<p>Higher adherence to a healthy diet significantly reduced the risk of prostate cancer progression in men with low-risk prostate cancer on active surveillance, according to a study published in <i>JAMA Oncology</i>.<span><sup>1</sup></span></p><p>The study is the first to show a significant association between a healthy diet and a significantly decreased risk of grade reclassification in this setting, according to the senior author of the study, Bruce J. Trock, PhD, Frank Hinman Jr. Endowed Professor of Urology and professor of oncology and epidemiology at the Johns Hopkins School of Medicine.</p><p>Using the Healthy Eating Index (HEI), a validated measure of overall diet quality that adheres to the Dietary Guidelines for Americans developed by the US Department of Agriculture, the study found that the likelihood of disease progression from Grade Group 1 to Grade Group 2 or higher decreased by 30% for every 25-point increase in the HEI. (The HEI provides a score of 0–100 for each category of healthful and unhealthful foods eaten by a person, with higher scores indicating a healthier diet.<span><sup>2</sup></span>)</p><p>Even more important, according to Dr Trock, was the finding that a 25-point increase in the HEI significantly decreased (by nearly 50%) the risk of progressing to Grade Group 3 or higher. “This is important because men with Grade 2 can sometimes continue on active surveillance, but the Grade Group 3 nearly always mandates definitive treatment with surgery and/or radiation,” he says.</p><p>The prospective cohort study included 886 men diagnosed with Grade Group 1 prostate cancer between January 2005 and February 2017 who were undergoing active surveillance. All the men completed a validated food frequency questionnaire on their usual dietary patterns. Researchers also looked at a measure of how much diet likely contributes to inflammation (i.e., the Dietary Inflammatory Index), but they found no association between this measure and grade reclassification.</p><p>Dr Trock says that the findings offer urologists evidence to share with their patients on active surveillance that a healthy diet may improve their prognosis, and they also provide concrete steps that patients can take to play an active role in the management of their disease, something that men on active surveillance often ask about.</p><p>“But this isn’t a magic cure-all, and men should continue with their active surveillance regimen,” says Dr Trock, who emphasizes that he would like to see the results of the study replicated in other studies. “But there is no downside to improving your diet quality, and it has other health benefits for cardiovascular disease, diabetes, and weight control,” he adds.</p><p>Commenting on the study, Walter M. Stadler, MD, Fred C. Buffett Professor of Medicine and senior advisor to the Comprehensive Cancer Center director at UChicago Medicine, calls the study interesting and agrees that a healthy diet accompanied by regular exercise is always
发表在《美国医学会肿瘤学》上的一项研究表明,在积极监测的低风险前列腺癌患者中,坚持健康饮食可以显著降低前列腺癌进展的风险。该研究的资深作者Bruce J. Trock博士表示,该研究首次显示了健康饮食与显著降低前列腺癌等级重新分类风险之间的显著联系。小弗兰克·欣曼,约翰·霍普金斯医学院泌尿学教授,肿瘤学和流行病学教授。使用健康饮食指数(HEI),一种符合美国农业部制定的《美国人膳食指南》的整体饮食质量的有效衡量标准,研究发现,HEI每增加25点,疾病从1级发展到2级或更高的可能性就会降低30%。(健康指数为一个人所吃的健康和不健康食物的每一类提供0-100分的分数,分数越高表明饮食越健康。)更重要的是,根据特罗克博士的发现,健康指数每增加25分,就会显著降低(近50%)进入第3组或更高级别的风险。他说:“这很重要,因为2级患者有时可以继续积极监测,但3级患者几乎总是要求进行手术和/或放射治疗。”这项前瞻性队列研究包括2005年1月至2017年2月期间被诊断为1级前列腺癌的886名男性,他们正在接受积极监测。所有男性都完成了一份关于他们日常饮食模式的有效食物频率问卷。研究人员还研究了饮食可能导致炎症的程度(即饮食炎症指数),但他们发现该指标与等级重新分类之间没有关联。Trock博士说,这些发现为泌尿科医生提供了证据,可以与积极监测的患者分享健康的饮食可能会改善他们的预后,他们还提供了患者可以采取的具体步骤,在疾病管理中发挥积极作用,这是积极监测的男性经常问的问题。“但这并不是万能的,男性应该继续他们的积极监测方案,”Trock博士说,他强调他希望看到这项研究的结果在其他研究中得到复制。他补充说:“但改善饮食质量并没有坏处,而且它对心血管疾病、糖尿病和体重控制还有其他健康益处。”Walter M. Stadler医学博士,Fred C. Buffett医学教授,芝加哥大学医学院综合癌症中心主任高级顾问,对这项研究进行了评论,称这项研究很有趣,并同意健康饮食加上定期锻炼总是一个好主意,因为它们对健康有多种好处。然而,他警告说,除了其他潜在的辅助因素,如其他健康问题(压力、伴随疾病和健康的社会决定因素),区分健康饮食对疾病进展的好处基本上是不可能的。他说:“很难确定这是健康的饮食本身还是健康的生活方式。”他还说,不可能从研究中轻易区分饮食与前列腺癌“进展”和“发展”之间的关系,因为主动监测中几乎所有的“进展”事件都可能是由于采样不足。“换句话说,较高级别的前列腺癌已经存在于相当大比例的Gleason 1组患者中,但由于抽样误差,在最初的活检中未被检测到,”他说,并补充说,近年来使用增强的磁共振成像活检算法使这个问题不那么普遍。
{"title":"Healthy diet may reduce the risk of low-grade prostate cancer progressing to a higher grade","authors":"Mary Beth Nierengarten","doi":"10.1002/cncr.35740","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.35740","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Higher adherence to a healthy diet significantly reduced the risk of prostate cancer progression in men with low-risk prostate cancer on active surveillance, according to a study published in <i>JAMA Oncology</i>.<span><sup>1</sup></span></p><p>The study is the first to show a significant association between a healthy diet and a significantly decreased risk of grade reclassification in this setting, according to the senior author of the study, Bruce J. Trock, PhD, Frank Hinman Jr. Endowed Professor of Urology and professor of oncology and epidemiology at the Johns Hopkins School of Medicine.</p><p>Using the Healthy Eating Index (HEI), a validated measure of overall diet quality that adheres to the Dietary Guidelines for Americans developed by the US Department of Agriculture, the study found that the likelihood of disease progression from Grade Group 1 to Grade Group 2 or higher decreased by 30% for every 25-point increase in the HEI. (The HEI provides a score of 0–100 for each category of healthful and unhealthful foods eaten by a person, with higher scores indicating a healthier diet.<span><sup>2</sup></span>)</p><p>Even more important, according to Dr Trock, was the finding that a 25-point increase in the HEI significantly decreased (by nearly 50%) the risk of progressing to Grade Group 3 or higher. “This is important because men with Grade 2 can sometimes continue on active surveillance, but the Grade Group 3 nearly always mandates definitive treatment with surgery and/or radiation,” he says.</p><p>The prospective cohort study included 886 men diagnosed with Grade Group 1 prostate cancer between January 2005 and February 2017 who were undergoing active surveillance. All the men completed a validated food frequency questionnaire on their usual dietary patterns. Researchers also looked at a measure of how much diet likely contributes to inflammation (i.e., the Dietary Inflammatory Index), but they found no association between this measure and grade reclassification.</p><p>Dr Trock says that the findings offer urologists evidence to share with their patients on active surveillance that a healthy diet may improve their prognosis, and they also provide concrete steps that patients can take to play an active role in the management of their disease, something that men on active surveillance often ask about.</p><p>“But this isn’t a magic cure-all, and men should continue with their active surveillance regimen,” says Dr Trock, who emphasizes that he would like to see the results of the study replicated in other studies. “But there is no downside to improving your diet quality, and it has other health benefits for cardiovascular disease, diabetes, and weight control,” he adds.</p><p>Commenting on the study, Walter M. Stadler, MD, Fred C. Buffett Professor of Medicine and senior advisor to the Comprehensive Cancer Center director at UChicago Medicine, calls the study interesting and agrees that a healthy diet accompanied by regular exercise is always","PeriodicalId":138,"journal":{"name":"Cancer","volume":"131 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.1,"publicationDate":"2025-02-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cncr.35740","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143431670","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
