As part of Massachusetts General Hospital’s overall quality improvement program, the Massachusetts General Hospital Breast Oncology Program participated in the NCCN Breast Cancer Outcomes Database Opportunities for Improvement Program. A review of concordance to breast oncology quality measures revealed that a small proportion of patients with breast cancer started chemotherapy more than 120 days after diagnosis. Therefore, the research team designed a quality improvement project to increase the percentage of concordance with the ASCO quality measure that requires time to treatment of less than 120 days and to decrease the number weeks from last definitive surgery to first adjuvant chemotherapy by 2014. A multipronged approach of improvements was used: to systems and infrastructure, communication among providers, and recruitment of additional staff as needed. This article describes the project and future initiatives to further improve the quality of breast cancer care at the institution.
You are looking at 1 - 6 of 6 items for
- Author: Inga T. Lennes x
- Refine by Access: All x
Inga T. Lennes, Mara Bloom, Nie Bohlen, and Beverly Moy
Renato G. Martins, Thomas A. D’Amico, Billy W. Loo Jr, Mary Pinder-Schenck, Hossein Borghaei, Jamie E. Chaft, Apar Kishor P. Ganti, Feng-Ming (Spring) Kong, Mark G. Kris, Inga T. Lennes, and Douglas E. Wood
Patients with stage IIIA non–small cell lung cancer, determined based on involvement of ipsilateral mediastinal lymph nodes, represent the most challenging management problem in this disease. Patients with this stage disease may have very different degrees of lymph node involvement. The pathologic confirmation of this involvement is a key step in the therapeutic decision. The difference in the degree of lymph node compromise has prognostic and treatment implications. Based on multiple considerations, patients can be treated with induction chemotherapy, chemoradiotherapy followed by surgery, or definitive chemoradiotherapy without surgery. Data derived from clinical trials have provided incomplete guidance for physicians and their patients. The best therapeutic plan is achieved through the multidisciplinary cooperation of a team specialized in lung cancer.
Douglas E. Wood, Ella A. Kazerooni, Scott L. Baum, George A. Eapen, David S. Ettinger, Lifang Hou, David M. Jackman, Donald Klippenstein, Rohit Kumar, Rudy P. Lackner, Lorriana E. Leard, Inga T. Lennes, Ann N.C. Leung, Samir S. Makani, Pierre P. Massion, Peter Mazzone, Robert E. Merritt, Bryan F. Meyers, David E. Midthun, Sudhakar Pipavath, Christie Pratt, Chakravarthy Reddy, Mary E. Reid, Arnold J. Rotter, Peter B. Sachs, Matthew B. Schabath, Mark L. Schiebler, Betty C. Tong, William D. Travis, Benjamin Wei, Stephen C. Yang, Kristina M. Gregory, and Miranda Hughes
Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related mortality in the United States and worldwide. Early detection of lung cancer is an important opportunity for decreasing mortality. Data support using low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) of the chest to screen select patients who are at high risk for lung cancer. Lung screening is covered under the Affordable Care Act for individuals with high-risk factors. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) covers annual screening LDCT for appropriate Medicare beneficiaries at high risk for lung cancer if they also receive counseling and participate in shared decision-making before screening. The complete version of the NCCN Guidelines for Lung Cancer Screening provides recommendations for initial and subsequent LDCT screening and provides more detail about LDCT screening. This manuscript focuses on identifying patients at high risk for lung cancer who are candidates for LDCT of the chest and on evaluating initial screening findings.
