Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 10 of 11 items for

  • Author: James Marshall x
  • Refine by Access: All x
Clear All Modify Search
Full access

Rochelle Payne Ondracek, Michael W. Kattan, Christine Murekeyisoni, Changhong Yu, Eric C. Kauffman, James R. Marshall, and James L. Mohler

Background: The Kattan postoperative radical prostatectomy (RP) nomogram is used to predict biochemical recurrence-free progression (BCRFP) after RP. However, external validation among contemporary patients using modern outcome definitions is limited. Methods: A total of 1,931 patients who underwent RP at Roswell Park Cancer Institute (RPCI) between 1993 and 2014 (median follow-up, 47 months; range, 0–244 months) were assessed for NCCN-defined biochemical failure (BF) and RPCI-defined treatment failure (TF). Actual rates of biochemical failure-free survival (BFS; defined as 1 – BF) and treatment failure-free survival (TFS; defined as 1 – TF) were compared with Kattan BCRFP nomogram predictions. Results: The Kattan BCRFP nomogram predictions at 5 and 10 years were predictive of BFS (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUC], 0.772) and TFS (AUC, 0.774). The Kattan BCRFP nomogram tended to underestimate BFS and TFS compared with actual outcomes. The Kattan 5-year BCRFP predictions consistently overestimated actual 5-year BFS outcomes among subgroups of high- and intermediate-risk patients with at least 5-year outcomes. Conclusions: The Kattan BCRFP nomogram is a robust predictor of NCCN-defined BF in a large sample of patients with RP with substantial follow-up and modern, standardized failure definitions

Full access

Pamala A. Pawloski, Cara L. McDermott, James H. Marshall, Vanita Pindolia, Catherine M. Lockhart, Catherine A. Panozzo, Jeffrey S. Brown, and Bernadette Eichelberger

Background: Chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia (FN) is prevented or minimized with granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (G-CSFs). Several G-CSF biosimilars are approved in the United States. The Biologics and Biosimilars Collective Intelligence Consortium (BBCIC) is a nonprofit initiative whose objective is to provide scientific evidence on real-world use and comparative safety and effectiveness of biologics and biosimilars using the BBCIC distributed research network (DRN). Patients and Methods: We describe real-world G-CSF use in patients with breast or lung cancer receiving first-cycle chemotherapy associated with high FN risk. We assessed hospitalizations for FN, availability of absolute neutrophil counts, and G-CSF–induced adverse events to inform future observational comparative effectiveness studies of G-CSF reference products and their biosimilars. A descriptive analysis of 5 participating national health insurance plans was conducted within the BBCIC DRN. Results: A total of 57,725 patients who received at least one G-CSF dose were included. Most (92.5%) patients received pegfilgrastim. FN hospitalization rates were evaluated by narrow (<0.5%), intermediate (1.91%), and broad (2.99%) definitions. Anaphylaxis and hyperleukocytosis were identified in 1.15% and 2.28% of patients, respectively. This analysis provides real-world evidence extracted from a large, readily available database of diverse patients, characterizing G-CSF reference product use to inform the feasibility of future observational comparative safety and effectiveness analyses of G-CSF biosimilars. We showed that the rates of FN and adverse events in our research network are consistent with those reported by previous small studies. Conclusions: Readily available BBCIC DRN data can be used to assess G-CSF use with the incidence of FN hospitalizations. Insufficient laboratory result data were available to report absolute neutrophil counts; however, other safety data are available for assessment that provide valuable baseline data regarding the effectiveness and safety of G-CSFs in preparation for comparative effectiveness studies of reference G-CSFs and their biosimilars.

Full access

Pamala A. Pawloski, Cara L. McDermott, James H. Marshall, Vanita Pindolia, Catherine M. Lockhart, Catherine A. Panozzo, Jeffrey S. Brown, and Bernadette Eichelberger