<p>During his fellowship in surgical oncology at the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, Ronald P. DeMatteo, MD, stumbled onto a cancer that was new to him. His imagination was piqued, and this led to his study of the relatively uncommon and little investigated gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST). His investigation into the biology of the tumor paved the way to leading the first national trial, funded by the National Cancer Institute (NCI), to examine the benefit of a relatively new drug on the market as adjuvant therapy after surgical resection of the tumor.<span><sup>1</sup></span></p><p>The drug was imatinib, and the results of the trial (ACOSOG-Z9001), which showed significantly improved outcomes, led to the 2008 accelerated approval of the treatment regimen and changed the standard of care for patients with resectable GISTs.</p><p>He also led two additional national trials testing the benefit of imatinib as adjuvant therapy for patients with resectable GISTs. The US Food and Drug Administration granted full approval in 2012.</p><p>Fast-forward to today, and Dr DeMatteo is continuing his research into the biology of abdominal tumors while also serving as an academic surgical oncologist. He is currently chair of the Department of Surgery at the Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, a position he has held since 2017. He maintains an active clinical practice, runs a research training program for young surgeons (funded by two NCI grants), and is in his final months as president of the Society of Surgical Oncology. In all these capacities, he cites the high reward in helping to shape the field of surgical oncology—from guiding the faculty and direction of a specific department to educating new surgical oncologists on how to perform research and ultimately to bringing all the training and expertise to bear on improving the lives of patients.</p><p>“Academic medicine allows you to do any or all of these jobs, and that is its big appeal,” Dr DeMatteo says. “That is what I find the most enjoyable, that you can eventually tailor the job to you and to what you like to do.”</p><p>From Dr DeMatteo’s accounting, the wish to tailor his career to suit his drive and purpose started at a very early age. In first grade, he decided that he wanted to be a surgeon. He did not know of any, but he liked to work with his hands—taking the lawn mower apart, building model airplanes—and somehow, he made the leap to the desire to take apart and put together the human body.</p><p>After a failed attempt at gaining access to an operating room as a seventh grader (he was allowed only outside the door to count sponges to ensure that the 10-packs used in surgery were accurate), he succeeded in getting into an emergency room at a local hospital, where he was given menial tasks to perform. His big break came while he was a premed undergraduate at the Johns Hopkins University, where he finally was allowed into the operating room at the Johns Hopkins
罗纳德·p·德马泰奥医学博士在纪念斯隆·凯特琳癌症中心从事外科肿瘤学研究期间,偶然发现了一种对他来说陌生的癌症。他的想象力被激发了,这导致了他对相对罕见和很少研究的胃肠道间质瘤(GIST)的研究。他对肿瘤生物学的研究为领导由美国国家癌症研究所(NCI)资助的第一个国家试验铺平了道路,该试验旨在检验市场上一种相对较新的药物作为手术切除肿瘤后辅助治疗的益处。该药物是伊马替尼,试验结果(ACOSOG-Z9001)显示出显著改善的结果,导致2008年加速批准了治疗方案,并改变了可切除gist患者的护理标准。他还领导了另外两项国家试验,测试伊马替尼作为可切除gist患者辅助治疗的益处。美国食品和药物管理局于2012年给予了全面批准。快进到今天,DeMatteo博士继续他对腹部肿瘤生物学的研究,同时也是一名学术外科肿瘤学家。他目前是宾夕法尼亚大学佩雷尔曼医学院外科系主任,自2017年以来一直担任该职位。他保持着积极的临床实践,为年轻外科医生开展研究培训项目(由两项NCI资助),并且在他作为外科肿瘤学会主席的最后几个月里。在所有这些能力中,他列举了帮助塑造外科肿瘤学领域的高回报——从指导一个特定部门的教员和方向,到教育新的外科肿瘤学家如何进行研究,并最终将所有的培训和专业知识用于改善患者的生活。德马泰奥博士说:“学术医学允许你做任何或所有这些工作,这就是它的巨大吸引力。”“这是我觉得最令人愉快的事情,你最终可以根据自己的喜好定制一份工作。”从德马泰奥博士的计算来看,他很早就希望根据自己的动力和目标来调整自己的职业生涯。一年级时,他决定要成为一名外科医生。他不知道有什么,但他喜欢用自己的双手工作——拆开割草机,制作模型飞机——不知怎么的,他突然产生了把人体拆开再组装起来的愿望。七年级的时候,他曾试图进入手术室,但失败了(他只被允许在门外数纱布,以确保手术中使用的10包纱布是准确的),后来他成功地进入了当地一家医院的急诊室,在那里他被分配了一些卑微的任务。他在约翰·霍普金斯大学读医学预科的时候迎来了重大突破,在那里他终于被允许进入约翰·霍普金斯医院的手术室,他说那是“迷人的,非常酷的”。他想成为一名外科医生的愿望在康奈尔大学医学院期间一直保持着稳定,但直到他在宾夕法尼亚大学医院的外科住院医生实习期才完全形成,在那里他最初想成为一名心脏外科医生,然后是一名移植外科医生。在DeMatteo博士实习期的后期,一位新招募的外科肿瘤学家Douglas L. Fraker医学博士在宾夕法尼亚大学(University of Pennsylvania)的到来,出乎他的意料,但他很快就走上了外科肿瘤学的道路。那是在20世纪90年代中期,外科肿瘤学作为一个领域还处于起步阶段。我只花了一周的时间和Fraker医生一起工作,看了他为DeMatteo医生做的各种手术,就被他迷住了。他想做外科肿瘤学。他离开了纪念斯隆凯特琳癌症中心完成了为期两年的外科奖学金,打算回到宾夕法尼亚大学与Fraker博士一起工作,但命运再次以Leslie H. Blumgart医学博士的名义进行了干预,Leslie H. Blumgart医学博士是一位来自南非的牙医,后来成为外科肿瘤学家,他成为肝脏手术的先驱,并以他对特定癌症(肝脏和胰腺)的独特关注启发了DeMatteo博士。DeMatteo博士在接下来的20年里一直在纪念斯隆·凯特琳癌症中心工作,在过去的11年里,他担任外科部副主任,直到他回到宾夕法尼亚大学担任目前的主任职务。在命运的另一个转折中,他再次与仍在宾夕法尼亚大学执业的Fraker博士合作。这可能花了20年而不是2年,但曾经的导师和学员又成了同事。DeMatteo博士对形成可切除的gist的新护理标准的贡献是基于他早期对肿瘤生物学的深入研究,以及他作为该领域的先驱在理解对gist的免疫反应方面的努力。 其他的成就包括我们对GIST中特定类型的癌基因突变如何与临床结果相关的理解,以及通过在线nomogram来选择患者进行辅助分子治疗的工具的开发,该工具可以预测哪些患者在GIST切除后可能会经历肿瘤复发。虽然他最出名的可能是他在gist方面的工作,但他的临床实践扩展到了广泛的腹部癌症,而他的实验室(在美国国立卫生研究院20年的持续资助下)则专注于更好地了解肝脏的免疫环境和肿瘤免疫学。DeMatteo博士于2020年成为美国国家医学院的成员。2016年,他被GIST救生筏支持小组授予Jeroen Pit科学奖。从2008年到2010年,他获得了外科肿瘤临床研究协会奖,他经常被Castle Connolly美国癌症顶级医生,美国顶级医生和费城杂志年度顶级医生认可为顶级医生之一。当被问及他一年级的梦想是否已经实现时,德马泰奥博士说,他已经远远超过了他作为一个简单的一年级学生的任何梦想,他若有所思地说:“当你还那么小的时候,你不可能有那么大的梦想。”
{"title":"First person profile: Ronald P. DeMatteo, MD","authors":"Mary Beth Nierengarten","doi":"10.1002/cncr.35736","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.35736","url":null,"abstract":"<p>During his fellowship in surgical oncology at the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, Ronald P. DeMatteo, MD, stumbled onto a cancer that was new to him. His imagination was piqued, and this led to his study of the relatively uncommon and little investigated gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST). His investigation into the biology of the tumor paved the way to leading the first national trial, funded by the National Cancer Institute (NCI), to examine the benefit of a relatively new drug on the market as adjuvant therapy after surgical resection of the tumor.<span><sup>1</sup></span></p><p>The drug was imatinib, and the results of the trial (ACOSOG-Z9001), which showed significantly improved outcomes, led to the 2008 accelerated approval of the treatment regimen and changed the standard of care for patients with resectable GISTs.</p><p>He also led two additional national trials testing the benefit of imatinib as adjuvant therapy for patients with resectable GISTs. The US Food and Drug Administration granted full approval in 2012.</p><p>Fast-forward to today, and Dr DeMatteo is continuing his research into the biology of abdominal tumors while also serving as an academic surgical oncologist. He is currently chair of the Department of Surgery at the Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, a position he has held since 2017. He maintains an active clinical practice, runs a research training program for young surgeons (funded by two NCI grants), and is in his final months as president of the Society of Surgical Oncology. In all these capacities, he cites the high reward in helping to shape the field of surgical oncology—from guiding the faculty and direction of a specific department to educating new surgical oncologists on how to perform research and ultimately to bringing all the training and expertise to bear on improving the lives of patients.</p><p>“Academic medicine allows you to do any or all of these jobs, and that is its big appeal,” Dr DeMatteo says. “That is what I find the most enjoyable, that you can eventually tailor the job to you and to what you like to do.”</p><p>From Dr DeMatteo’s accounting, the wish to tailor his career to suit his drive and purpose started at a very early age. In first grade, he decided that he wanted to be a surgeon. He did not know of any, but he liked to work with his hands—taking the lawn mower apart, building model airplanes—and somehow, he made the leap to the desire to take apart and put together the human body.</p><p>After a failed attempt at gaining access to an operating room as a seventh grader (he was allowed only outside the door to count sponges to ensure that the 10-packs used in surgery were accurate), he succeeded in getting into an emergency room at a local hospital, where he was given menial tasks to perform. His big break came while he was a premed undergraduate at the Johns Hopkins University, where he finally was allowed into the operating room at the Johns Hopkins","PeriodicalId":138,"journal":{"name":"Cancer","volume":"131 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.1,"publicationDate":"2025-02-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cncr.35736","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143431671","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
