Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 10 of 23 items for

  • Author: Leonard B. Saltz x
Clear All Modify Search
Full access

Paul Glare, Kathy Plakovic, Anna Schloms, Barbara Egan, Andrew S. Epstein, David Kelsen and Leonard Saltz

The NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for Palliative Care recommend screening all patients for palliative care (PC) needs and to call a PC consult when referral criteria are met. The goal of this pilot project was to evaluate the feasibility of implementing the screening and referral components of the NCCN Guidelines for Palliative Care in patients admitted to the Gastrointestinal Oncology Service (GIOS) at a comprehensive cancer center (CCC). Floor nurses performed the initial screening of all patients admitted to the 2 teams—Team A and Team B—of the GIOS on one floor of Memorial Hospital for 3 months. In addition, only the patients admitted to Team A were evaluated according to the referral criteria, triggering a PC consult if results were positive. Nurses were surveyed regarding satisfaction with and the acceptability of screening. During the study period, 229 (90%) total admissions were screened, with 169 (73%) having positive results. Of the Team A admissions, 72 (64%) met the referral criteria. More consults occurred for patients in Team A (47 vs 15; P=.001). In 30% of the referral criteria-triggered consults, the PC needs were manageable by the primary team. Nurses reported screening to be easy and quick (<5 minutes per patient) but only somewhat helpful. Being unfamiliar with many patients and families, floor nurses often felt unable to screen them accurately for some issues. In conclusion, screening was feasible, increasing access to PC, but accuracy and usefulness are concerns. With a consult indicated in 64% patients, yet with 30% being manageable by the primary team, the current criteria may be too sensitive for the inpatient environment of a CCC. More evaluation is needed before widespread implementation can be recommended.

Full access

James J. Harding, Ghaith Abu-Zeinah, Joanne F. Chou, Dwight Hall Owen, Michele Ly, Maeve Aine Lowery, Marinela Capanu, Richard Do, Nancy E. Kemeny, Eileen M. O'Reilly, Leonard B. Saltz and Ghassan K. Abou-Alfa

Background: Bone metastases are common in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), but their incidence, morbidity, and mortality are not well defined. Methods: The Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center database was queried for all patients with HCC and metastases seen from 2002 to 2014. The prevalence of bone metastasis was determined and cumulative incidence function was used to estimate the probability of developing a bone metastasis. Regression models were created to identify risk factors for osseous metastasis. The frequency of skeletal-related events (SREs), defined as pathologic fracture, spinal cord compression, need for radiation therapy to bone, and/or surgical resection of bone, was determined and cumulative incidence function was used to estimate the probability of SRE development. Regression models were created to identify SRE risk factors. Correlation of clinicopathologic parameters, including bone metastases and SREs, with overall survival was analyzed using Kaplan-Meier methodology. Results: A total of 459 patients with HCC and extrahepatic metastases were identified; 151 patients (32.9%) had or developed bone metastases: 128 (27.9%) as a primary site and 23 (4.6%) as a secondary site of extrahepatic disease. Among the 331 patients without bone metastasis at presentation, the yearly incidence of bone metastasis was 6.4% (95% CI, 3.6%–9.2%). Hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection increased the chance of developing a bone metastasis (P=.02). The cumulative incidence of SREs was 50% at 6 months. Univariate analysis showed that patients with HBV-related HCC had a significantly higher incidence of SREs (P=.02). Sorafenib and bisphosphonates each protected against SREs. The presence of SREs was independently associated with a worse overall survival (hazard ratio, 2.13; 95% CI, 1.52–2.97; P<.01) in the multivariable model. Conclusions: Patients with AJCC stage IV HCC and bone metastases that are clinically evident on routine radiography or on clinical examination at presentation are apt to develop frequent, morbid, and mortal SREs, whereas those without evident bone metastasis at presentation are unlikely to develop these complications.

