Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 7 of 7 items for

  • Author: Douglas W. Blayney x
  • Refine by Access: All x
Clear All Modify Search
Full access

HSR21-068: Predicting Preventable Emergency Department Visits and Admissions After Chemotherapy

Dylan Joseph Peterson, Nicolai Patrick Ostberg, Selen Bozkurt, James D. Brooks, Douglas W. Blayney, and Tina Hernandez-Boussard

Full access

PSA Testing Use and Prostate Cancer Diagnostic Stage After the 2012 U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Guideline Changes

Christopher J. Magnani, Kevin Li, Tina Seto, Kathryn M. McDonald, Douglas W. Blayney, James D. Brooks, and Tina Hernandez-Boussard

ABSTRACT

Background: Most patients with prostate cancer are diagnosed with low-grade, localized disease and may not require definitive treatment. In 2012, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommended against prostate cancer screening to address overdetection and overtreatment. This study sought to determine the effect of guideline changes on prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening and initial diagnostic stage for prostate cancer. Patients and Methods: A difference-in-differences analysis was conducted to compare changes in PSA screening (exposure) relative to cholesterol testing (control) after the 2012 USPSTF guideline changes, and chi-square test was used to determine whether there was a subsequent decrease in early-stage, low-risk prostate cancer diagnoses. Data were derived from a tertiary academic medical center’s electronic health records, a national commercial insurance database (OptumLabs), and the SEER database for men aged ≥35 years before (2008–2011) and after (2013–2016) the guideline changes. Results: In both the academic center and insurance databases, PSA testing significantly decreased for all men compared with the control. The greatest decrease was among men aged 55 to 74 years at the academic center and among those aged ≥75 years in the commercial database. The proportion of early-stage prostate cancer diagnoses (<T2) decreased across age groups at the academic center and in the SEER database. Conclusions: In primary care, PSA testing decreased significantly and fewer prostate cancers were diagnosed at an early stage, suggesting provider adherence to the 2012 USPSTF guideline changes. Long-term follow-up is needed to understand the effect of decreased screening on prostate cancer survival.

Full access

Real-World Impact of Prophylactic Growth Factor Use on Timing of Febrile Neutropenia and Infection After High-Risk Chemotherapy

Douglas W. Blayney, Nicole M. Kuderer, Alice Kate Cummings Joyner, John Jarvis, Dominic Nunag, Jasmine Wells, Lan Huang, Ramon Mohanlal, and Gary H. Lyman

Background: Prophylactic growth-factor therapy with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) reduces the risk of febrile neutropenia (FN) in patients with breast cancer initiating myelosuppressive chemotherapy. However, little is known about the protective benefit early in the chemotherapy cycle. Methods: To assess the relationship between G-CSF prophylaxis and incidence of FN/infection in week 1 versus beyond week 1 of the first chemotherapy cycle, a retrospective study was conducted using Medicare claims from 2005 through 2020 among patients with breast cancer initiating high-risk chemotherapy. Two cohorts were compared based on G-CSF prophylaxis within 3 days following chemotherapy initiation. The primary outcome was FN or infection, defined as hospitalization with neutropenia, fever, or infection diagnosis. Secondary outcomes were a stricter definition of FN and infection-related hospitalization. Unadjusted and regression-adjusted proportions of patients experiencing each outcome during week 1 versus beyond week 1 of the first chemotherapy cycle were compared. Results: Of 78,810 patients meeting all inclusion criteria (>98% female; mean age, 69 years), 79% initiated TC (docetaxel/cyclophosphamide), 14% TCH (docetaxel/carboplatin/trastuzumab), and 7% TAC (docetaxel/doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide). Among patients receiving G-CSF (74%), incidence of first-cycle FN/infection was lower compared with patients not receiving G-CSF (overall, 6% vs 13%; TAC, 12% vs 19%; TC, 6% vs 12%; TCH, 5% vs 15%). However, patients who received G-CSF were generally more likely to experience FN/infection in week 1 (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.24 for all; 1.73 for TAC; 1.35 for TC; and 0.76 for TCH). Results were similar for strictly defined FN (overall aOR, 1.29 for week 1 and 0.12 for beyond week 1) and infection-related hospitalization (overall aOR, 1.33 for week 1 and 0.27 for beyond week 1). Conclusions: Overall, the rates of chemotherapy-related FN and infection in week 1 of the first chemotherapy cycle are similar for patients receiving and not receiving G-CSF, suggesting continued risk in week 1 despite prophylactic G-CSF.

