Search Results
You are looking at 1 - 7 of 7 items for
- Author: Brian Kelly x
- Refine by Access: All x
Why Psychosocial Care is Difficult to Integrate into Routine Cancer Care: Stigma is the Elephant in the Room
Jimmie C. Holland, Brian J. Kelly, and Mark I. Weinberger
Insights Into Preferences for Psycho-Oncology Services Among Women With Gynecologic Cancer Following Distress Screening
Sylvie D. Lambert, Brian Kelly, Allison Boyes, Alexander Cameron, Catherine Adams, Anthony Proietto, and Afaf Girgis
Much attention has been given to implementing routine screening programs in cancer care to improve the management of distress following diagnosis. Although patients might screen positive for distress, several studies have found that most then refuse additional psychosocial support. To inform the development of successful models of distress screening, this qualitative study explored preferences for psychosocial care among 18 women diagnosed with a gynecologic cancer who scored at least 4 on the Distress Thermometer (DT). Participants were recruited from a gynecologic oncology outpatient clinic in Newcastle, Australia, and interviewed. Unanimously, participants felt that completing the DT was an integral part of their cancer care. However, half then refused the referral to see a psychologist. These women typically reported that a referral was not needed, because their rating on the DT reflected transient stressors or physical distress. Many also spoke about their need to cope with the challenges they were facing on their own and the extensive social support they already had in place to help them overcome these challenges. In contrast, women who accepted referral to the psychologist often struggled to cope with several losses they felt had existential and long-term effects. Commonly, these women reported not having the social support they needed, managing several concurrent life stressors, and/or not having the repertoire of coping skills they required to “remain afloat.” Findings from this study begin to bridge the gap between clinicians’ and patients’ expectations of how psychosocial services should be used in response to distress screening.
HSR20-112: Quantifying Caregiver Preferences for Attributes Associated With First-Line Treatment of Metastatic Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer
Candice Yong, Brian Seal, M. Janelle Cambron-Mellott, Oliver Will, Martine C. Maculaitis, Kelly Clapp, Emily Mulvihill, Ion Cotarla, and Ranee Mehra
HSR20-106: Quantifying Patient Preferences for Attributes Associated With First-Line Treatment of Metastatic Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer
Brian Seal, Candice Yong, M. Janelle Cambron-Mellott, Oliver Will, Martine C. Maculaitis, Kelly Clapp, Emily Mulvihill, Ion Cotarla, and Ranee Mehra
A Polycythemia Vera JAK2 Mutation Masquerading as a Duodenal Cancer Mutation
Justin Lee, Jennifer Axilbund, W. Brian Dalton, Daniel Laheru, Stanley Watkins, David Chu, Karen Cravero, Berry Button, Kelly Kyker-Snowman, Ian Waters, Christopher D. Gocke, Josh Lauring, and Ben Ho Park
Next-generation sequencing (NGS) is increasingly being used in cancer care to identify both somatic tumor driver mutations that can be targeted for therapy, and heritable mutations in the germline associated with increased cancer risk. This report presents a case of a JAK2 V617F mutation falsely identified as a duodenal cancer mutation via NGS. The patient was found to have a history of polycythemia vera, a disorder with a high incidence of JAK2 somatic mutations. Buccal cell DNA showed heterozygosity for the mutation, suggesting that it was potentially germline. However, subsequent resequencing of tumor, adjacent normal tissue, and fingernail DNA confirmed the mutation was somatic, and its presence in tumor and buccal cells resulted from contaminating blood cells. This report highlights important nuances of NGS that can lead to misinterpretation of results with potential clinical implications.
NCCN Guidelines® Insights: Squamous Cell Skin Cancer, Version 1.2022
Featured Updates to the NCCN Guidelines
Chrysalyne D. Schmults, Rachel Blitzblau, Sumaira Z. Aasi, Murad Alam, James S. Andersen, Brian C. Baumann, Jeremy Bordeaux, Pei-Ling Chen, Robert Chin, Carlo M. Contreras, Dominick DiMaio, Jessica M. Donigan, Jeffrey M. Farma, Karthik Ghosh, Roy C. Grekin, Kelly Harms, Alan L. Ho, Ashley Holder, John Nicholas Lukens, Theresa Medina, Kishwer S. Nehal, Paul Nghiem, Soo Park, Tejesh Patel, Igor Puzanov, Jeffrey Scott, Aleksandar Sekulic, Ashok R. Shaha, Divya Srivastava, William Stebbins, Valencia Thomas, Yaohui G. Xu, Beth McCullough, Mary A. Dwyer, and Mai Q. Nguyen
The NCCN Guidelines for Squamous Cell Skin Cancer provide recommendations for diagnostic workup, clinical stage, and treatment options for patients with cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma. The NCCN panel meets annually to discuss updates to the guidelines based on comments from panel members and the Institutional Review, as well as submissions from within NCCN and external organizations. These NCCN Guidelines Insights focus on the introduction of a new surgical recommendation terminology (peripheral and deep en face margin assessment), as well as recent updates on topical prophylaxis, immunotherapy for regional and metastatic disease, and radiation therapy.
NCCN Guidelines Insights: Soft Tissue Sarcoma, Version 1.2021
Featured Updates to the NCCN Guidelines
Margaret von Mehren, John M. Kane III, Marilyn M. Bui, Edwin Choy, Mary Connelly, Sarah Dry, Kristen N. Ganjoo, Suzanne George, Ricardo J. Gonzalez, Martin J. Heslin, Jade Homsi, Vicki Keedy, Ciara M. Kelly, Edward Kim, David Liebner, Martin McCarter, Sean V. McGarry, Christian Meyer, Alberto S. Pappo, Amanda M. Parkes, I. Benjamin Paz, Ivy A. Petersen, Matthew Poppe, Richard F. Riedel, Brian Rubin, Scott Schuetze, Jacob Shabason, Jason K. Sicklick, Matthew B. Spraker, Melissa Zimel, Mary Anne Bergman, and Giby V. George
The NCCN Guidelines for Soft Tissue Sarcoma provide recommendations for the diagnosis, evaluation, treatment, and follow-up for patients with soft tissue sarcomas. These NCCN Guidelines Insights summarize the panel discussion behind recent important updates to the guidelines, including the development of a separate and distinct guideline for gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs); reconception of the management of desmoid tumors; inclusion of further recommendations for the diagnosis and management of extremity/body wall, head/neck sarcomas, and retroperitoneal sarcomas; modification and addition of systemic therapy regimens for sarcoma subtypes; and revision of the principles of radiation therapy for soft tissue sarcomas.