Background: Chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia (FN) is prevented or minimized with granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (G-CSFs). Several G-CSF biosimilars are approved in the United States. The Biologics and Biosimilars Collective Intelligence Consortium (BBCIC) is a nonprofit initiative whose objective is to provide scientific evidence on real-world use and comparative safety and effectiveness of biologics and biosimilars using the BBCIC distributed research network (DRN). Patients and Methods: We describe real-world G-CSF use in patients with breast or lung cancer receiving first-cycle chemotherapy associated with high FN risk. We assessed hospitalizations for FN, availability of absolute neutrophil counts, and G-CSF–induced adverse events to inform future observational comparative effectiveness studies of G-CSF reference products and their biosimilars. A descriptive analysis of 5 participating national health insurance plans was conducted within the BBCIC DRN. Results: A total of 57,725 patients who received at least one G-CSF dose were included. Most (92.5%) patients received pegfilgrastim. FN hospitalization rates were evaluated by narrow (<0.5%), intermediate (1.91%), and broad (2.99%) definitions. Anaphylaxis and hyperleukocytosis were identified in 1.15% and 2.28% of patients, respectively. This analysis provides real-world evidence extracted from a large, readily available database of diverse patients, characterizing G-CSF reference product use to inform the feasibility of future observational comparative safety and effectiveness analyses of G-CSF biosimilars. We showed that the rates of FN and adverse events in our research network are consistent with those reported by previous small studies. Conclusions: Readily available BBCIC DRN data can be used to assess G-CSF use with the incidence of FN hospitalizations. Insufficient laboratory result data were available to report absolute neutrophil counts; however, other safety data are available for assessment that provide valuable baseline data regarding the effectiveness and safety of G-CSFs in preparation for comparative effectiveness studies of reference G-CSFs and their biosimilars.

Full access

Stanley J. Miller, Murad Alam, James S. Andersen, Daniel Berg, Christopher K. Bichakjian, Glen M. Bowen, Richard T. Cheney, L. Frank Glass, Roy C. Grekin, Alan L. Ho, Anne Kessinger, Nanette Liegeois, Daniel D. Lydiatt, Jeff Michalski, William H. Morrison, Kishwer S. Nehal, Kelly C. Nelson, Paul Nghiem, Thomas Olencki, Clifford S. Perlis, Ashok R. Shaha, Malika Tuli, Marshall M. Urist, Linda C. Wang, and John A. Zic

Full access

Stanley J. Miller, Murad Alam, James Andersen, Daniel Berg, Christopher K. Bichakjian, Glen Bowen, Richard T. Cheney, L. Frank Glass, Roy C. Grekin, Dennis E. Hallahan, Anne Kessinger, Nancy Y. Lee, Nanette Liegeois, Daniel D. Lydiatt, Jeff Michalski, William H. Morrison, Kishwer S. Nehal, Kelly C. Nelson, Paul Nghiem, Thomas Olencki, Allan R. Oseroff, Clifford S. Perlis, E. William Rosenberg, Ashok R. Shaha, Marshall M. Urist, and Linda C. Wang

Full access

Stanley J. Miller, Murad Alam, James Andersen, Daniel Berg, Christopher K. Bichakjian, Glen Bowen, Richard T. Cheney, L. Frank Glass, Roy C. Grekin, Anne Kessinger, Nancy Y. Lee, Nanette Liegeois, Daniel D. Lydiatt, Jeff Michalski, William H. Morrison, Kishwer S. Nehal, Kelly C. Nelson, Paul Nghiem, Thomas Olencki, Clifford S. Perlis, E. William Rosenberg, Ashok R. Shaha, Marshall M. Urist, Linda C. Wang, and John A. Zic

Full access

Rebecca M. Shulman, David S. Weinberg, Eric A. Ross, Karen Ruth, Glenn F. Rall, Anthony J. Olszanski, James Helstrom, Michael J. Hall, Julia Judd, David Y.T. Chen, Robert G. Uzzo, Timothy P. Dougherty, Riley Williams, Daniel M. Geynisman, Carolyn Y. Fang, Richard I. Fisher, Marshall Strother, Erica Huelsmann, Sunil Adige, Peter D. Whooley, Kevin Zarrabi, Brinda Gupta, Pritish Iyer, Melissa McShane, Hilario Yankey, Charles T. Lee, Nina Burbure, Lauren E. Laderman, Julie Giurintano, Samuel Reiss, and Eric M. Horwitz

