Strongyloidiasis in patients at a comprehensive cancer center in the United States

Cancer ◽  
2004 ◽  
Vol 100 (7) ◽  
pp. 1531-1536 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amar Safdar ◽  
Kumthorn Malathum ◽  
Saul J. Rodriguez ◽  
Rola Husni ◽  
Kenneth V. I. Rolston
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Comprehensive Cancer Center ◽  
Cancer Center

Survey of orbital tumors at a comprehensive cancer center in the United States

Head & Neck ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 33 (5) ◽  
pp. 610-614 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roman Shinder ◽  
Nagham Al-Zubidi ◽  
Bita Esmaeli
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Comprehensive Cancer Center ◽  
Cancer Center ◽  
Orbital Tumors

scholarly journals Characteristics and Clinical Outcomes of Individuals at High Risk for Pancreatic Cancer: A Descriptive Analysis from a Comprehensive Cancer Center

2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 106-119
Author(s):  
Griffin McNamara ◽  
Karla Ali ◽  
Shraddha Vyas ◽  
Tri Huynh ◽  
Monica Nyland ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Genetic Risk ◽  
Incidental Findings ◽  
The United States ◽  
Comprehensive Cancer Center ◽  
Cancer Center ◽  
Pancreatic Cysts ◽  
Sporadic Cases

Pancreatic cancer (PC), a leading cause of cancer-related deaths in the United States, is typically diagnosed at an advanced stage. To improve survival, there is an unmet need to detect pre-malignant lesions and early invasive disease. Prime populations to study for early detection efforts include cohorts of high risk individuals (HRI): those with increased risk to develop pre-malignant pancreatic cysts and PC because of a familial or hereditary predisposition to the disease and those in the general population of sporadic cases who are incidentally found to harbor a pre-malignant pancreatic cyst. The objective of this study was to describe the characteristics and clinical outcomes of cohorts of HRI identified at Moffitt Cancer Center. We set out to determine the uptake of screening, the prevalence and characteristics of solid and cystic pancreatic lesions detected via screening or as incidental findings, and the age at which lesions were detected. Of a total of 329 HRI, roughly one-third were found to have pancreatic lesions, most of which constituted pre-malignant cysts known as intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms. Individuals with the highest genetic risk for PC were found to have smaller cysts at a much earlier age than sporadic cases with incidental findings; however, many individuals at high genetic risk did not have abdominal imaging reports on file. We also identified a subset of HRI at moderate genetic risk for PC that were found to have cystic and solid pancreatic lesions as part of a diagnostic work-up rather than a screening protocol. These findings suggest the pancreatic research community should consider expanding criteria for who should be offered screening. We also emphasize the importance of continuity of care between cancer genetics and gastrointestinal oncology clinics so that HRI are made aware of the opportunities related to genetic counseling, genetic testing, and screening.

Characteristics and outcomes of cancer patients ≥80 years treated with chemotherapy at a comprehensive cancer center

2006 ◽  
Vol 24 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. 8548-8548
Author(s):  
P. Jiang ◽  
M. Choi ◽  
D. Smith ◽  
L. Heilbrun ◽  
S. M. Gadgeel
Keyword(s):  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Solid Tumors ◽  
Solid Tumor ◽  
Hematologic Malignancy ◽  
Survival Rates ◽  
The United States ◽  
Comprehensive Cancer Center ◽  
Cancer Center ◽  
Tumor Patients ◽  
Hematologic Cancer

8548 Background: The percentage of cancer patients ≥ 80 years old is expected to rise in the United States. However data are limited on use of chemotherapy in this group of patients. Methods: Retrospective identification of patients who received systemic chemotherapy at our cancer center between 1/1/2000 to 12/31/2004 was performed using the computer generated pharmacy data and medical records. Patients who had diagnosis of cancer and ≥ 80 years were included in the study; patients receiving only supportive care, hormonal therapy, or oral chemotherapy were excluded. The protocol for this study was approved by the Wayne State University IRB. Results: A total of 133 patients ≥ 80 years who received chemotherapy was analyzed. The median age was 83 and 31% of the patients were ≥ 85 years. There were more females (61%) than males (39%). The gender distribution was more even (47% v. 53%) after excluding gender specific tumors. The racial distribution was diverse- Whites 65 (49%); Blacks 41 (31%); Other 18 (13%); Unknown 9 (7%). 16% of the patients had hematologic malignancy and 84% had solid tumors. Gynecological cancers (32%) followed by aerodigestive cancers (26%) were the most common solid tumors. Solid tumor patients primarily had regional (48%) or distant (45%) disease. During the first regimen, 512 cycles of chemotherapy was delivered with a median of 3 cycles per patient (range 1–24 cycles); 40% of patients received only 2 cycles of chemotherapy. 64% of patients were able to receive chemotherapy without 2nd cycle delay. The distribution of single or multidrug regimens was fairly similar; Solid tumors 52% v. 48%; Hematologic cancers 43% v. 57%. Carboplatin and paclitaxel (22%) was the most common regimen among solid tumor patients. 26% of all patients received a second regimen. The 1 year survival rates among hematologic cancer and solid tumor patients were 65% and 48%, respectively. Stage of disease was the only statistically significant factor predicting survival. Conclusions: In this diverse group of cancer patients ≥ 80 years old and selected for chemotherapy, the treatment was feasible. The survival outcomes in this elderly population were comparable to those of a younger patient population suggesting that the treatment is beneficial. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

Factors influencing treatment of inflammatory breast cancer in the United States.

