Daniel G. Coit
David A. Kooby and Daniel G. Coit
Although the incidence of gastric adenocarcinoma in the United States has declined steadily since the early 1900s, it remains a significant health problem. Progress has been made during the past few decades in several areas: Lymph node staging has been refined, perioperative mortality has fallen, and plausible adjuvant therapy has emerged. Currently, complete surgical resection is the mainstay of therapy because it is the only potentially curative option; however, considerable controversy remains regarding the specifics of a surgical approach. This article examines 4 major controversies in the management of gastric cancer: extent of gastric resection, role of extended lymph node dissection, value of elective splenectomy for proximal gastric lesions, and current state of adjuvant therapy. Pertinent retrospective and prospective studies are reviewed to help formulate meaningful conclusions.
Daniel G. Coit and Anthony J. Olszanski
The treatment of melanoma in 2013 has evolved significantly over the past 2 years, according to presentations at the recent NCCN 18th Annual Conference. Ipilimumab and vemurafenib have prolonged the survival of patients with advanced disease, and the research pipeline continues to evaluate a number of new agents highlighting a tremendous optimism to further improve outcomes. These new treatment options were incorporated into the NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology in 2012. A recent presentation of these guidelines highlighted changes in both the initial management of very thin melanomas and the ongoing importance of targeted agents and immunotherapy in more advanced disease. This presentation included refining the indication for sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB), which, according to the updated guidelines, is not recommended for very thin lesions (≤ 0.75 mm). Dr. Daniel G. Coit discussed the rationale for this change during the presentation, and Dr. Anthony J. Olszanski reviewed the evidence for new classes of agents that impact survival.
Shoko Mori, Cristian Navarrete-Dechent, Tatyana A. Petukhova, Erica H. Lee, Anthony M. Rossi, Michael A. Postow, Lara A. Dunn, Benjamin R. Roman, Vivian T. Yin, Daniel G. Coit, Travis J. Hollmann, Klaus J. Busam, Kishwer S. Nehal, and Christopher A. Barker
Background: Tumor board conferences (TBCs) are used by oncologic specialists to review patient cases, exchange knowledge, and discuss options for cancer management. These multidisciplinary meetings are often a cornerstone of treatment at leading cancer centers and are required for accreditation by certain groups, such as the American College of Surgeons' Commission on Cancer. Little is known regarding skin cancer TBCs. The objective of this study was to characterize the structure, function, and impact of existing skin cancer TBCs in the United States. Methods: A cross-sectional online survey was administered to physician leaders of skin cancer TBCs at NCI-designated Comprehensive and Clinical Cancer Centers. Results: Of the 59 centers successfully contacted, 14 (24%) reported not having a conference where skin cancer cases were discussed, and 45 (76%) identified 53 physician leaders. A total of 38 physicians (72%) completed the survey. Half of the meeting leaders were medical and/or surgical oncologists, and dermatologists led one-third of meetings. TBCs had a moderate to significant impact on patient care according to 97% of respondents. All respondents indicated that the meetings enhanced communication among physicians and provided an opportunity for involved specialists and professionals to discuss cases. The most frequently cited barrier to organizing TBCs was determining a common available date and time for attendees (62%). The most common suggestion for improvement was to increase attendance, specialists, and/or motivation. Conclusions: Results showed overall consistency in meeting structure but variability in function, which may be a reflection of institutional resources and investment in the conference. Future directions include defining metrics to evaluate changes in diagnosis or management plan after tumor board discussion, attendance, clinical trial enrollment, and cost analysis. Results of this survey may aid other institutions striving to develop and refine skin cancer TBCs.