<p>A short course of induction chemotherapy delivered immediately before chemoradiotherapy significantly improved progression-free survival and overall survival for patients with locally advanced cervical cancer in comparison with the current standard of care with chemoradiotherapy alone, according to the results of the INTERLACE trial published in <i>The Lancet</i>.<span><sup>1</sup></span></p><p>At a median follow-up of 67 months, the 5-year overall survival rates were 80% for patients treated with induction chemotherapy followed by chemoradiotherapy and 72% for patients treated with chemoradiotherapy alone, whereas the 5-year progression-free survival rates were 72% and 64%, respectively. Overall, patients who received induction therapy had a 38% lower risk of disease progression and a 40% lower risk of death than those treated with chemoradiotherapy alone.</p><p>The findings indicate a new standard of care for these patients according to the study authors, who were led by Mary McCormack, MD, a consultant clinical oncologist at the University College Hospitals NHS Trust in London.</p><p>Of critical importance is the timing of chemoradiotherapy after induction therapy to avoid any gaps in treatment. Up to 93% of patients in the study who received induction chemotherapy received it 14 days or less before chemoradiotherapy. Dr McCormack underscores the importance of ensuring that patients proceed to chemoradiotherapy immediately after induction chemotherapy (i.e., induction chemotherapy is delivered in Weeks 1–6 and is followed by radiotherapy plus cisplatin, including brachytherapy, in Weeks 7–13).</p><p>Dr McCormack stresses that induction chemotherapy did not compromise the delivery of definitive radiation, with 96% of the patients who were treated with induction chemotherapy completing the course of definitive radiation within 56 days. Prior evidence shows a higher tumor control probability when the overall radiation treatment time is less than 56 days.<span><sup>2</sup></span></p><p>She says that radiotherapy, particularly in under-resourced settings, should be scheduled before induction chemotherapy is initiated, and she emphasizes that “the induction chemotherapy approach is not designed to manage radiotherapy wait times.”</p><p>INTERLACE is a multinational, phase 3 trial of 500 patients with locally advanced cervical cancer randomized to standard cisplatin-based chemoradiotherapy alone (<i>n</i> = 250) or induction chemotherapy (carboplatin and paclitaxel) followed by chemoradiotherapy (<i>n</i> = 250).</p><p>Commenting on the study, Elise Kohn, MD, head of Gynecologic Cancer Therapeutics in the Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program at the National Cancer Institute, agrees that the results of the study could translate into a change in practice for treating patients with early-stage cervical cancer. As with all treatments, she emphasizes that practitioners should assess patients for signs, symptoms, and risks of this approach and engage in sha
{"title":"New standard of care for patients with locally advanced cervical cancer","authors":"Mary Beth Nierengarten","doi":"10.1002/cncr.35739","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.35739","url":null,"abstract":"<p>A short course of induction chemotherapy delivered immediately before chemoradiotherapy significantly improved progression-free survival and overall survival for patients with locally advanced cervical cancer in comparison with the current standard of care with chemoradiotherapy alone, according to the results of the INTERLACE trial published in <i>The Lancet</i>.<span><sup>1</sup></span></p><p>At a median follow-up of 67 months, the 5-year overall survival rates were 80% for patients treated with induction chemotherapy followed by chemoradiotherapy and 72% for patients treated with chemoradiotherapy alone, whereas the 5-year progression-free survival rates were 72% and 64%, respectively. Overall, patients who received induction therapy had a 38% lower risk of disease progression and a 40% lower risk of death than those treated with chemoradiotherapy alone.</p><p>The findings indicate a new standard of care for these patients according to the study authors, who were led by Mary McCormack, MD, a consultant clinical oncologist at the University College Hospitals NHS Trust in London.</p><p>Of critical importance is the timing of chemoradiotherapy after induction therapy to avoid any gaps in treatment. Up to 93% of patients in the study who received induction chemotherapy received it 14 days or less before chemoradiotherapy. Dr McCormack underscores the importance of ensuring that patients proceed to chemoradiotherapy immediately after induction chemotherapy (i.e., induction chemotherapy is delivered in Weeks 1–6 and is followed by radiotherapy plus cisplatin, including brachytherapy, in Weeks 7–13).</p><p>Dr McCormack stresses that induction chemotherapy did not compromise the delivery of definitive radiation, with 96% of the patients who were treated with induction chemotherapy completing the course of definitive radiation within 56 days. Prior evidence shows a higher tumor control probability when the overall radiation treatment time is less than 56 days.<span><sup>2</sup></span></p><p>She says that radiotherapy, particularly in under-resourced settings, should be scheduled before induction chemotherapy is initiated, and she emphasizes that “the induction chemotherapy approach is not designed to manage radiotherapy wait times.”</p><p>INTERLACE is a multinational, phase 3 trial of 500 patients with locally advanced cervical cancer randomized to standard cisplatin-based chemoradiotherapy alone (<i>n</i> = 250) or induction chemotherapy (carboplatin and paclitaxel) followed by chemoradiotherapy (<i>n</i> = 250).</p><p>Commenting on the study, Elise Kohn, MD, head of Gynecologic Cancer Therapeutics in the Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program at the National Cancer Institute, agrees that the results of the study could translate into a change in practice for treating patients with early-stage cervical cancer. As with all treatments, she emphasizes that practitioners should assess patients for signs, symptoms, and risks of this approach and engage in sha","PeriodicalId":138,"journal":{"name":"Cancer","volume":"131 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.1,"publicationDate":"2025-02-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cncr.35739","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143431689","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Mi Jin Oh MD, Jinbae Park MS, Jiwoon Jeon BS, Mina Park MS, Seungkyung Kang MD, Su Hyun Kim MD, PhD, Su Hee Park MD, Young Hoon Chang MD, Cheol Min Shin MD, PhD, Seung Joo Kang MD, PhD, Seunghan Lee MD, Sang Gyun Kim MD, PhD, Soo-Jeong Cho MD, PhD
Background
Borrmann type-4 (B-4) advanced gastric cancer is challenging to diagnose through routine endoscopy, leading to a poor prognosis. The objective of this study was to develop an artificial intelligence (AI)-based system capable of detecting B-4 gastric cancers using upper endoscopy.
