Kidney Cancer clinical trials at UCSD

This is a first in human, multicenter, open label, Phase 1a and 1b dose-escalation and dose-expansion study to establish the maximum tolerated dose, recommended Phase 2 dose, and evaluate the safety and tolerability of QD oral dosing of HC 7366 in a dose escalating fashion in subjects with advanced solid tumors. Up to 40 subjects will be enrolled into the Phase 1a dose-escalation part of the study. The study will be conducted in the United States at approximately 7 to 10 sites. Every effort will be made to ensure approximately 50% of all subjects enrolled into Phase 1a of this study are subjects with the tumors of special interest including squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck, colorectal cancer, non-small cell lung cancer, and transitional cell carcinoma of the bladder. Subjects with other solid tumor types are also eligible provided study selection criteria are met and they do not exceed 50% of all enrolled subjects. All subjects in Phase 1b will enroll with clear cell renal cell carcinoma. The Phase 1a study will follow a traditional 3+3 design. The starting dose level will be 10 mg QD, escalating to 20, 40, 75, 125, and 150 mg QD as safety allows. All doses are to be administered in the fasting state with water at least 1 hour before food or at least 2 hours after food. The Phase 1b dose-expansion will be at a single dose level of 75 mg based on the safety, tolerability, PK/PD results from Phase 1a to obtain additional safety and preliminary efficacy information. At the discretion of the safety monitoring committee and sponsor, the cohort may be expanded to enroll additional patients and/ or 1-2 additional cohorts will be opened. Up to 30 subjects may be enrolled in the Phase 1b portion of the study at the 75 mg dose. Replacement patients will be enrolled if necessary. Subjects will be dosed until unacceptable toxicity, disease progression per immune-related Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, discontinuation of treatment for other protocol allowed reason (eg, subject refusal), any other administrative reasons, or after 2 years of treatment, whichever occurs first. For scheduling purposes, dosing in Phase 1a and 1b will occur in 3 week cycles and computed tomography scans will be conducted once every 6 weeks from Cycle 1/Day 1, with the first postbaseline scan after 6 weeks of dosing (precycle 3) until confirmed disease progression, death, start of new anticancer therapy, withdrawal of consent, or end of study, whichever occurs first.

The goal of this study is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of pembrolizumab plus belzutifan plus lenvatinib or pembrolizumab/quavonlimab plus lenvatinib versus pembrolizumab plus lenvatinib as first-line treatment in participants with advanced clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC). The primary hypotheses are (1) pembrolizumab plus belzutifan plus lenvatinib is superior to pembrolizumab plus lenvatinib with respect to progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS), in advanced ccRCC participants; and (2) pembrolizumab/quavonlimab plus lenvatinib is superior to pembrolizumab plus lenvatinib with respect to PFS and OS, in advanced ccRCC participants.

This is a Phase 1, multiple dose, ascending dose escalation study to define a MTD/RD and regimen of XmAb23104, to describe safety and tolerability, to assess PK and immunogenicity, and to preliminarily assess anti-tumor activity of XmAb23104 monotherapy and combination therapy with ipilimumab in subjects with selected advanced solid tumors.

The primary objective of this single arm phase 2 trial is to assess the response rate [complete response (CR) + partial response (PR)] of combined nivolumab and HD IL-2 in subjects with metastatic melanoma and renal cell carcinoma. Response will be performed after each course of nivolumab and IL-2 using RECIST 1.1. Patients will be treated for one course past best response for a maximum of 3 courses.

This phase III trial compares the usual treatment (treatment with ipilimumab and nivolumab followed by nivolumab alone) to treatment with ipilimumab and nivolumab, followed by nivolumab with cabozantinib in patients with untreated renal cell carcinoma that has spread to other parts of the body. The addition of cabozantinib to the usual treatment may make it work better. Immunotherapy with monoclonal antibodies, such as nivolumab and ipilimumab, may help the body's immune system attack the cancer, and may interfere with the ability of tumor cells to grow and spread. Cabozantinib may stop the growth of tumor cells by blocking some of the enzymes needed for cell growth. It is not yet known how well the combination of cabozantinib and nivolumab after initial treatment with ipilimumab and nivolumab works in treating patients with renal cell cancer that has spread to other parts of the body.

A Phase 1, open label, dose escalation and expanded cohort study of P-MUC1C-ALLO1 in adult subjects with advanced or metastatic epithelial derived solid tumors, including but not limited to the tumor types listed below.

This phase II trial studies whether adding radium-223 dichloride to the usual treatment, cabozantinib, improves outcomes in patients with renal cell cancer that has spread to the bone. Radioactive drugs such as radium-223 dichloride may directly target radiation to cancer cells and minimize harm to normal cells. Cabozantinib may stop the growth of cancer cells by blocking some of the enzymes needed for cell growth. Giving radium-223 dichloride and cabozantinib may help lessen the pain and symptoms from renal cell cancer that has spread to the bone, compared to cabozantinib alone.

Partial nephrectomy (PN) is the standard treatment for localized renal masses and should be preferred in clinical T1 (<7 cm tumor diameter) renal tumors over radical nephrectomy (RN) whenever technically feasible. Nonetheless, indications, approaches, techniques for PN, and correct reporting of outcomes, are still a matter of great debate within the urology community. Concurrently, case-report series suggested that alternative strategies for the treatment of localized renal tumors (ablation techniques (AT), watchful waiting (WW), active surveillance (AS)) could be feasible with acceptable oncologic outcomes in particular settings of patients with localized renal tumors. In this complex clinical scenario, the role surgeon-related and environmental factors (such as surgical experience, hospital resources, countries' social background and performance of health system) are important to address the best personalized approach in patients with renal tumors. In the light of current evidence, many unsolved questions still remain and many unmet needs must be addressed. In particular, 1) the risk-benefit trade-offs between PN and RN for anatomically complex renal localized tumors; 2) the definition of evidence-based strategies to tailor the management strategy (AT vs WW vs AS vs surgery) in different subset of patients with particular clinical conditions (i.e. old, frail, comorbid patients); and 3) the definition of evidence-based recommendations to adapt surgical approach (open vs laparoscopic vs robotic) and resection techniques to different patient-, tumor-, and surgeon-specific characteristics. To meet the challenges, to overcome the limitations of current kidney cancer literature (such as the retrospective study design, potential risk of biases, and heterogeneous follow-up of most series), and to provide high-quality evidence for future development of effective clinical practice Guidelines, we designed the international REgistry of COnservative or Radical treatment of localized kiDney tumors (i-RECORD) Project. The expected impact of the i-RECORD project is to provide robust evidence on the leading clinical and environmental factors driving selection of the management strategy in patients with kidney cancer, and the differential impact of different management strategies (including AS, WW, AT, PN and RN) on functional, perioperative and oncological outcomes, as well as quality of life assessment, at a mid-long term follow-up (5-10 years).