Background: Most safety and efficacy trials of the SARS-CoV-2 vaccines excluded patients with cancer, yet these patients are more likely than healthy individuals to contract SARS-CoV-2 and more likely to become seriously ill after infection. Our objective was to record short-term adverse reactions to the COVID-19 vaccine in patients with cancer, to compare the magnitude and duration of these reactions with those of patients without cancer, and to determine whether adverse reactions are related to active cancer therapy. Patients and Methods: A prospective, single-institution observational study was performed at an NCI-designated Comprehensive Cancer Center. All study participants received 2 doses of the Pfizer BNT162b2 vaccine separated by approximately 3 weeks. A report of adverse reactions to dose 1 of the vaccine was completed upon return to the clinic for dose 2. Participants completed an identical survey either online or by telephone 2 weeks after the second vaccine dose. Results: The cohort of 1,753 patients included 67.5% who had a history of cancer and 12.0% who were receiving active cancer treatment. Local pain at the injection site was the most frequently reported symptom for all respondents and did not distinguish patients with cancer from those without cancer after either dose 1 (39.3% vs 43.9%; P=.07) or dose 2 (42.5% vs 40.3%; P=.45). Among patients with cancer, those receiving active treatment were less likely to report pain at the injection site after dose 1 compared with those not receiving active treatment (30.0% vs 41.4%; P=.002). The onset and duration of adverse events was otherwise unrelated to active cancer treatment. Conclusions: When patients with cancer were compared with those without cancer, few differences in reported adverse events were noted. Active cancer treatment had little impact on adverse event profiles.

Full access

Christopher K. Bichakjian, Thomas Olencki, Sumaira Z. Aasi, Murad Alam, James S. Andersen, Daniel Berg, Glen M. Bowen, Richard T. Cheney, Gregory A. Daniels, L. Frank Glass, Roy C. Grekin, Kenneth Grossman, Susan A. Higgins, Alan L. Ho, Karl D. Lewis, Daniel D. Lydiatt, Kishwer S. Nehal, Paul Nghiem, Elise A. Olsen, Chrysalyne D. Schmults, Aleksandar Sekulic, Ashok R. Shaha, Wade L. Thorstad, Malika Tuli, Marshall M. Urist, Timothy S. Wang, Sandra L. Wong, John A. Zic, Karin G. Hoffmann, and Anita Engh

Basal cell carcinoma (BCC) of the skin is the most common cancer, with a higher incidence than all other malignancies combined. Although it is rare to metastasize, patients with multiple or frequently recurring BCC can suffer substantial comorbidity and be difficult to manage. Assessment of risk is a key element of management needed to inform treatment selection. The overall management of BCC primarily consists of surgical approaches, with radiation therapy as an alternate or adjuvant option. Many superficial therapies for BCC have been explored and continue to be developed, including topicals, cryosurgery, and photodynamic therapy. Two hedgehog pathway inhibitors were recently approved by the FDA for systemic treatment of advanced and metastatic BCC, and others are in development. The NCCN Guidelines for Basal Cell Skin Cancer, published in full herein, include recommendations for selecting among the various surgical approaches based on patient-, lesion-, and disease-specific factors, as well as guidance on when to use radiation therapy, superficial therapies, and hedgehog pathway inhibitors.

Full access

Christopher K. Bichakjian, Thomas Olencki, Murad Alam, James S. Andersen, Daniel Berg, Glen M. Bowen, Richard T. Cheney, Gregory A. Daniels, L. Frank Glass, Roy C. Grekin, Kenneth Grossman, Alan L. Ho, Karl D. Lewis, Daniel D. Lydiatt, William H. Morrison, Kishwer S. Nehal, Kelly C. Nelson, Paul Nghiem, Clifford S. Perlis, Ashok R. Shaha, Wade L. Thorstad, Malika Tuli, Marshall M. Urist, Timothy S. Wang, Andrew E. Werchniak, Sandra L. Wong, John A. Zic, Karin G. Hoffmann, Nicole R. McMillian, and Maria Ho

Merkel cell carcinoma is a rare, aggressive cutaneous tumor that combines the local recurrence rates of infiltrative nonmelanoma skin cancer with the regional and distant metastatic rates of thick melanoma. The NCCN Guidelines for Merkel Cell Carcinoma provide recommendations on the diagnosis and management of this aggressive disease based on clinical evidence and expert consensus. This version includes revisions regarding the use of PET/CT imaging and the addition of a new section on the principles of pathology to provide guidance on the analysis, interpretation, and reporting of pathology results.