Methods
Endoscopic images from 259 patients who were diagnosed with B-4 gastric cancer and 595 controls who had benign conditions were retrospectively collected from Seoul National University Hospital for training and testing. Internal validation involved prospectively collected endoscopic videos from eight patients with B-4 gastric cancer and 148 controls. For external validation, endoscopic images and videos from patients with B-4 gastric cancer and controls at the Seoul National University Bundang Hospital were used. To calculate patient-based accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity, a diagnosis of B-4 was made for patients in whom greater than 50% of the images were identified as B-4 gastric cancer.
Results
The accuracy of the patient-based diagnosis was highest in the internal image test set, with accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of 93.22%, 92.86%, and 93.39%, respectively. The accuracy of the model in the internal validation videos, the external validation images, and the external validation videos was 91.03%, 91.86%, and 86.71%, respectively. Notably, in both the internal and external video sets, the AI model demonstrated 100% sensitivity for diagnosing patients who had B-4 gastric cancer.
Conclusions
An innovative AI-based model was developed to identify B-4 gastric cancer using endoscopic images. This AI model is specialized for the highly sensitive detection of rare B-4 gastric cancer and is expected to assist clinicians in real-time endoscopy.
{"title":"Application of artificial intelligence in the detection of Borrmann type 4 advanced gastric cancer in upper endoscopy (with video)","authors":"Mi Jin Oh MD, Jinbae Park MS, Jiwoon Jeon BS, Mina Park MS, Seungkyung Kang MD, Su Hyun Kim MD, PhD, Su Hee Park MD, Young Hoon Chang MD, Cheol Min Shin MD, PhD, Seung Joo Kang MD, PhD, Seunghan Lee MD, Sang Gyun Kim MD, PhD, Soo-Jeong Cho MD, PhD","doi":"10.1002/cncr.35768","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.35768","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Background</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Borrmann type-4 (B-4) advanced gastric cancer is challenging to diagnose through routine endoscopy, leading to a poor prognosis. The objective of this study was to develop an artificial intelligence (AI)-based system capable of detecting B-4 gastric cancers using upper endoscopy.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Methods</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Endoscopic images from 259 patients who were diagnosed with B-4 gastric cancer and 595 controls who had benign conditions were retrospectively collected from Seoul National University Hospital for training and testing. Internal validation involved prospectively collected endoscopic videos from eight patients with B-4 gastric cancer and 148 controls. For external validation, endoscopic images and videos from patients with B-4 gastric cancer and controls at the Seoul National University Bundang Hospital were used. To calculate patient-based accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity, a diagnosis of B-4 was made for patients in whom greater than 50% of the images were identified as B-4 gastric cancer.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Results</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>The accuracy of the patient-based diagnosis was highest in the internal image test set, with accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of 93.22%, 92.86%, and 93.39%, respectively. The accuracy of the model in the internal validation videos, the external validation images, and the external validation videos was 91.03%, 91.86%, and 86.71%, respectively. Notably, in both the internal and external video sets, the AI model demonstrated 100% sensitivity for diagnosing patients who had B-4 gastric cancer.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Conclusions</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>An innovative AI-based model was developed to identify B-4 gastric cancer using endoscopic images. This AI model is specialized for the highly sensitive detection of rare B-4 gastric cancer and is expected to assist clinicians in real-time endoscopy.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":138,"journal":{"name":"Cancer","volume":"131 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.1,"publicationDate":"2025-02-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143423972","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Emmanuel Gyan MD, PhD, Mark D. Minden MD, PhD, Kohmei Kubo MD, PhD, Alessandro Rambaldi MD, Gunnar Juliusson MD, Martin Jädersten MD, PhD, Richard J. Kelly MD, PhD, László Szerafin MD, CSc, Wensheng He PhD, Stanley C. Gill PhD, Jason E. Hill PhD, Caroline Chen MD, David Delgado MD, Nahla Hasabou MD
Background
The GOSSAMER phase 2 study assessed the FMS-like tyrosine kinase 3 (FLT3) inhibitor gilteritinib as maintenance therapy in patients with FLT3–internal tandem duplication (FLT3-ITD) acute myeloid leukemia (AML) in first complete remission without previous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT).
Methods
Patients had to be within 2 months of their last consolidation cycle and have completed the recommended number of cycles per local practice. FLT3 inhibitors were allowed only during induction and/or consolidation. The primary end point was relapse-free survival (RFS). Secondary end points included overall survival (OS), event-free survival, and measurable residual disease (MRD).
Results
In total, 98 patients were randomized (gilteritinib, n = 63; placebo, n = 35). RFS was not significantly different between the arms (hazard ratio, 0.74; 95% confidence interval, 0.41–1.34; p = .16). RFS rates for the gilteritinib and placebo arms were 68.5% and 55.3% at 1 year, 51.8% and 44.9% at 2 years, and 41.2% and 40.8% at 3 years, respectively. OS was not significantly different between the arms but may have been affected by subsequent AML therapies after discontinuation. In patients who received subsequent therapy (gilteritinib, 46.8%; placebo, 60.0%), a higher percentage of placebo-treated (57.1%) versus gilteritinib-treated patients (27.6%) underwent HSCT. At the end of treatment, 96.4% of gilteritinib-treated and 85.7% of placebo-treated patients had undetectable MRD. Relapsed placebo-treated (86.7%) versus gilteritinib-treated patients (34.8%) had a greater FLT3 mutational burden. No new significant safety concerns were noted.
Conclusions
The primary end point was not achieved; however, an observed trend toward potential benefit was noted in patients with FLT3-ITD AML who had not undergone prior HSCT.
{"title":"Maintenance therapy with the FMS-like tyrosine kinase 3 inhibitor gilteritinib in patients with FMS-like tyrosine kinase 3–internal tandem duplication acute myeloid leukemia: A phase 2 study","authors":"Emmanuel Gyan MD, PhD, Mark D. Minden MD, PhD, Kohmei Kubo MD, PhD, Alessandro Rambaldi MD, Gunnar Juliusson MD, Martin Jädersten MD, PhD, Richard J. Kelly MD, PhD, László Szerafin MD, CSc, Wensheng He PhD, Stanley C. Gill PhD, Jason E. Hill PhD, Caroline Chen MD, David Delgado MD, Nahla Hasabou MD","doi":"10.1002/cncr.35746","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.35746","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Background</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>The GOSSAMER phase 2 study assessed the <i>FMS</i>-like tyrosine kinase 3 (FLT3) inhibitor gilteritinib as maintenance therapy in patients with <i>FLT3</i>–internal tandem duplication (<i>FLT3</i>-ITD) acute myeloid leukemia (AML) in first complete remission without previous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT).</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Methods</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Patients had to be within 2 months of their last consolidation cycle and have completed the recommended number of cycles per local practice. FLT3 inhibitors were allowed only during induction and/or consolidation. The primary end point was relapse-free survival (RFS). Secondary end points included overall survival (OS), event-free survival, and measurable residual disease (MRD).</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Results</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>In total, 98 patients were randomized (gilteritinib, <i>n</i> = 63; placebo, <i>n</i> = 35). RFS was not significantly different between the arms (hazard ratio, 0.74; 95% confidence interval, 0.41–1.34; <i>p</i> = .16). RFS rates for the gilteritinib and placebo arms were 68.5% and 55.3% at 1 year, 51.8% and 44.9% at 2 years, and 41.2% and 40.8% at 3 years, respectively. OS was not significantly different between the arms but may have been affected by subsequent AML therapies after discontinuation. In patients who received subsequent therapy (gilteritinib, 46.8%; placebo, 60.0%), a higher percentage of placebo-treated (57.1%) versus gilteritinib-treated patients (27.6%) underwent HSCT. At the end of treatment, 96.4% of gilteritinib-treated and 85.7% of placebo-treated patients had undetectable MRD. Relapsed placebo-treated (86.7%) versus gilteritinib-treated patients (34.8%) had a greater <i>FLT3</i> mutational burden. No new significant safety concerns were noted.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Conclusions</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>The primary end point was not achieved; however, an observed trend toward potential benefit was noted in patients with <i>FLT3</i>-ITD AML who had not undergone prior HSCT.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":138,"journal":{"name":"Cancer","volume":"131 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.1,"publicationDate":"2025-02-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cncr.35746","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143396823","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Older adults with advanced cancer are at higher risk of treatment-related toxicities, which can impair function. Relationships between clinician-rated and patient-reported toxicities with functional decline remain unclear.
