300,000+ clinical trials. Find the right one.

170 active trials for Advanced Cancer

Immunotherapy And Palliative Radiotherapy Combined In Patients With Advanced Malignancy

Immunotherapy includes a class of medication called checkpoint inhibitors, which are a relatively new medication therapy for many types of cancer which are metastatic, meaning it has spread to other parts of the body.Immune therapy medication may be given safely with radiation treatment, and in rare cases it may even make radiotherapy more effective. When radiation therapy is given in the "palliative" setting it is given to treat pain/discomfort and not necessarily shrink or get rid of the tumour. Palliative radiotherapy may be given for many reasons, but common examples include painful bone or liver tumours, brain metastases, or symptoms from a chest tumour such as feeling breathless, cough, or bleeding. Palliative radiotherapy is usually given in smaller amounts and less frequently than other types of radiation therapy. Because checkpoint inhibitors are relatively new there is not a huge amount of evidence looking at how patients respond when the treatments are combined, or in which patients immune therapy may make radiation therapy even more effective. This study is looking at the way patients who are on or about to start immune therapy and who have been recommended for palliative radiotherapy, respond to the combination of these two treatments. The purpose of this study is to describe the treatment outcomes in patients with cancer that has spread who are managed with a combination of immune therapy medication and radiotherapy. This research is being done because there is limited information about the outcomes of combined immune therapy and radiotherapy treatment from a patient's perspective, but also in terms of which patients may have a better response to combined treatment. In particular, the study aims to describe how combined treatment affects cancer not only in the area where radiotherapy is given, but also outside the part of the body that receives radiotherapy (which is called "abscopal" effect).

Start: January 2017
HALO Trial: Haloperidol vs Olanzapine in Hyperactive Delirium in Advanced Cancer Patients; A Multi-Centre, Randomised-Controlled Trial

Background and Clinical Need: Delirium is common at the end of life and is challenging to control. There is a clinical need to study the benefits of commonly used drugs like Haloperidol and Olanzapine in the management of hyperactive delirium in advanced cancer patients in a scientifically robust manner. Aims/Hypotheses: The investigators aim to study the effectiveness of Haloperidol compared with Olanzapine in the management of hyperactive delirium in advanced cancer patients receiving palliative care. The investigators hypothesise that Olanzapine is as effective as Haloperidol in the control of hyperactive delirium. Methods: The investigators will conduct a pragmatic, multi-centre, (hospital, inpatient hospice, community hospital) open-label randomised-controlled trial comparing the use of Haloperidol versus Olanzapine in advanced cancer patients with hyperactive delirium. The primary outcome is the change in Richmond Agitation and Sedation Scale (RASS) scores among patients in each treatment group at 8 hours post-drug administration. The secondary outcome is the control of hyperactive delirium at 24, 48 and 72 hours using either Haloperidol or Olanzapine. The mean doses of Haloperidol and Olanzapine used as well as the volume of rescue Midazolam required as well as side-effects of the study medications, survival after enrolment into study will also be studied. Significance to palliative care The results of this study will advance the knowledge of delirium management worldwide with regards to the efficacy of Haloperidol and Olanzapine in managing hyperactive delirium in patients with advanced cancer. Haloperidol is used traditionally in palliative care for managing delirium. However, as a conventional anti-psychotic, it does cause extra-pyramidal side-effects. Olanzapine, a newer atypical anti-psychotic with a more favourable side-effect profile is being used increasingly in the control of delirium. These 2 commonly used drugs have never been compared head to head in a randomised-controlled, multi-centre study.

Start: May 2021
International Study to Evaluate Two Programs of Support for Patients With Advanced Cancer and Their Families

The overall aim of this project is to evaluate the effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and mechanisms of action of two psychoeducational interventions (a face-to-face nurse-led intervention called FOCUS+ and an eHealth intervention called iFOCUS) aimed at improving the emotional function and self-efficacy of patients with advanced cancer and their family caregiver. Both interventions are compared to care as usual. Both interventions focus on teaching dyads optimal ways to jointly manage the implications of advanced cancer and responding to their priority concerns and are designed to be tailored to the specific needs and wishes of the patient-caregiver dyads. Tailoring is based on information about the dyad obtained at enrollment (e.g. age, relationship, etc.) and the responses in the intervention sessions. The overarching aim is addressed by five core intervention components: supporting family involvement and improving the dyads mutual communication, supporting outlook (i.e. increasing the dyad's capacity to identify positive or meaningful aspects related to their situation), increasing dyads' coping skills, i.e. their capacity to identify their coping strategies and take action help dyads reduce their uncertainty teaching symptom management and giving them confidence to handle specific tasks and problems Project objectives: To compare 1) the face-to-face FOCUS+ intervention and 2) the iFOCUS web intervention to 3) care as usual in terms of their: Effect on the emotional function and self-efficacy (primary outcomes), appraisal of illness, uncertainty, hopelessness, coping, dyad communication, quality of life and healthcare resource use of patients with advanced cancer and their family caregivers Cost-effectiveness Effects on vulnerable subgroups (particularly women and those of lower socioeconomic status) Effectiveness in different healthcare systems To evaluate the implementation process of the interventions in terms of the acceptability, feasibility, usefulness as perceived by patients, family caregivers and healthcare staff in each country, and their mechanisms of action. Data will be collected three times from patient-caregiver dyads: 1) baseline measure (t0) after which the dyad will immediately be randomized to one of the study arms, 2) first follow-up at 12 weeks after baseline (t1) and 3) second follow-up at 24 weeks after baseline (t2).

Start: February 2021