2015 ◽  
Vol 33 (28_suppl) ◽  
pp. 118-118
Author(s):  
Heather Y. Lin ◽  
Gildy Babiera ◽  
Isabelle Bedrosian ◽  
Simona Flora Shaitelman ◽  
Henry Mark Kuerer ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Inflammatory Breast Cancer ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
High Volume ◽  
The United States ◽  
Comprehensive Cancer Center ◽  
Cancer Center ◽  
Cancer Data ◽  
Number Of Patients ◽  
Facility Level

118 Background: Guidelines for treating inflammatory breast cancer (IBC) using trimodality (chemotherapy, surgery and radiation) therapy (TT) remain largely unchanged since 2000. However, many such patients did not receive TT. It is unknown how patient-level (PL) and facility-level (FL) factors contribute to TT utilization. Methods: Using the National Cancer Data Base (NCDB), patients who underwent surgical treatment of locoregional IBC from 2003-2011 were identified. We correlated patient, tumor, and treatment data with TT. An observed to expected (O/E) ratio of number of patients treated with TT was calculated for each hospital by adjusting for PL factors. Hierarchical mixed effects models were used to assess the proportion of variation in the use of TT attributable to PL and FL factors, respectively. Results: Among 5,537 patients who met the study criteria, the use of TT fluctuated annually (67.3%-75.7%) and was less likely for patients who were over 70, had a lower income or had an N0 tumor (all p < 0.05). By insurance type, TT use was lowest among Medicare patients. Of the 542 hospitals examined, 55 (10.1%) and 24 (4.4%) were identified as significantly low and high outliers for the use of TT (p < 0.05), respectively. While comprehensive cancer centers represented the majority of high outliers, the TT use by facility type overall was not significantly different demonstrating variability within comprehensive cancer center practice. The percentage of the total variance in the use of TT attributable to facility (11%) was almost triple the variance attributable to the measured PL factors (3.4%). Conclusions: The use of standard of care TT varied widely across facilities with some high volume centers clearly underutilizing TT. To improve clinical outcomes for this rare and aggressive malignancy, it is critical to identify facility level factors impacting the use of TT to ensure the guideline adherence of IBC treatment.

Invisible Barriers to Clinical Trials: The Impact of Structural, Infrastructural, and Procedural Barriers to Opening Oncology Clinical Trials

2006 ◽  
Vol 24 (28) ◽  
pp. 4545-4552 ◽  
Author(s):  
David M. Dilts ◽  
Alan B. Sandler
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
The United States ◽  
Comprehensive Cancer Center ◽  
Cancer Center ◽  
Community Practice ◽  
Home Office ◽  
Scientific Review ◽  
Oncology Research ◽  
Oncology Clinical Trials ◽  
The Impact

Purpose To investigate the administrative barriers that impact the opening of clinical trials at the Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center (VICC) and at VICC Affiliate Network (VICCAN) sites. Methods VICC, a National Cancer Institute–designated comprehensive cancer center, and three VICCAN community practice sites were studied. Methodology used was identification and mapping of existing processes and analysis of historical timing data. Results At course granularity, the process steps required at VICC and VICCAN main office plus local sites are 20 v 17 to 30 steps, respectively; this gap widens with finer granularity, with more than 110 v less than 60 steps, respectively. Approximately 50% of the steps are nonvalue added. For example, in the institutional review board (IRB) process, less than one third of the steps add value to the final protocol. The numbers of groups involved in the approval processes are 27 (VICC) and 6 to 14 (VICCAN home office and local sites). The median times to open a trial are 171 days (95% CI, 158 to 182 days) for VICC and 191 days (95% CI, 119 to 269 days) for the VICCAN sites. Contrary to expectations, the time for IRB review and approval (median, 47 days) is the fastest process compared with the scientific review committee review and approval (median, 70 days) and contracts and grants review (median, 78.5 days). Opening a cooperative group clinical trial is significantly (P = .05) more rapid because they require fewer review steps. Conclusion There are numerous opportunities to remove nonvalue-added steps and save time in opening clinical trials. With increasing numbers of new agents, fewer domestic principal investigators, and more companies off-shoring clinical trials, overcoming such barriers is of critical importance for maintenance of core oncology research capabilities in the United States.

scholarly journals Frontline Management of Epithelial Ovarian Cancer—Combining Clinical Expertise with Community Practice Collaboration and Cutting-Edge Research

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (9) ◽  
pp. 2830
Author(s):  
Edward Wenge Wang ◽  
Christina Hsiao Wei ◽  
Sariah Liu ◽  
Stephen Jae-Jin Lee ◽  
Susan Shehayeb ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Epithelial Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Translational Research ◽  
The United States ◽  
Cutting Edge ◽  
Cancer Center ◽  
Community Practice ◽  
Clinical Expertise ◽  
Clinical And Translational Research

Epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) is the most common histology of ovarian cancer defined as epithelial cancer derived from the ovaries, fallopian tubes, or primary peritoneum. It is the fifth most common cause of cancer-related death in women in the United States. Because of a lack of effective screening and non-specific symptoms, EOC is typically diagnosed at an advanced stage (FIGO stage III or IV) and approximately one third of patients have malignant ascites at initial presentation. The treatment of ovarian cancer consists of a combination of cytoreductive surgery and systemic chemotherapy. Despite the advances with new cytotoxic and targeted therapies, the five-year survival rate for all-stage EOC in the United States is 48.6%. Delivery of up-to-date guideline care and multidisciplinary team efforts are important drivers of overall survival. In this paper, we review our frontline management of EOC that relies on a multi-disciplinary approach drawing on clinical expertise and collaboration combined with community practice and cutting edge clinical and translational research. By optimizing partnerships through team medicine and clinical research, we combine our cancer center clinical expertise, community practice partnership, and clinical and translational research to understand the biology of this deadly disease, advance therapy and connect our patients with the optimal treatment that offers the best possible outcomes.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document