Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 10 of 14 items for

  • Author: Clair Beard x
  • Refine by Access: Content accessible to Me x
Clear All Modify Search
Full access

Second Malignant Neoplasms in Testicular Cancer Survivors

Chunkit Fung, Sophie D. Fossa, Clair J. Beard, and Lois B. Travis

Second malignant neoplasms (SMNs) are a potentially life-threatening late effect of testicular cancer (TC) and its therapy. Although the increased risk for developing solid tumors among TC survivors is largely attributed to radiotherapy, chemotherapy may also be associated with excess risks. However, the baseline risks of developing site-specific SMNs in TC survivors have not yet been quantified, nor have interactions between treatments and other risk factors been elucidated. Studies to date report overall relative risks ranging from 1.4- to 2.8-fold for SMN in TC survivors, with significantly elevated risks apparent for more than 35 years. Analytic investigations show relationships between increasing radiation dose and/or field size and solid tumor risk. Small excess risks of leukemia follow treatment with either chemotherapy or radiotherapy. Recently, concern has been expressed about the increased risk of SMN from radiation exposure during imaging surveillance for recurrence. A small number of studies have examined this issue, generating inconclusive results. Given the current changes in TC treatment that result in lower radiation doses, in the future solid tumors will likely have a considerably lower impact on the lives of TC survivors, although diligent follow-up will be required to accurately quantify long-term risks and to ascertain risks associated with chemotherapy.

Full access

Follow-Up Management of Patients With Testicular Cancer: A Multidisciplinary Consensus-Based Approach

Clair J. Beard, Shilpa Gupta, Robert J. Motzer, Elizabeth K. O'Donnell, Elizabeth R. Plimack, Kim A. Margolin, Charles J. Ryan, Joel Sheinfeld, and Darren R. Feldman

Testicular cancer is the most common cancer in men aged 15 to 40 years in the United States, Canada, and many European countries. Given the excellent prognosis of most men with testicular cancer, updates in care after treatment have become very important. This article provides a review of the available evidence, integrated with expert medical judgment, in the area of testicular cancer follow-up.

Full access

Models of Care and NCCN Guideline Adherence in Very-Low-Risk Prostate Cancer

Ayal A. Aizer, Jonathan J. Paly, Anthony L. Zietman, Paul L. Nguyen, Clair J. Beard, Sandhya K. Rao, Irving D. Kaplan, Andrzej Niemierko, Michelle S. Hirsch, Chin-Lee Wu, Aria F. Olumi, M. Dror Michaelson, Anthony V. D’Amico, and Jason A. Efstathiou

NCCN Guidelines recommend active surveillance as the primary management option for patients with very-low-risk prostate cancer and an expected survival of less than 20 years, reflecting the favorable prognosis of these men and the lack of perceived benefit of immediate, definitive treatment. The authors hypothesized that care at a multidisciplinary clinic, where multiple physicians have an opportunity to simultaneously review and discuss each case, is associated with increased rates of active surveillance in men with very-low-risk prostate cancer, including those with limited life expectancy. Of 630 patients with low-risk prostate cancer managed at 1 of 3 tertiary care centers in Boston, Massachusetts in 2009, 274 (43.5%) had very-low-risk classification. Patients were either seen by 1 or more individual practitioners in sequential settings or at a multidisciplinary clinic, in which concurrent consultation with 2 or more of the following specialties was obtained: urology, radiation oncology, and medical oncology. Patients seen at a multidisciplinary prostate cancer clinic were more likely to select active surveillance than those seen by individual practitioners (64% vs 30%; P<.001), an association that remained significant on multivariable logistic regression (odds ratio [OR], 4.16; P<.001). When the analysis was limited to patients with an expected survival of less than 20 years, this association remained highly significant (72% vs 34%, P<.001; OR, 5.19; P<.001, respectively). Multidisciplinary care is strongly associated with selection of active surveillance, adherence to NCCN Guidelines and minimization of overtreatment in patients with very-low-risk prostate cancer.

