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

135 active trials for Leukemia

Healthy Bones, Healthy Life

Childhood cancer treatments are increasingly effective, leading to dramatic improvements in survival rates. These treatments often have devastating effects on the overall health of pediatric cancer survivors (PCS) since they occur during a critical time of bone growth, including increased risks of poor bone health, fracture, and diabetes. In normal child development, physical activity habits influence bone density and structure, which affect bone strength in adulthood. Despite this well-understood principle of bone development, there are no exercise guidelines for improving bone health in PCS. The long-term goal of this research is to develop an effective exercise intervention to improve bone health after cancer therapy. As a first step, the investigators propose to test the hypothesis that the intensity and amount of ground impact of a child's daily physical activity will influence changes in bone density in PCS. The Specific Aims are to (1) examine the effect of physical activity on lumbar bone density of PCS and to (2) evaluate how physical activity influences bone density. In a prospective cohort study, the investigators will enroll 38 pediatric and adolescent survivors (ages 5-18) of acute lymphoblastic leukemia or lymphoma at any post-treatment time point. Aim 1: At two assessments, baseline and six months later, bone density and structure (by DXA scan, a type of x-ray that can measure bone density and the amount of muscle and fat in the body) and physical activity level (by accelerometry, a device like a fitness tracker) will be evaluated. Each child will be categorized as having low or high physical activity based on accelerometry measures averaged from baseline and six-month assessments. Bone changes (0-6 months) will be compared between low and high activity groups. Aim 2: Evaluate potential mechanisms by which physical activity mediates changes in bone, including the effects of lean mass (measured by DXA) and metabolic health (lipid panel, insulin sensitivity (HOMA-IR, hemoglobin A1c), vitamin D). Long-term impact: This research will provide information as to the types of exercise that impact bone health in PCS. This study will help develop effective, evidence-based exercise therapies. These therapies may help prevent fractures and associated disability, leading to an improvement in the quality of life for survivors of pediatric cancer.

Start: November 2020
International Collaborative Treatment Protocol For Children And Adolescents With Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia

Rationale/Purpose: Drugs used in chemotherapy work in different ways to stop the growth of cancer cells, either by killing the cells or by stopping them from dividing. Giving more than one drug (combination chemotherapy) may kill more cancer cells. It is not yet known which combination chemotherapy regimen is more effective in treating young patients with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL). This trial is studying several different combination chemotherapy regimens to compare how well they work in treating young patients with ALL. Study objectives Primary study questions: Non high-risk (non-HR) precursor-B ALL (pB-ALL) patients with TEL/AML1-negative ALL or unknown TEL/AML1 status and flow cytometry minimal residual disease (MRD) in bone marrow on day 15 <0.1% or with TEL/AML1-positive ALL (randomized study question R1): Can the daunorubicin dose in Protocol IA be safely reduced by 50 % with a non-inferior EFS and a reduction of toxicity (treatment-related mortality and AE/SAE in Protocol I)? Patients with pB-ALL and risk group medium risk (MR) (randomized study question R2): Can the clinical outcome be improved by protracted asparagine depletion achieved through application of intensified PEG-L-asparaginase during reintensification and early maintenance? High-risk (HR) patients (as identified by day 33 - randomized study question RHR): Can the clinical outcome be improved by protracted exposure to PEG-L-asparaginase during Protocol IB? Secondary study questions: Standard risk (SR) patients identified by at least one sensitive marker: Is the clinical outcome comparable to that obtained in SR patients (identified with two sensitive markers) in AIEOP-BFM ALL 2000, or can the outcome even be improved with the use of PEG-L-asparaginase instead of native E. coli L-ASP? T-ALL non-HR patients: Can the high level of outcome which was obtained for these patients in study AIEOP-BFM ALL 2000 be preserved or even improved with the use of PEG-L-ASP instead of native E. coli L-ASP? HR patients with persisting high MRD levels despite the use of the HR blocks in the intensified consolidation phase "MRD Non-Responders": Is it possible to improve the outcome and to achieve a further reduction of leukemic cell burden by administration of an innovative treatment schedule (DNX-FLA)? Patients participating in the randomized asparaginase studies (pB-ALL/MR, HR): Are asparaginase activity and asparaginase antibodies associated with development of allergic reactions, and do they have an effect on the outcome of the patients? What is the relative value of different methods of MRD monitoring in the definition of alternative stratification systems within a BFM-oriented protocol?

Start: June 2010