Full access

Myeloid Growth Factors

Jeffrey Crawford, Jeffrey Allen, James Armitage, Douglas W. Blayney, Spero R. Cataland, Mark L. Heaney, Sally Htoy, Susan Hudock, Dwight D. Kloth, David J. Kuter, Gary H. Lyman, Brandon McMahon, David P. Steensma, Saroj Vadhan-Raj, Peter Westervelt, and Michael Westmoreland

Full access

Myeloid Growth Factors

Jeffrey Crawford, James Armitage, Lodovico Balducci, Pamela Sue Becker, Douglas W. Blayney, Spero R. Cataland, Mark L. Heaney, Susan Hudock, Dwight D. Kloth, David J. Kuter, Gary H. Lyman, Brandon McMahon, Hope S. Rugo, Ayman A. Saad, Lee S. Schwartzberg, Sepideh Shayani, David P. Steensma, Mahsa Talbott, Saroj Vadhan-Raj, Peter Westervelt, Michael Westmoreland, Mary Dwyer, and Maria Ho

Febrile neutropenia, a common side effect of myelosuppressive chemotherapy in patients with cancer, can result in prolonged hospitalization and broad-spectrum antibiotic use, often prompting treatment delays or dose reductions of drug regimens. Prophylactic use of myeloid growth factors (mainly the colony-stimulating factors filgrastim and pegfilgrastim) in patients of heightened risk can reduce the severity and duration of febrile neutropenia. The NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for Myeloid Growth Factors provide recommendations on the use of these agents mainly in the oncology setting based on clinical evidence and expert consensus. This version includes revisions surrounding the issue of timing of pegfilgrastim administration. It also includes new sections on tbo-filgrastim, a recently approved agent that is biologically similar to filgrastim, and the role of myeloid growth factors in the hematopoietic cell transplant setting

Full access

Myeloid Growth Factors, Version 2.2017, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology

Jeffrey Crawford, Pamela Sue Becker, James O. Armitage, Douglas W. Blayney, Julio Chavez, Peter Curtin, Shira Dinner, Thomas Fynan, Ivana Gojo, Elizabeth A. Griffiths, Shannon Hough, Dwight D. Kloth, David J. Kuter, Gary H. Lyman, Mary Mably, Sudipto Mukherjee, Shiven Patel, Lia E. Perez, Adam Poust, Raajit Rampal, Vivek Roy, Hope S. Rugo, Ayman A. Saad, Lee S. Schwartzberg, Sepideh Shayani, Mahsa Talbott, Saroj Vadhan-Raj, Sumithira Vasu, Martha Wadleigh, Peter Westervelt, Jennifer L. Burns, and Lenora Pluchino

Myeloid growth factors (MGFs) are given as supportive care to patients receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy to reduce the incidence of neutropenia. This selection from the NCCN Guidelines for MGFs focuses on the evaluation of regimen- and patient-specific risk factors for the development of febrile neutropenia (FN), the prophylactic use of MGFs for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced FN, and assessing the risks and benefits of MGF use in clinical practice.

Full access

Myeloid Growth Factors

Jeffrey Crawford, James Armitage, Lodovico Balducci, Charles Bennett, Douglas W. Blayney, Spero R. Cataland, David C. Dale, George D. Demetri, Harry P. Erba, James Foran, Alison G. Freifeld, Marti Goemann, Mark L. Heaney, Sally Htoy, Susan Hudock, Dwight D. Kloth, David J. Kuter, Gary H. Lyman, Laura Boehnke Michaud, Sarah C. Miyata, Martin S. Tallman, Saroj Vadhan-Raj, Peter Westervelt, and Michael K. Wong