Full access

Variation in National Use of Long-Term ADT by Disease Aggressiveness Among Men With Unfavorable-Risk Prostate Cancer

Vinayak Muralidhar, Paul J. Catalano, Gally Reznor, Brandon A. Mahal, Toni K. Choueiri, Christopher J. Sweeney, Neil E. Martin, Clair J. Beard, Yu-Wei Chen, Michelle D. Nezolosky, Karen E. Hoffman, Felix Y. Feng, Quoc-Dien Trinh, and Paul L. Nguyen

Background: The current NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology for Prostate Cancer recommend long-term androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) for all men with high-risk prostate cancer treated with external-beam radiation therapy (EBRT). We determined whether the use of long-term ADT varied by the recently defined subcategories of high-risk disease (favorable, other, and very high) versus unfavorable intermediate-risk disease. Methods: We identified 5,524 patients with unfavorable-risk prostate cancer diagnosed from 2004 to 2007 and managed with EBRT using the SEER-Medicare linked database. Patients were stratified by risk group: unfavorable intermediate-risk, favorable high-risk (previously defined and validated as clinical stage T1c, Gleason score of 4 + 4 = 8, and prostate-specific antigen [PSA] level <10 ng/mL, or clinical stage T1c, Gleason score of 6, and PSA level >20 ng/mL), very-high-risk (clinical stage T3b–T4 or primary Gleason pattern 5), or other high risk (ie, neither favorable nor very high). We used multivariable competing risks regression to estimate the rates of long-term (≥2 years) ADT by group. Results: Men with favorable high-risk prostate cancer were significantly less likely to receive long-term ADT than those with other high-risk disease (15.4% vs 24.6%, adjusted hazard ratio [AHR], 0.68; 95% CI, 0.60–0.76; P<.001), and similarly likely as those with unfavorable intermediate-risk disease (AHR, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.99–1.23; P=.087). Other high-risk disease was less likely to receive long-term ADT than very high-risk cancer (24.6% vs 30.8%; AHR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.74–0.93; P=.002). Conclusions: Despite current guidelines, patients with EBRT-managed high-risk prostate cancer received significantly different rates of long-course ADT based on subclassification. Our results suggest that oncologists view these patients as a heterogeneous group with favorable high-risk cancer warranting less aggressive therapy than other high-risk or very high-risk disease.

Full access

Practice Patterns and Outcomes Among Patients With N0M0 Prostate Cancer and a Very High Prostate-Specific Antigen Level

Vinayak Muralidhar, Paul L. Nguyen, Brandon A. Mahal, David D. Yang, Kent W. Mouw, Brent S. Rose, Clair J. Beard, Jason A. Efstathiou, Neil E. Martin, Martin T. King, and Peter F. Orio III

Background: Management of patients with a very high prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level (≥98.0 ng/mL) but clinically localized (N0M0) prostate cancer is challenging. This study sought to determine practice patterns and outcomes among these patients. Patients and Methods: A total of 748,825 patients with prostate cancer from 2004 through 2012 were identified using the National Cancer Database. These patients were subdivided by PSA level (0–9.9, 10.0–19.9, 20.0–39.9, 40.0–59.9, 60.0–79.9, 80.0–97.9, and ≥98.0 ng/mL), nodal status (N0 vs N1), and distant metastases (M0 vs M1). Rates of locoregional treatment and 5-year overall survival (OS) in each group were determined. Survival was compared using Cox regression after adjusting for multiple patient-specific factors. Results: The rate of locoregional treatment for patients with N0M0 disease and PSA level ≥98.0 ng/mL was significantly lower than for those with N1M0 disease (52.6% vs 60.4%; P<.001) or N0M0 disease and PSA level <98.0 ng/mL (52.6% vs 86.6%; P<.001). The 5-year OS rate was similar for patients with N1M0 disease and those with N0M0 disease and a very high PSA level (63.2% vs 59.1%; adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 0.91; P=.063). The survival benefit associated with locoregional treatment was higher among those with N0M0 disease and a very high PSA level than among those with N1M0 disease (aHR, 0.28 vs 0.44; P<.001). Conclusions: Patients with clinical N0M0 disease and a very high PSA level (≥98.0 ng/mL) have outcomes similar to those with N1 disease but receive locoregional treatment at a lower rate. Future work is needed to investigate the utility of locoregional treatment in this population.