Methods
This secondary analysis of the GAP70+ trial aimed to evaluate the associations between clinician-rated (Clinician-rated common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events [CTCAE]) and patient-reported toxicities (PRO-CTCAE) with changes in physical performance and functional outcomes in older adults receiving systemic therapy. Physical performance was measured using the Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB; impairment: score ≤9). Functional capacity was assessed using activities of daily living (ADL) and instrumental ADL (IADL); impairment: any task difficulty. Toxicities were captured by CTCAE and PRO-CTCAE, which assess symptom severity and activity interferences. Generalized estimating equations evaluated the association of toxicity grades (0–1, 2, ≥3) within 3 months of treatment initiation with new functional impairments within 6 months.
Results
Patients were age 70 to 96 years. At baseline, 82.9% had impaired SPPB, 51.5% had impaired IADL, and 27.4% had impaired ADL. Among patients without baseline impairments, 57.7%, 47.4%, and 31.0% developed new SPPB, IADL, and ADL impairments, respectively. No association was found between CTCAE toxicity and new SPPB impairment (p = .70), but higher PRO-CTCAE toxicity severity (p = .02) and interference (p = .02) were associated with new SPPB impairments. New IADL impairments were more common with higher grades of CTCAE (p = .02) severe PRO-CTCAE toxicities (p = .02).
Conclusion
These findings emphasize the need to assess both clinician-rated and patient-reported toxicities to understand and mitigate functional decline in older adults with advanced cancer.
{"title":"Relationships between patient-reported and clinician-rated toxicities and daily functioning in older adults with advanced cancer undergoing systemic therapy","authors":"Eva Culakova PhD, Mostafa Mohamed MD, PhD, Marie Flannery PhD, RN, Marielle Jensen-Battaglia PT, DPT, Zhihong Zhang PhD, Erika Ramsdale MD, MS, Rachael Tylock MS, Fiona Stauffer MS, Megan Wells MPH, Allison Magnuson DO, Kah Poh Loh MBBCh, BAO, Umang Gada MS, Michelle Janelsins PhD, MPH, Supriya Mohile MD, MS","doi":"10.1002/cncr.35766","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.35766","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Background</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Older adults with advanced cancer are at higher risk of treatment-related toxicities, which can impair function. Relationships between clinician-rated and patient-reported toxicities with functional decline remain unclear.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Methods</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>This secondary analysis of the GAP70+ trial aimed to evaluate the associations between clinician-rated (Clinician-rated common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events [CTCAE]) and patient-reported toxicities (PRO-CTCAE) with changes in physical performance and functional outcomes in older adults receiving systemic therapy. Physical performance was measured using the Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB; impairment: score ≤9). Functional capacity was assessed using activities of daily living (ADL) and instrumental ADL (IADL); impairment: any task difficulty. Toxicities were captured by CTCAE and PRO-CTCAE, which assess symptom severity and activity interferences. Generalized estimating equations evaluated the association of toxicity grades (0–1, 2, ≥3) within 3 months of treatment initiation with new functional impairments within 6 months.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Results</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Patients were age 70 to 96 years. At baseline, 82.9% had impaired SPPB, 51.5% had impaired IADL, and 27.4% had impaired ADL. Among patients without baseline impairments, 57.7%, 47.4%, and 31.0% developed new SPPB, IADL, and ADL impairments, respectively. No association was found between CTCAE toxicity and new SPPB impairment (<i>p</i> = .70), but higher PRO-CTCAE toxicity severity (<i>p</i> = .02) and interference (<i>p</i> = .02) were associated with new SPPB impairments. New IADL impairments were more common with higher grades of CTCAE (<i>p</i> = .02) severe PRO-CTCAE toxicities (<i>p</i> = .02).</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Conclusion</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>These findings emphasize the need to assess both clinician-rated and patient-reported toxicities to understand and mitigate functional decline in older adults with advanced cancer.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":138,"journal":{"name":"Cancer","volume":"131 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.1,"publicationDate":"2025-02-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cncr.35766","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143396883","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Arti Patel Varanasi PhD, MPH, CPH, Linda Burhansstipanov DrPH, MSPH, OPN-CG, Sharon Gentry MSN, RN, Michelle Chappell MS, Carrie Dorn MPA, LMSW, Julie McMahon MPH, Kimberly Bradsher BS, Elba L. Saavedra Ferrer PhD, MS, OPN-CG, LaSonia Melvin Barnett MA, Marjorie Leighliter MHA, BSN, RN, OCN, Donna Moore Wilson MSN, RN, CBCN, Tracie Lewis MS
<p>The American Cancer Society National Navigation Roundtable (ACS NNRT) was established in 2017.<span><sup>1</sup></span> The ACS NNRT is a national coalition of 100+ member organizations to advance navigation efforts that eliminate barriers to quality care, reduce disparities, and foster ongoing health equity across the cancer continuum. The ACS provides organizational leadership and expert staff support to the ACS NNRT. In 2024, the ACS NNRT Workforce Development Task Group (WFD) published an article that described job roles of patient navigators (PN) based on their level of expertise.<span><sup>2</sup></span> The purpose of the current article is to illustrate how the table (https://navigationroundtable.org/resource/patient-navigation-job-roles-by-levels-of-experience-workforce-development-task-group-national-navigation-roundtable/) from the published article can be used to generate job descriptions that align with roles and responsibilities of navigators. The current article is the work of the NNRT WFD and highlights insights and guidance from experts in the field. The 2024 table can provide a resource for navigators looking to advance careers and administrators creating job descriptions for navigators at different levels of proficiency. The table applies to clinical and oncology patient navigators across diverse settings and organizations (community, academic, and clinic-based).</p><p>Oncology patient navigation as an occupation and a health delivery support strategy has rapidly expanded over the last 3 decades with this care concept’s importance becoming widely accepted. Through the evolution of this profession, the role of the navigator has been updated to meet the needs of the community or health care system.<span><sup>3</sup></span> The profession has matured with evidence-based practices and peer-reviewed publications to support navigation titles, standards, training, qualifications, and validation of their contribution to value-based care. Efforts have also been made to standardize patient navigation roles to inform job descriptions.<span><sup>2</sup></span> There remains a gap in standardized language to create job descriptions that patient navigation programs can use.</p><p>The origin of this profession started with Dr. Harold P. Freeman’s patient navigation goal to improve outcomes in populations that are medically underserved by eliminating barriers to timely cancer diagnosis and treatment in a culturally sensitive manner.<span><sup>4</sup></span> He described “lay navigators (now defined as oncology patient navigators) as the principal navigators in our system,” but recognizes the need for other professional navigators such as social workers and nurses, to be integrated at more complex points of care.<span><sup>5</sup></span> He acknowledges that patient navigators (now defined as “oncology patient navigators”) and clinical navigators (nurse and/or social worker) should possess specific knowledge and skill set based on patient ne
