Active clinical trials for "Thrombocytosis"

This phase II clinical trial evaluates whether a modified modality of conditioning reduces treatment-related mortality (TRM) in patients who undergo a hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) for a hematological malignancy. HSCT is a curative therapy for many hematopoietic malignancies, however this regimen results in higher rates of TRM than other forms of treatment. In recent years, less intense conditioning regimens with radiation and chemotherapy prior to HSCT have been developed. Radiation therapy uses high energy sources to kill cancer cells and shrink tumors while chemotherapy drugs like fludarabine and cyclophosphamide work in different ways to stop the growth of tumor cells, either by killing the cells, by stopping them from dividing, or by stopping them from spreading. This study evaluates whether a two-step approach with lower-intensity regimens of these treatments prior to HSCT reduces the rate of TRM.

The primary objective of this study is to assess the safety and tolerability of administrating mutated-CALR peptide Vaccine to patients with MPN. The researchers plan to enroll 10 patients over a 12 month period. Maximum length of participation in 80 weeks. Patients will be asked to complete questionnaires, bone marrow biopsies, research lab collection, and standard of care lab draw. This research will be taking place only at The Mount Sinai Hospital, specifically at the Ruttenberg Treatment Center.

This phase II trial studies the effects of luspatercept with or without hydroxyurea in treating patients with myelodysplastic/myeloproliferative neoplasms with ring sideroblasts and thrombocytosis or unclassifiable with ring sideroblasts. Biological therapies, such as luspatercept, use substances made from living organisms that may stimulate or suppress the immune system in different ways and stop cancer cells from growing. Hydroxyurea may stop the growth of cancer cells by blocking some of the enzymes needed for cell growth. Giving luspatercept with or without hydroxyurea may help doctors determine what doses of the combination is safe for patients to take and how the disease responds to the treatment.

This Phase 1/2, open-label, dose-finding study is intended to evaluate the safety and tolerability, PK, PD, and efficacy of INCB000928 administered as monotherapy or in combination with ruxolitinib in participants with MF who are transfusion-dependent or presenting with symptomatic anemia. This study will consist of 2 parts: dose escalation and expansion.

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the safety, tolerability, and preliminary efficacy of INCB057643 as monotherapy or combination with ruxolitinib for participants with myelofibrosis and other myeloid neoplasms.

This is a Phase 3 open-label, multicenter, randomized, active-controlled study designed to compare the efficacy and safety and tolerability of P1101 compared with ANA after 12 months of treatment as second-line therapy for subjects with ET who have had a suboptimal or failed response to HU.

This is a phase 1b/2 study of KRT-232 combined with ruxolitinib in subjects with MF who have a suboptimal response after at least 18 weeks of treatment with ruxolitinib. The primary objective of the study is to determine a recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) of KRT 232 in combination with ruxolitinib.

Prospective study for the development of a non-invasive score for differentiating prefibrotic myelofibrosis from essential thrombocytosis and overt myelofibrosis.

Philadelphia-negative myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPN) are frequent and chronic myeloid malignancies including Polycythemia Vera (PV), essential thrombocythemia (ET), Primary Myelofibrosis (PMF) and Prefibrotic myelofibrosis (PreMF). These MPNs are caused by the acquisition of mutations affecting activation/proliferation pathways in hematopoietic stem cells. The principal mutations are JAK2V617F, calreticulin (CALR exon 9) and MPL W515. ET or MFP/PreMF patients who do not carry one of these three mutations are declared as triple-negative (3NEG) cases even if they are real MPN cases. These diseases are at high risk of thrombo-embolic complications and with high morbidity/mortality. This risk varies from 4 to 30% depending on MPN subtype and mutational status. In terms of therapy, all patients with MPNs should also take daily low-dose aspirin (LDA) as first antithrombotic drug, which is particularly efficient to reduce arterial but not venous events. Despite the association of a cytoreductive drug and LDA, thromboses still occur in 5-8% patients/year. All these situations have been explored in biological or clinical assays. All of them could increase the bleeding risk. We should look at different ways to reduce the thrombotic incidence: Direct Oral Anticoagulants (DOAC)? In the general population, in medical or surgical contexts, DOACs have demonstrated their efficiency to prevent or cure most of the venous or arterial thrombotic events. At the present time, DOAC can be used in cancer populations according to International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis (ISTH) recommendations, except in patients with cancer at high bleeding risk (gastro-intestinal or genito-urinary cancers). Unfortunately, in trials evaluating DOAC in cancer patients, most patients have solid rather than hematologic cancers (generally less than 10% of the patients, mostly lymphoma or myeloma). In cancer patients, DOAC are also highly efficient to reduce the incidence of thrombosis (-30 to 60%), but patients are exposed to a higher hemorrhagic risk, especially in digestive cancer patients. In the cancer population, pathophysiology of both thrombotic and hemorrhagic events may be quite different between solid cancers and MPN. If MPN patients are also considered to be cancer patients in many countries, the pathophysiology of thrombosis is quite specific (hyperviscosity, platelet abnormalities, clonality, specific cytokines…) and they are exposed to a lower risk of digestive hemorrhages. It is thus difficult to extend findings from the "general cancer population" to MPN patients. Unfortunately, only scarce, retrospective data regarding the use of DOAC in MPNs are available data. We were the first to publish a "real-life" study about the use, the impact, and the risks in this population. In this local retrospective study, 25 patients with MPN were treated with DOAC for a median time of 2.1 years. We observed only one thrombosis (4%) and three major hemorrhages (12%, after trauma or unprepared surgery). Furthermore, we have compared the benefit/risk balance compared to patients treated with LDA without difference. With the increasing evidences of efficacy and tolerance of DOAC in large cohorts of patients including cancer patients, with their proven efficacy on prevention of both arterial and venous thrombotic events and because of the absence of prospective trial using these drugs in MPN patients, we propose to study their potential benefit as primary thrombotic prevention in MPN.

Prospective study to evaluate the relevance of CALR allele burden monitoring as a molecular marker of disease progression.