An interventional study of FDA-approved drug or combination of drugs and FLAG induction in Myelodysplastic Syndromes, sponsored by University of Florida. Withdrawn at 1 site in United States. Open to participants aged 18 Years to 99 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2019-06-11.
Sponsored by University of Florida · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment
This open-label, randomized, parallel group phase II study will investigate the efficacy of computational biology-informed treatment vs. standard of care treatment for patients with relapsed or refractory myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS).
It is hypothesized that personalized treatment informed by computational biology simulation technology will improve treatment outcomes for patients with relapsed or refractory MDS.
1,997 studies on the registry are indexed under Myelodysplastic Syndromes; 324 are open to participants now.
Browse Myelodysplastic Syndromes studies →University of Florida is the lead sponsor of 1,287 studies on the registry; 199 are open to participants now.
Of its 180 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 143 (79%) have results posted.
Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.
Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.
Women of (i.e., women who are pre-menopausal or not surgically sterile) may participate, provided they meet the following conditions:
Exclusion Criteria:
Underlined terms in the criteria open these too. Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.
Before you join, the study team explains what taking part involves — its purpose, what happens, the risks and possible benefits — and answers your questions, so you can decide freely. Consent is usually recorded on a form (the informed consent form, ICF) signed by you or, where the law allows, by someone legally authorised to decide for you.
You can keep asking questions during the study, you are told of new information that matters, and you can choose to leave at any time.
Relapsed: the illness came back after treatment had worked. Refractory: it did not respond to treatment, or stopped responding while still on it.
A scale of how much an illness limits everyday activity. For people being assessed to join a study, scores run from 0 (fully active) to 4; lower is more active.
Studies most often ask for 0–1 or 0–2. Your doctor gives the score; the WHO scale uses the same steps. The full scale also has 5, which records death.
Able to become pregnant: from the first period until menopause, unless permanently unable to through surgery (removal of the womb, or of both ovaries or both fallopian tubes).
Criteria for people of childbearing potential usually ask for a negative pregnancy test and for contraception during the study and for a time after it.
Ways of preventing pregnancy. “Highly effective” methods fail less than 1% of the time a year when used correctly — for example an IUD or an implant.
Criteria usually say which methods count and how long to keep using them after the last dose, sometimes for male participants too. Some studies accept a partner’s vasectomy if it was confirmed successful and that person is the participant’s only sexual partner.
A drug or device being studied in a clinical trial.
It may be new, or already approved and being studied for another use, dose or form. Criteria often leave out people who took part in another study of one within a recent period, commonly 30 days or five half-lives.
The US National Cancer Institute’s scale of how severe an adverse event is — any unwanted medical event during a study, such as a symptom, an illness or an abnormal test result, whether or not a treatment caused it. Whether it did is judged separately.
“Side effects of earlier treatment resolved to grade 1 or less” means they have settled to mild or gone.
Judged by the study doctor to matter for your health or for the study. It is a doctor’s decision, so ask the study team if you are unsure whether something counts.
Informed consent
Before you join, the study team explains what taking part involves — its purpose, what happens, the risks and possible benefits — and answers your questions, so you can decide freely. Consent is usually recorded on a form (the informed consent form, ICF) signed by you or, where the law allows, by someone legally authorised to decide for you.
You can keep asking questions during the study, you are told of new information that matters, and you can choose to leave at any time.
Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.
Relapsed and refractory
Relapsed: the illness came back after treatment had worked. Refractory: it did not respond to treatment, or stopped responding while still on it.
Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.
ECOG performance status
A scale of how much an illness limits everyday activity. For people being assessed to join a study, scores run from 0 (fully active) to 4; lower is more active.
Studies most often ask for 0–1 or 0–2. Your doctor gives the score; the WHO scale uses the same steps. The full scale also has 5, which records death.
Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.
Childbearing potential
Able to become pregnant: from the first period until menopause, unless permanently unable to through surgery (removal of the womb, or of both ovaries or both fallopian tubes).
Criteria for people of childbearing potential usually ask for a negative pregnancy test and for contraception during the study and for a time after it.
Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.
Contraception
Ways of preventing pregnancy. “Highly effective” methods fail less than 1% of the time a year when used correctly — for example an IUD or an implant.
Criteria usually say which methods count and how long to keep using them after the last dose, sometimes for male participants too. Some studies accept a partner’s vasectomy if it was confirmed successful and that person is the participant’s only sexual partner.
Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.
Investigational drug or device
A drug or device being studied in a clinical trial.
It may be new, or already approved and being studied for another use, dose or form. Criteria often leave out people who took part in another study of one within a recent period, commonly 30 days or five half-lives.
Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.