美国癌症协会全国导航圆桌会议(ACS NNRT)成立于2017年。ACS NNRT是一个由100多个成员组织组成的全国联盟,旨在推进导航工作,消除优质护理的障碍,减少差异,并促进整个癌症连续体的持续健康公平。ACS为ACS NNRT提供组织领导和专家人员支持。2024年,ACS NNRT劳动力发展任务小组(WFD)发表了一篇文章,根据他们的专业水平描述了病人导航员(PN)的工作角色本文的目的是说明如何使用已发布文章中的表(https://navigationroundtable.org/resource/patient-navigation-job-roles-by-levels-of-experience-workforce-development-task-group-national-navigation-roundtable/)来生成与导航员的角色和职责相一致的职位描述。当前的文章是NNRT WFD的工作,重点介绍了该领域专家的见解和指导。2024表可以为寻求职业发展的导航员和为不同熟练程度的导航员创建工作描述的管理员提供资源。该表适用于不同设置和组织(社区、学术和基于临床的)的临床和肿瘤患者导航器。在过去的30年里,肿瘤患者导航作为一种职业和健康服务支持策略迅速发展,这一护理概念的重要性被广泛接受。通过这一职业的发展,导航员的角色已经更新,以满足社区或卫生保健系统的需求这个行业已经成熟,有了基于证据的实践和同行评议的出版物,以支持导航标题、标准、培训、资格和验证他们对基于价值的护理的贡献。还努力使病人导航角色标准化,以便为工作描述提供信息在标准化语言上仍然存在空白,无法创建病人导航程序可以使用的职位描述。这一职业的起源始于Harold P. Freeman博士的病人导航目标,通过以文化敏感的方式消除癌症及时诊断和治疗的障碍,改善医疗服务不足人群的预后他将“非专业导航员(现在定义为肿瘤患者导航员)描述为我们系统中的主要导航员”,但也认识到需要其他专业导航员,如社会工作者和护士,在更复杂的护理点上进行整合他承认病人导航员(现在定义为“肿瘤病人导航员”)和临床导航员(护士和/或社会工作者)应该具备基于病人需求的特定知识和技能。肿瘤患者和临床导航员在癌症连续体的任何时刻与患者一起工作。例如,社区环境中的肿瘤患者导航员可能在癌症连续体的预防、教育和筛查部分与患者一起工作,而诊所中的肿瘤患者导航员在患者被诊断患有癌症后开始工作。肿瘤患者导航员也可以跨越诊所的门槛,在诊断、治疗、生存和生命结束的过程中继续与患者一起工作。临床环境中的文件和报销系统导致了护士导航和后来的病例管理的演变。2013年至2017年,肿瘤护理学会、肿瘤护士学会;病人导航员(AONN+)和乔治华盛顿大学对描述导航角色、核心能力、知识领域和衡量导航影响的标准指标做出了贡献。由于这项基础工作产生了多种能力资源,在2019年,美国癌症协会国家导航圆桌会议(ACS NNRT)劳动力发展小组利用这些能力的基础,与来自患者导航员培训协作组织和科罗拉多州公共卫生和环境部健康导航劳动力发展倡议的其他人员一起,就基于能力的患者导航培训的共享领域达成共识。6 .为了统一行业对各种类型导航员的定义、范围和角色的标准化,由专业肿瘤小组的领导组成的患者导航工作组在一个跨学科的合作伙伴关系中成立,包括护理、社会工作和肿瘤患者导航员,该合作伙伴关系源于2017年的拜登癌症倡议。出版了专业执业标准。 随着定义、角色、基于能力的患者导航培训的共享领域的标准化,以及支持专业的指标,专业导航实践的另一个统一部分是围绕专业水平创建具有特定实践范围的工作描述。在2022-2023年,ACS NNRT劳动力发展小组使用2019年的培训能力,并就入门、中级和高级的定义达成一致,以定义导航经验或同等水平,以及包括知识和专业知识在内的技能,创建了适用于所有肿瘤学导航员的工作描述。这个工具可以用来创建职位描述,也可以作为导航员职业发展的指南。这些基本标准的传播和实施一直是一项挑战。在实践中广泛采用这些标准对于患者导航专业的发展和提供高质量和一致的服务至关重要。社区指南承认病人导航是一种循证实践。10本文说明了如何使用患者导航员工作角色表为三个不同的熟练程度级别(入门级、中级和高级)生成工作描述(图1)。它是管理员为特定专业水平创建标准一致的工作描述的资源,也是导航员查看如何在患者导航员角色中随着时间的推移晋升到不同阶段的资源。与单独处理患者导航器、护士导航器和社会工作导航器的其他标准不同,本文中的资源适用于所有初级、中级和高级患者导航器。患者导航员是患者的倡导者,也需要成为他们职业发展的倡导者。通过了解导航的深度和广度,管理人员可以更好地欣赏导航在癌症连续体中的价值。2024表对于管理员来说是一个有用的工具,可以确定哪些技能与导航员的专业知识和经验水平相关。肿瘤患者导航领域正在迅速扩展到癌症以外的领域。职位描述应该具有灵活性,使候选人能够在导航中发展。总而言之,该表是一种工具,可以通过显示基于专业水平的技能线性进展来帮助管理员。这可以带来促进导航肿瘤学职业发展的机会。随着管理人员根据专业知识水平协调培训和评估机会,总体上改善了护理协调和任务转移和任务共享的发展,以克服障碍并改善患者的结果。随着导航员角色的发展,他们可以培训和指导其他导航员和肿瘤护理团队的成员。他们在识别社区资源差距、与其他服务提供者合作以及向政策制定者提供信息方面发挥着关键作用(Advanced、Domain IV和TANaopic 4)。11 arti Varanasi:概念化、调查、写作-原始草案、写作-审查和编辑、项目管理、监督和方法。Linda Burhansstipanov:概念化,调查,写作-原稿,方法,写作-审查和编辑,监督和项目管理。莎朗·金特里:写作-原稿和写作-审查和编辑。米歇尔·查佩尔:写作-原稿,写作-审查和编辑。嘉莉·多恩:写作-原稿,写作-审查和编辑。朱莉·麦克马洪:写作-原稿和写作-审查和编辑。金伯利·布拉德舍:写作-原稿,写作-审查和编辑。Elba L. Saavedra Ferrer:写作-原创草稿和写作-审查和编辑。LaSonia Barnett:写作-原稿和写作-审查和编辑。Marjorie leighl:写作-原稿,写作-审查和编辑。唐娜·摩尔·威尔逊:写作-原稿,写作-审查和编辑。特蕾西·刘易斯:写作-原稿和写作-审查和编辑。Linda Burhansstipanov报告了美国原住民癌症研究公司专业活动的费用。Arti Varanasi报道了美国癌症协会专业活动的费用。其他作者报告没有利益冲突。
{"title":"Job descriptions by oncology patient navigator experience","authors":"Arti Patel Varanasi PhD, MPH, CPH, Linda Burhansstipanov DrPH, MSPH, OPN-CG, Sharon Gentry MSN, RN, Michelle Chappell MS, Carrie Dorn MPA, LMSW, Julie McMahon MPH, Kimberly Bradsher BS, Elba L. Saavedra Ferrer PhD, MS, OPN-CG, LaSonia Melvin Barnett MA, Marjorie Leighliter MHA, BSN, RN, OCN, Donna Moore Wilson MSN, RN, CBCN, Tracie Lewis MS","doi":"10.1002/cncr.35764","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.35764","url":null,"abstract":"<p>The American Cancer Society National Navigation Roundtable (ACS NNRT) was established in 2017.<span><sup>1</sup></span> The ACS NNRT is a national coalition of 100+ member organizations to advance navigation efforts that eliminate barriers to quality care, reduce disparities, and foster ongoing health equity across the cancer continuum. The ACS provides organizational leadership and expert staff support to the ACS NNRT. In 2024, the ACS NNRT Workforce Development Task Group (WFD) published an article that described job roles of patient navigators (PN) based on their level of expertise.<span><sup>2</sup></span> The purpose of the current article is to illustrate how the table (https://navigationroundtable.org/resource/patient-navigation-job-roles-by-levels-of-experience-workforce-development-task-group-national-navigation-roundtable/) from the published article can be used to generate job descriptions that align with roles and responsibilities of navigators. The current article is the work of the NNRT WFD and highlights insights and guidance from experts in the field. The 2024 table can provide a resource for navigators looking to advance careers and administrators creating job descriptions for navigators at different levels of proficiency. The table applies to clinical and oncology patient navigators across diverse settings and organizations (community, academic, and clinic-based).</p><p>Oncology patient navigation as an occupation and a health delivery support strategy has rapidly expanded over the last 3 decades with this care concept’s importance becoming widely accepted. Through the evolution of this profession, the role of the navigator has been updated to meet the needs of the community or health care system.<span><sup>3</sup></span> The profession has matured with evidence-based practices and peer-reviewed publications to support navigation titles, standards, training, qualifications, and validation of their contribution to value-based care. Efforts have also been made to standardize patient navigation roles to inform job descriptions.<span><sup>2</sup></span> There remains a gap in standardized language to create job descriptions that patient navigation programs can use.</p><p>The origin of this profession started with Dr. Harold P. Freeman’s patient navigation goal to improve outcomes in populations that are medically underserved by eliminating barriers to timely cancer diagnosis and treatment in a culturally sensitive manner.<span><sup>4</sup></span> He described “lay navigators (now defined as oncology patient navigators) as the principal navigators in our system,” but recognizes the need for other professional navigators such as social workers and nurses, to be integrated at more complex points of care.<span><sup>5</sup></span> He acknowledges that patient navigators (now defined as “oncology patient navigators”) and clinical navigators (nurse and/or social worker) should possess specific knowledge and skill set based on patient ne","PeriodicalId":138,"journal":{"name":"Cancer","volume":"131 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.1,"publicationDate":"2025-02-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cncr.35764","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143396799","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Brigid M. Lynch PhD, Julie K. Bassett PhD, Roger L. Milne PhD, Alpa V. Patel PhD, Erika Rees-Punia PhD, I-Min Lee MBBS, ScD, Steven C. Moore PhD, Charles E. Matthews PhD