Daniel G. Coit, Robert Andtbacka, Christopher J. Anker, Christopher K. Bichakjian, William E. Carson III, Adil Daud, Raza A. Dilawari, Dominick DiMaio, Valerie Guild, Allan C. Halpern, F. Stephen Hodi Jr., Mark C. Kelley, Nikhil I. Khushalani, Ragini R. Kudchadkar, Julie R. Lange, Anne Lind, Mary C. Martini, Anthony J. Olszanski, Scott K. Pruitt, Merrick I. Ross, Susan M. Swetter, Kenneth K. Tanabe, John A. Thompson, Vijay Trisal, and Marshall M. Urist
Daniel G. Coit, Robert Andtbacka, Christopher K. Bichakjian, Raza A. Dilawari, Dominick DiMaio, Valerie Guild, Allan C. Halpern, F. Stephen Hodi, Mohammed Kashani-Sabet, Julie R. Lange, Anne Lind, Lainie Martin, Mary C. Martini, Scott K. Pruitt, Merrick I. Ross, Stephen F. Sener, Susan M. Swetter, Kenneth K. Tanabe, John A. Thompson, Vijay Trisal, Marshall M. Urist, Jeffrey Weber, and Michael K. Wong
Featured Updates to the NCCN Guidelines
Daniel G. Coit, Robert Andtbacka, Christopher J. Anker, Christopher K. Bichakjian, William E. Carson III, Adil Daud, Dominick DiMaio, Martin D. Fleming, Valerie Guild, Allan C. Halpern, F. Stephen Hodi Jr., Mark C. Kelley, Nikhil I. Khushalani, Ragini R. Kudchadkar, Julie R. Lange, Anne Lind, Mary C. Martini, Anthony J. Olszanski, Scott K. Pruitt, Merrick I. Ross, Susan M. Swetter, Kenneth K. Tanabe, John A. Thompson, Vijay Trisal, Marshall M. Urist, Nicole McMillian, and Maria Ho
The NCCN Guidelines for Melanoma provide multidisciplinary recommendations on the clinical management of patients with melanoma. This NCCN Guidelines Insights report highlights notable recent updates. Foremost of these is the exciting addition of the novel agents ipilimumab and vemurafenib for treatment of advanced melanoma. The NCCN panel also included imatinib as a treatment for KIT-mutated tumors and pegylated interferon alfa-2b as an option for adjuvant therapy. Also important are revisions to the initial stratification of early-stage lesions based on the risk of sentinel lymph node metastases, and revised recommendations on the use of sentinel lymph node biopsy for low-risk groups. Finally, the NCCN panel reached clinical consensus on clarifying the role of imaging in the workup of patients with melanoma.
Daniel G. Coit, John A. Thompson, Robert Andtbacka, Christopher J. Anker, Christopher K. Bichakjian, William E. Carson III, Gregory A. Daniels, Adil Daud, Dominick DiMaio, Martin D. Fleming, Rene Gonzalez, Valerie Guild, Allan C. Halpern, F. Stephen Hodi Jr, Mark C. Kelley, Nikhil I. Khushalani, Ragini R. Kudchadkar, Julie R. Lange, Mary C. Martini, Anthony J. Olszanski, Merrick I. Ross, April Salama, Susan M. Swetter, Kenneth K. Tanabe, Vijay Trisal, Marshall M. Urist, Nicole R. McMillian, and Maria Ho
The NCCN Guidelines for Melanoma provide multidisciplinary recommendations for the management of patients with melanoma. These NCCN Guidelines Insights highlight notable recent updates. Dabrafenib and trametinib, either as monotherapy (category 1) or combination therapy, have been added as systemic options for patients with unresectable metastatic melanoma harboring BRAF V600 mutations. Controversy continues regarding the value of adjuvant radiation for patients at high risk of nodal relapse. This is reflected in the category 2B designation to consider adjuvant radiation following lymphadenectomy for stage III melanoma with clinically positive nodes or recurrent disease.
Daniel G. Coit, John A. Thompson, Mark R. Albertini, Christopher Barker, William E. Carson III, Carlo Contreras, Gregory A. Daniels, Dominick DiMaio, Ryan C. Fields, Martin D. Fleming, Morganna Freeman, Anjela Galan, Brian Gastman, Valerie Guild, Douglas Johnson, Richard W. Joseph, Julie R. Lange, Sameer Nath, Anthony J. Olszanski, Patrick Ott, Aparna Priyanath Gupta, Merrick I. Ross, April K. Salama, Joseph Skitzki, Jeffrey Sosman, Susan M. Swetter, Kenneth K. Tanabe, Evan Wuthrick, Nicole R. McMillian, and Anita M. Engh
The NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for Cutaneous melanoma have been significantly revised over the past few years in response to emerging data on immune checkpoint inhibitor therapies and BRAF-targeted therapy. This article summarizes the data and rationale supporting extensive changes to the recommendations for systemic therapy as adjuvant treatment of resected disease and as treatment of unresectable or distant metastatic disease.