Jamie M. Jacobs, Molly E. Ream, Nicole Pensak, Lauren E. Nisotel, Joel N. Fishbein, James J. MacDonald, Joanne Buzaglo, Inga T. Lennes, Steven A. Safren, William F. Pirl, Jennifer S. Temel, and Joseph A. Greer
Background: Oral therapies are increasingly common in oncology care. However, data are lacking regarding the physical and psychologic symptoms patients experience, or how these factors relate to medication adherence and quality of life (QoL). Materials and Methods: From December 2014 through August 2016, a total of 181 adult patients who were prescribed oral targeted therapy or chemotherapy enrolled in a randomized study of adherence and symptom management at Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center. Patients completed baseline assessments of adherence with electronic pill cap, QoL, symptom severity, mood, social support, fatigue, and satisfaction with clinicians and treatment. Relationships among these factors were examined using Pearson product-moment correlations and multivariable linear regression. Results: At baseline, the mean electronic pill cap adherence rate showed that patients took 85.57% of their oral therapy. The most commonly reported cancer-related symptoms were fatigue (88.60%), drowsiness (76.50%), disturbed sleep (68.20%), memory problems (63.10%), and emotional distress (60.80%). Patients who reported greater cancer-related symptom severity had lower adherence (r= −0.20). In a multivariable regression, greater depressive and anxiety symptoms, worse fatigue, less social support, lower satisfaction with clinicians and treatment, and higher symptom burden were associated with worse QoL (F[10, 146]=50.53; adjusted R2=0.77). Anxiety symptoms were most strongly associated with clinically meaningful decrements in QoL (β= −7.10; SE=0.22). Conclusions: Patients prescribed oral therapies struggle with adherence, and cancer-related symptom burden is high and related to worse adherence and QoL. Given perceptions that oral therapies are less impairing, these data underscore the strong need to address adherence issues, symptom burden, and QoL for these patients.
Joseph A. Greer, Jamie M. Jacobs, Nicole Pensak, Lauren E. Nisotel, Joel N. Fishbein, James J. MacDonald, Molly E. Ream, Emily A. Walsh, Joanne Buzaglo, Alona Muzikansky, Inga T. Lennes, Steven A. Safren, William F. Pirl, and Jennifer S. Temel
Background: Patients with cancer are increasingly prescribed oral therapies, bearing greater responsibility for self-management of treatment adherence and adverse events. We conducted a randomized trial to test the use of a smartphone mobile app to improve symptoms and adherence to oral cancer therapy. Materials and Methods: From February 18, 2015, through December 31, 2016, 181 patients with diverse cancers who were prescribed oral therapy were randomized to receive either the smartphone mobile app or standard care. The mobile app included a medication plan with reminders, a symptom-reporting module, and patient education. Primary outcomes were adherence (per electronic pill caps), symptom burden (per MD Anderson Symptom Inventory), and quality of life (per the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy–General). Participants also completed self-report measures of medication adherence, anxiety and depression symptoms, social support, quality of care, and healthcare utilization. Linear regression was used to assess intervention effects on adherence and change in self-report outcomes from baseline to week 12, controlling for baseline scores and social support. Results: Study groups did not differ across any outcome measure, with an overall mean adherence of 78.81% (SD, 26.66%) per electronic pill caps. However, moderation analyses showed that intervention effects on the primary adherence measure varied by baseline self-reported adherence and anxiety symptoms. Specifically, adherence rates per electronic pill caps were higher in patients randomized to the mobile app versus standard care within the subsamples of patients who reported baseline adherence problems (mean difference, –22.30%; 95% CI, –42.82 to –1.78; P=.034) and elevated anxiety (mean difference, –16.08%; 95% CI, –31.74 to –0.41; P=.044). Conclusions: Although the mobile app may not improve outcomes for all patients prescribed oral cancer therapy, the intervention may be beneficial for those with certain risk factors, such as difficulties with adherence or anxiety.
NCCN Guidelines® Insights: Lung Cancer Screening, Version 1.2022
Featured Updates to the NCCN Guidelines
Douglas E. Wood, Ella A. Kazerooni, Denise Aberle, Abigail Berman, Lisa M. Brown, Georgie A. Eapen, David S. Ettinger, J. Scott Ferguson, Lifang Hou, Dipen Kadaria, Donald Klippenstein, Rohit Kumar, Rudy P. Lackner, Lorriana E. Leard, Inga T. Lennes, Ann N.C. Leung, Peter Mazzone, Robert E. Merritt, David E. Midthun, Mark Onaitis, Sudhakar Pipavath, Christie Pratt, Varun Puri, Dan Raz, Chakravarthy Reddy, Mary E. Reid, Kim L. Sandler, Jacob Sands, Matthew B. Schabath, Jamie L. Studts, Lynn Tanoue, Betty C. Tong, William D. Travis, Benjamin Wei, Kenneth Westover, Stephen C. Yang, Beth McCullough, and Miranda Hughes
The NCCN Guidelines for Lung Cancer Screening recommend criteria for selecting individuals for screening and provide recommendations for evaluation and follow-up of lung nodules found during initial and subsequent screening. These NCCN Guidelines Insights focus on recent updates to the NCCN Guidelines for Lung Cancer Screening.