Background
Previous estimates of the number of cancers attributable to physical inactivity in the United States have typically focused on only three malignancies (colon, endometrial, and postmenopausal breast cancer). Contemporary epidemiologic evidence suggests that physical inactivity could contribute to up to 15 types of cancer, and a dose–response effect has been demonstrated for 13 of these. This study estimated the number of cancers diagnosed in the United States in 2015 due to physical inactivity for these 13 sites.
Methods
Data from the 2005 National Health Interview Survey were used to estimate physical activity prevalence and, with the assumption of a 10-year latency period, 2015 cancer incidence data from the National Program of Cancer Registries and Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Incidence US Cancer Statistics Public Use Database.
Results
The potential impact fraction was estimated to be 4.1%, which meant that 30,951 of 761,625 incident cancers at the 13 sites could have been prevented in the United States in 2015 if adults had increased physical activity by one category in 2005 (approximately 7.5 additional metabolic equivalent task hours per week [MET-h/week]). Theoretically, 85,415 of 761,625 incident cancers at the 13 sites (population attributable fraction, 11.2%) could have been prevented if all adults had achieved the highest level of physical activity (>30 MET-h/week).
Conclusions
When estimates are based on updated epidemiologic evidence regarding physical inactivity and cancer risk, substantially more cancers are attributable to physical inactivity than previously reported. A greater focus on physical activity promotion is warranted for cancer control in the United States.
{"title":"Estimating cancer incidence attributable to physical inactivity in the United States","authors":"Brigid M. Lynch PhD, Julie K. Bassett PhD, Roger L. Milne PhD, Alpa V. Patel PhD, Erika Rees-Punia PhD, I-Min Lee MBBS, ScD, Steven C. Moore PhD, Charles E. Matthews PhD","doi":"10.1002/cncr.35725","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.35725","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Background</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Previous estimates of the number of cancers attributable to physical inactivity in the United States have typically focused on only three malignancies (colon, endometrial, and postmenopausal breast cancer). Contemporary epidemiologic evidence suggests that physical inactivity could contribute to up to 15 types of cancer, and a dose–response effect has been demonstrated for 13 of these. This study estimated the number of cancers diagnosed in the United States in 2015 due to physical inactivity for these 13 sites.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Methods</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Data from the 2005 National Health Interview Survey were used to estimate physical activity prevalence and, with the assumption of a 10-year latency period, 2015 cancer incidence data from the National Program of Cancer Registries and Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Incidence US Cancer Statistics Public Use Database.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Results</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>The potential impact fraction was estimated to be 4.1%, which meant that 30,951 of 761,625 incident cancers at the 13 sites could have been prevented in the United States in 2015 if adults had increased physical activity by one category in 2005 (approximately 7.5 additional metabolic equivalent task hours per week [MET-h/week]). Theoretically, 85,415 of 761,625 incident cancers at the 13 sites (population attributable fraction, 11.2%) could have been prevented if all adults had achieved the highest level of physical activity (>30 MET-h/week).</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Conclusions</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>When estimates are based on updated epidemiologic evidence regarding physical inactivity and cancer risk, substantially more cancers are attributable to physical inactivity than previously reported. A greater focus on physical activity promotion is warranted for cancer control in the United States.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":138,"journal":{"name":"Cancer","volume":"131 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.1,"publicationDate":"2025-02-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cncr.35725","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143396782","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Steven G. DuBois MD, Chitose Ogawa MD, Lucas Moreno MD, Yaël P. Mossé MD, Matthias Fischer MD, Anne L. Ryan MD, Kieuhoa T. Vo MD, Bram De Wilde MD, Alba Rubio-San-Simon MD, Margaret E. Macy MD, Lisa Howell MD, Suzanne Shusterman MD, Nadège Corradini MD, Roberto Luksch MD, Isabelle Aerts MD, Jennifer H. Foster MD, Brian D. Weiss MD, Chandrasekhar Pamidipati Karthik MSc, Eunice Yuen PhD, Emin Avsar PhD, Julie R. Park MD, Araz Marachelian MD
Background
This study evaluated the safety, pharmacokinetics, and antitumor activity of LY3295668 erbumine as monotherapy and combination therapy in children with relapsed/refractory neuroblastoma.
Methods
Patients aged 2–21 years who had relapsed/refractory neuroblastoma were enrolled. LY3295668 erbumine was evaluated at two dose levels (12 and 15 mg/m2) and administered orally twice daily continuously as monotherapy and in combination with intravenous topotecan and cyclophosphamide in 28-day cycles.
Results
Twenty-five patients were treated. No dose-limiting toxicity occurred in monotherapy; one patient had dose-limiting toxicities in the combination therapy cohort (grade 3 mucositis and grade 4 neutropenia). The recommended phase 2 dose for both monotherapy and combination therapy was 15 mg/m2. Twenty-two patients (88%) had one or more treatment-related adverse event(s) (TRAEs), and 18 (72%) experienced grade ≥3 TRAEs. Myelosuppression was the most common high-grade TRAE observed in the combination therapy cohort. At both dose levels, steady-state plasma concentrations exceeded xenograft 90% inhibitory concentration levels. In the monotherapy cohort, one patient had a minor response, and one patient had stable disease, both continuing for >12 months. In the combination therapy cohort, two patients had a partial response, two had a minor response, and six had stable disease. Overall, the response rate, according to New Approaches to Neuroblastoma Therapy version 2.0 criteria, was 8%, and the disease control rate was 52%.
