Angleton

The goal of this trial is to determine the efficacy of advanced cognitive training for cancer survivors suffering from cancer- and cancer-treatment-related cognitive dysfunction. For millions of cancer survivors, cognitive dysfunction is a prevalent, severe, and persistent problem that has long been associated with poor work-related and health-related outcomes. Evidence suggests that a significant subset of breast cancer survivors (BCS) incur cognitive changes that may persist for years after treatment. Unfortunately, the scientific basis for managing these cognitive changes is extremely limited. Available evidence from pilot studies, including our work, suggests that advanced cognitive training, which is based on the principles of neuroplasticity (ability of brain neurons to re-organize and form new neural networks), may be a viable treatment option. However, previous trials to date have been limited by lack of attention-controlled designs, small samples of BCS, or limited outcome measures. Therefore, to overcome limitations of past studies and build on our pilot results, the purpose of this 2-group, double-blind, randomized controlled trial is to conduct a full-scale efficacy trial to compare advanced cognitive training to attention control in BCS.

Researchers are evaluating if adding adjuvant chemotherapy (ACT) to ovarian function suppression (OFS) plus endocrine therapy (ET) improves invasive breast cancer-free survival (IBCFS) compared to OFS plus ET alone. This Phase III trial focuses on premenopausal women with early-stage breast cancer that is estrogen receptor (ER)-positive, HER2-negative, and has a 21-gene recurrence score between 16-25 for node-negative patients or 0-25 for patients with 1-3 positive nodes. The study addresses the need for better treatment options for younger women diagnosed with this type of breast cancer, as younger age is linked to worse outcomes despite standard therapies. Participants receive one of two treatments: either OFS combined with an aromatase inhibitor (AI) for five years or adjuvant chemotherapy followed by the same OFS plus AI regimen. The specific AI and GnRH agonist used, along with their dosing schedules, are chosen by the investigator, commonly including goserelin, leuprolide, or triptorelin administered monthly or every three months. Bilateral oophorectomy may be used instead of ovarian suppression if preferred. Endocrine therapy beyond five years is at the investigator's discretion. During the trial, participants will be closely monitored for invasive breast cancer-free survival over an 11-year period from randomization. Assessments include clinical evaluations, hormone receptor testing, tumor staging, and genetic recurrence scoring prior to enrollment. Safety and effectiveness data will be collected throughout the study, with particular attention to treatment side effects and long-term outcomes. The trial involves detailed eligibility screening and ongoing follow-up to ensure accurate measurement of the study's primary outcome.

Researchers are evaluating surgical and minimally invasive treatments for lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) by comparing Medicare patients who received the MILD procedure against those who had interspinous process decompression (IPD). The study focuses on outcomes such as the rate of harms related to the initial procedure and the frequency of additional surgical or minimally invasive interventions within 24 months after treatment. Enrollment includes patients treated from January 1, 2017, onward, with continuation until the sponsor decides to stop. The MILD procedure involves percutaneous image-guided lumbar decompression, performed under fluoroscopy through a dorsal approach to partially remove tissue and bone at the affected spinal level. The control group receives the IPD procedure for LSS. Both groups are monitored for a 24-month period post-index procedure using Medicare claims data to track reoperations and any harms. Participants contribute data through Medicare claims without needing prior enrollment or consent, as the study is exempt from IRB oversight. Researchers collect and analyze information on procedure-related harms and subsequent interventions over two years. This approach allows evaluation of long-term safety and effectiveness outcomes for patients treated with either MILD or IPD.