CTCAE grade
The US National Cancer Institute’s scale of how severe an adverse event is — any unwanted medical event during a study, such as a symptom, an illness or an abnormal test result, whether or not a treatment caused it. Whether it did is judged separately.
“Side effects of earlier treatment resolved to grade 1 or less” means they have settled to mild or gone.
Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.
Clinically significant
Judged by the study doctor to matter for your health or for the study. It is a doctor’s decision, so ask the study team if you are unsure whether something counts.
Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.
Patients randomized to this arm will receive an FDA-approved drug or combination of drugs predicted to have a therapeutic effect based on their individual MDS disease genetic profile by a computational biology simulation software program. The specific drug or combination of drugs that a patient on this arm will receive will be decided jointly by a molecular oncology board comprised of physicians, pharmacists, and nurse coordinators and the treating physician. Patients will receive a minimum of 2 months and a maximum of 4 months of treatment with the selected drug or combination of drugs.
Drug: FDA-approved drug or combination of drugs · Device: Computational biology simulations software
Patients randomized to this arm will receive either one of three standard of care treatment regimens of the treating physician's choice (low-dose cytarabine, 7 + 3 induction, or FLAG induction) or supportive care alone. Patients will receive a minimum of 2 months and a maximum of 4 months of the selected treatment regimen or of supportive care alone.
Drug: FLAG induction · Drug: 7 + 3 induction · Drug: Low-dose cytarabine · Other: Supportive care alone
Patients assigned to this arm will receive an FDA-approved drug or combination of drugs. Dosing and treatment schedule will follow the package insert for the selected drug(s).
Patients will receive 30 mg/m2 per day intravenously of fludarabine for 5 days and 2000 mg/m2 per day intravenously of cytarabine for 5 days. 5 mg/kg per day of granulocyte colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) may be given subcutaneously beginning on Day 1 of each treatment until absolute granulocyte count \> 500/ microliter for 3 days.
Patients will receive 100-200 mg/m2 per day intravenously of cytarabine for 7 days, plus either 45-60 mg/m2 per day intravenously of daunorubicin or 9-12 mg/m2 per day intravenously of idarubicin for 3 days.
Patients will receive 20 mg/m2 per day subcutaneously of cytarabine for 10 days every 28 days.
Patients will receive one or more of the following: blood product transfusions, antibiotics, granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF), erythropoietic stimulating factors, and iron chelation.
Genetic testing results for each patient randomized to this arm will be used by a computational biology simulations software program to generate a personalized map of dysregulated metabolic pathways contributing to the patient's disease. This map will then be used to digitally screen for potentially therapeutic FDA-approved drugs or drug combinations to target the dysregulated metabolic pathways.
Difference in overall response, as measured by International Working Group (IWG) 2006 criteria for response in MDS
Difference in overall response (number of patients who achieve complete response, partial response, stable disease, or hematologic improvement per IWG 2006 criteria) between patients treated with computational biology-informed therapy vs. those treated with standard of care regimens
Time frame: 4 months
Difference in safety and feasibility, as measured by CTCAE v4.0 criteria
Difference in safety and feasibility, as measured by CTCAE v4.0 criteria, between patients treated with computational biology-informed treatment and those who receive a standard of care regimen
Time frame: 5 months
Difference in time to death between patients treated with computational biology-informed therapy and those treated with standard of care regimens
Time frame: 3 years
Difference in time to progression to acute myeloid leukemia (AML), as measured by IWG 2006 criteria for response in MDS, between patients treated with computational biology-informed therapy and those treated with standard of care regimens
Time frame: 4 months
Difference in time to disease relapse, as measured by IWG 2006 criteria for response in MDS, between patients treated with computational biology-informed therapy and those treated with standard of care regimens
Time frame: 4 months
Difference in time to best response, as measured by IWG 2006 criteria for response in MDS, between patients treated with computational biology-informed therapy and those treated with standard of care regimens
Time frame: 4 months
Difference in change in myeloblast percentage between patients treated with computational biology-informed therapy and those treated with standard of care regimens
Time frame: 4 months
Difference in blood transfusion rate between patients treated with computational biology-informed therapy and those treated with standard of care regimens
Time frame: 7 months
Differences in mutant allele frequencies between patients treated with computational biology-informed therapy and those treated with standard of care regimens
Time frame: 4 months
Laboratory correlations between computational model and actual intracellular pathway activation status
Time frame: 4 months
Clinical correlations between pharmacogenotypes and drug efficacy (as measured by IWG 2006 criteria for response in MDS)
Time frame: 4 months
Clinical correlations between pharmacogenotypes and drug-related adverse events (as measured by CTCAE v4.0 criteria)
Time frame: 5 months
Start is estimated for May 2019; primary completion for Aug 2021, 27 months later.
How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.
This study is withdrawn, as verified in Jun 2019. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.
Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.
Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.
Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.