Full access

Testicular Cancer, Version 2.2015

Robert J. Motzer, Eric Jonasch, Neeraj Agarwal, Clair Beard, Sam Bhayani, Graeme B. Bolger, Sam S. Chang, Toni K. Choueiri, Brian A. Costello, Ithaar H. Derweesh, Shilpa Gupta, Steven L. Hancock, Jenny J. Kim, Timothy M. Kuzel, Elaine T. Lam, Clayton Lau, Ellis G. Levine, Daniel W. Lin, M. Dror Michaelson, Thomas Olencki, Roberto Pili, Elizabeth R. Plimack, Edward N. Rampersaud, Bruce G. Redman, Charles J. Ryan, Joel Sheinfeld, Brian Shuch, Kanishka Sircar, Brad Somer, Richard B. Wilder, Mary Dwyer, and Rashmi Kumar

Germ cell tumors (GCTs) account for 95% of testicular cancers. Testicular GCTs constitute the most common solid tumor in men between the ages of 20 and 34 years, and the incidence of testicular GCTs has been increasing in the past 2 decades. Testicular GCTs are classified into 2 broad groups—pure seminoma and nonseminoma—which are treated differently. Pure seminomas, unlike nonseminomas, are more likely to be localized to the testis at presentation. Nonseminoma is the more clinically aggressive tumor associated with elevated serum concentrations of alphafetoprotein (AFP). The diagnosis of a seminoma is restricted to pure seminoma histology and a normal serum concentration of AFP. When both seminoma and elements of a nonseminoma are present, management follows that for a nonseminoma. The NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for Testicular Cancer outline the diagnosis, workup, risk assessment, treatment, and follow-up schedules for patients with both pure seminoma and nonseminoma.

Full access

Testicular Cancer

Robert J. Motzer, Neeraj Agarwal, Clair Beard, Sam Bhayani, Graeme B. Bolger, Mark K. Buyyounouski, Michael A. Carducci, Sam S. Chang, Toni K. Choueiri, Shilpa Gupta, Steven L. Hancock, Gary R. Hudes, Eric Jonasch, Timothy M. Kuzel, Clayton Lau, Ellis G. Levine, Daniel W. Lin, Kim A. Margolin, M. Dror Michaelson, Thomas Olencki, Roberto Pili, Thomas W. Ratliff, Bruce G. Redman, Cary N. Robertson, Charles J. Ryan, Joel Sheinfeld, Jue Wang, and Richard B. Wilder

Full access

Kidney Cancer

Robert J. Motzer, Neeraj Agarwal, Clair Beard, Sam Bhayani, Graeme B. Bolger, Michael A. Carducci, Sam S. Chang, Toni K. Choueiri, Steven L. Hancock, Gary R. Hudes, Eric Jonasch, David Josephson, Timothy M. Kuzel, Ellis G. Levine, Daniel W. Lin, Kim A. Margolin, M. Dror Michaelson, Thomas Olencki, Roberto Pili, Thomas W. Ratliff, Bruce G. Redman, Cary N. Robertson, Charles J. Ryan, Joel Sheinfeld, Philippe E. Spiess, Jue Wang, and Richard B. Wilder

Full access

Kidney Cancer

Robert J. Motzer, Neeraj Agarwal, Clair Beard, Graeme B. Bolger, Barry Boston, Michael A. Carducci, Toni K. Choueiri, Robert A. Figlin, Mayer Fishman, Steven L. Hancock, Gary R. Hudes, Eric Jonasch, Anne Kessinger, Timothy M. Kuzel, Paul H. Lange, Ellis G. Levine, Kim A. Margolin, M. Dror Michaelson, Thomas Olencki, Roberto Pili, Bruce G. Redman, Cary N. Robertson, Lawrence H. Schwartz, Joel Sheinfeld, and Jue Wang

Full access

Testicular Cancer

Robert J. Motzer, Neeraj Agarwal, Clair Beard, Graeme B. Bolger, Barry Boston, Michael A. Carducci, Toni K. Choueiri, Robert A. Figlin, Mayer Fishman, Steven L. Hancock, Gary R. Hudes, Eric Jonasch, Anne Kessinger, Timothy M. Kuzel, Paul H. Lange, Ellis G. Levine, Kim A. Margolin, M. Dror Michaelson, Thomas Olencki, Roberto Pili, Bruce G. Redman, Cary N. Robertson, Lawrence H. Schwartz, Joel Sheinfeld, and Jue Wang