Conclusions
LY3295668 erbumine had a manageable safety profile as monotherapy and in combination therapy. Although proof-of-concept clinical responses were observed, future studies with biomarker-selected populations and/or novel combinations may yield higher response rates with Aurora kinase A inhibition.
{"title":"A phase 1 dose-escalation study of LY3295668 erbumine as monotherapy and in combination with topotecan and cyclophosphamide in children with relapsed/refractory neuroblastoma","authors":"Steven G. DuBois MD, Chitose Ogawa MD, Lucas Moreno MD, Yaël P. Mossé MD, Matthias Fischer MD, Anne L. Ryan MD, Kieuhoa T. Vo MD, Bram De Wilde MD, Alba Rubio-San-Simon MD, Margaret E. Macy MD, Lisa Howell MD, Suzanne Shusterman MD, Nadège Corradini MD, Roberto Luksch MD, Isabelle Aerts MD, Jennifer H. Foster MD, Brian D. Weiss MD, Chandrasekhar Pamidipati Karthik MSc, Eunice Yuen PhD, Emin Avsar PhD, Julie R. Park MD, Araz Marachelian MD","doi":"10.1002/cncr.35751","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.35751","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Background</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>This study evaluated the safety, pharmacokinetics, and antitumor activity of LY3295668 erbumine as monotherapy and combination therapy in children with relapsed/refractory neuroblastoma.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Methods</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Patients aged 2–21 years who had relapsed/refractory neuroblastoma were enrolled. LY3295668 erbumine was evaluated at two dose levels (12 and 15 mg/m<sup>2</sup>) and administered orally twice daily continuously as monotherapy and in combination with intravenous topotecan and cyclophosphamide in 28-day cycles.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Results</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Twenty-five patients were treated. No dose-limiting toxicity occurred in monotherapy; one patient had dose-limiting toxicities in the combination therapy cohort (grade 3 mucositis and grade 4 neutropenia). The recommended phase 2 dose for both monotherapy and combination therapy was 15 mg/m<sup>2</sup>. Twenty-two patients (88%) had one or more treatment-related adverse event(s) (TRAEs), and 18 (72%) experienced grade ≥3 TRAEs. Myelosuppression was the most common high-grade TRAE observed in the combination therapy cohort. At both dose levels, steady-state plasma concentrations exceeded xenograft 90% inhibitory concentration levels. In the monotherapy cohort, one patient had a minor response, and one patient had stable disease, both continuing for >12 months. In the combination therapy cohort, two patients had a partial response, two had a minor response, and six had stable disease. Overall, the response rate, according to New Approaches to Neuroblastoma Therapy version 2.0 criteria, was 8%, and the disease control rate was 52%.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Conclusions</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>LY3295668 erbumine had a manageable safety profile as monotherapy and in combination therapy. Although proof-of-concept clinical responses were observed, future studies with biomarker-selected populations and/or novel combinations may yield higher response rates with Aurora kinase A inhibition.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":138,"journal":{"name":"Cancer","volume":"131 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.1,"publicationDate":"2025-02-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143388894","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Alterations in mismatch repair (MMR) genes like MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, and PMS2 can lead to microsatellite instability–high (MSI-H) tumors. These mutations can be inherited, as in Lynch syndrome (LS), or occur de novo. Although immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) improves survival in MSI-H colorectal cancer (CRC) compared to chemotherapy, data comparing outcomes for patients with germline versus somatic MMR mutations are limited.
Methods
This retrospective study included patients from Mayo Clinic (Arizona, Minnesota, Florida) from 2008 to 2023. A total of 81 patient records were reviewed. Patients with MMR-deficient or MSI-H CRC (N = 18 LS, N = 63 non-LS) were included for analysis.
Results
Pembrolizumab was used in 65% of patients with LS and 94% of patients without LS, with median treatment durations of 11.7 and 8.8 months, respectively. Median overall survival (OS) for all stages was 82 months. There were no differences observed in OS for LS vs non-LS when patients in Stages II, III, and IV were analyzed separately. In Stage IV patients, BRAF V600E mutations were associated with worse OS compared to BRAF wild-type (hazard ratio, 2.69; 95% CI, 1.03–7.01, p = .043), with median OS of 19 vs. 113 months and progression-free survival of 12 vs. 95 months.
Conclusion
Patients with MSI-H CRC treated with ICIs exhibited similar outcomes regardless of germline or somatic MMR mutations. However, the presence of a BRAF V600E mutation was associated with a worse prognosis.
错配修复(MMR)基因如MLH1、MSH2、MSH6和PMS2的改变可导致微卫星不稳定性高(MSI-H)肿瘤。这些突变可以遗传,如Lynch综合征(LS),也可以从头发生。尽管与化疗相比,免疫检查点抑制剂(ICI)可提高MSI-H结直肠癌(CRC)的生存率,但比较生殖系与体细胞MMR突变患者结局的数据有限。方法回顾性研究纳入2008年至2023年梅奥诊所(亚利桑那州、明尼苏达州、佛罗里达州)的患者。共审查了81例患者记录。mmr缺陷或MSI-H CRC患者(N = 18 LS, N = 63非LS)被纳入分析。结果派姆单抗用于65%的LS患者和94%的非LS患者,中位治疗持续时间分别为11.7个月和8.8个月。所有阶段的中位总生存期(OS)为82个月。当分别分析II期、III期和IV期患者时,没有观察到LS与非LS的OS差异。在IV期患者中,与野生型BRAF相比,BRAF V600E突变与更差的OS相关(风险比,2.69;95% CI, 1.03-7.01, p = 0.043),中位OS为19个月,无进展生存期为12个月,无进展生存期为95个月。结论无论生殖系或体细胞MMR突变如何,接受ICIs治疗的MSI-H CRC患者均表现出相似的结果。然而,BRAF V600E突变的存在与较差的预后相关。
{"title":"Comparison of survival outcomes for patients with Lynch vs non-Lynch syndrome and microsatellite unstable colorectal cancer treated with immunotherapy","authors":"Cody Eslinger MD, MS, Daniel Walden MD, Alyssa McGary MS, Oluwadunni Emiloju MD, Daniel Ahn DO, Mohamad Bassam Sonbol MD, Tanios Bekaii-Saab MD, Mojun Zhu MD, Joleen Hubbard MD, Christina Wu MD","doi":"10.1002/cncr.35756","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.35756","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Background</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Alterations in mismatch repair (MMR) genes like <i>MLH1</i>, <i>MSH2</i>, <i>MSH6</i>, and <i>PMS2</i> can lead to microsatellite instability–high (MSI-H) tumors. These mutations can be inherited, as in Lynch syndrome (LS), or occur de novo. Although immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) improves survival in MSI-H colorectal cancer (CRC) compared to chemotherapy, data comparing outcomes for patients with germline versus somatic MMR mutations are limited.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Methods</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>This retrospective study included patients from Mayo Clinic (Arizona, Minnesota, Florida) from 2008 to 2023. A total of 81 patient records were reviewed. Patients with MMR-deficient or MSI-H CRC (<i>N</i> = 18 LS, <i>N</i> = 63 non-LS) were included for analysis.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Results</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Pembrolizumab was used in 65% of patients with LS and 94% of patients without LS, with median treatment durations of 11.7 and 8.8 months, respectively. Median overall survival (OS) for all stages was 82 months. There were no differences observed in OS for LS vs non-LS when patients in Stages II, III, and IV were analyzed separately. In Stage IV patients, <i>BRAF</i> V600E mutations were associated with worse OS compared to <i>BRAF</i> wild-type (hazard ratio, 2.69; 95% CI, 1.03–7.01, <i>p</i> = .043), with median OS of 19 vs. 113 months and progression-free survival of 12 vs. 95 months.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Conclusion</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Patients with MSI-H CRC treated with ICIs exhibited similar outcomes regardless of germline or somatic MMR mutations. However, the presence of a <i>BRAF</i> V600E mutation was associated with a worse prognosis.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":138,"journal":{"name":"Cancer","volume":"131 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.1,"publicationDate":"2025-02-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143389003","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}