Full access

Andrea Cercek, Karyn A. Goodman, Carla Hajj, Emily Weisberger, Neil H. Segal, Diane L. Reidy-Lagunes, Zsofia K. Stadler, Abraham J. Wu, Martin R. Weiser, Philip B. Paty, Jose G. Guillem, Garrett M. Nash, Larissa K. Temple, Julio Garcia-Aguilar and Leonard B. Saltz

Standard therapy for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) is preoperative chemoradiotherapy and postoperative chemotherapy. At Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC) the authors began offering FOLFOX (5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin) as initial treatment for patients with high-risk LARC to target micrometastases while treating the primary tumor. The purpose of this study is to report the safety and efficacy of initial FOLFOX given before chemoradiotherapy on tumor downsizing and pathologic complete response (pathCR) in LARC. The records of patients with stage II/III rectal cancer treated at MSKCC between 2007 and 2012 were reviewed. Of approximately 300 patients with LARC treated at MSKCC, 61 received FOLFOX as initial therapy. Of these 61 patients, 57 received induction FOLFOX (median 7 cycles) followed by chemoradiation, and 4 experienced an excellent response, declined chemoradiation, and underwent total mesorectal excision (TME). Twelve of the 61 patients did not undergo TME: 9 had a complete clinical response (CCR), 1 declined despite persistent tumor, 1 declined because of comorbidities, and 1 developed metastatic disease. Among the 61 patients receiving initial FOLFOX, 22 (36%) had either a pathCR (n=13) or a CCR (n=9). Of the 49 patients who underwent TME, all had R0 resections and 23 (47%) had tumor response greater than 90%, including 13 (27%) who experienced a pathCR. Of the 28 patients who received all 8 cycles of FOLFOX, 8 experienced a pathCR (29%) and 3 a CCR (11%). No serious adverse events occurred that required a delay in treatment during FOLFOX or chemoradiation. FOLFOX and chemoradiation before planned TME results in tumor regression, a high rate of delivery of planned therapy, and a substantial rate of pathCRs, and offers a good platform for nonoperative management in select patients.

Full access

Anya Litvak, Andrea Cercek, Neil Segal, Diane Reidy-Lagunes, Zsofia K. Stadler, Rona D. Yaeger, Nancy E. Kemeny, Martin R. Weiser, Melissa S. Pessin and Leonard Saltz

Routine monitoring of carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) levels is standard in patients with resected colorectal cancer (CRC). The incidence of false-positives and the upper limits of false-positive elevations have not been previously well characterized. A search of medical records at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center identified 728 patients who underwent an R0 resection of locoregional CRC between January 2003 and December 2012 and who had an increase in CEA level above the normal range after a normal perioperative CEA level. Of these, 358 had a false-positive elevation of CEA level, 335 had a true-positive elevation indicative of recurrent CRC, and 35 had a true-positive elevation indicative of the development of a new, non-CRC malignancy. Of those with false elevations, 111 had a single isolated CEA level elevation (median highest CEA level of 5.5 ng/mL) with no further abnormal measurements, whereas 247 had elevations on 2 or more readings, with a median highest level of 6.7 ng/mL. Of these 247 patients with confirmed false-positive CEA level elevations, only 5 (2%) had measurements greater than 15 ng/mL, and no confirmed elevation greater than 35 ng/mL was a false-positive. False-positive CEA test results in the range of 5 to 15 ng/mL are common. Confirmation of CEA elevation in this range before initiating imaging studies may be appropriate. False-positive results greater than 15 ng/mL are rare, and all confirmed CEA levels greater than 35 ng/mL were associated with cancer recurrence.

Full access

David S. Ettinger, Mark Agulnik, Justin M. M. Cates, Mihaela Cristea, Crystal S. Denlinger, Keith D. Eaton, Panagiotis M. Fidias, David Gierada, Jon P. Gockerman, Charles R. Handorf, Renuka Iyer, Renato Lenzi, John Phay, Asif Rashid, Leonard Saltz, Lawrence N. Shulman, Jeffrey B. Smerage, Gauri R. Varadhachary, Jonathan S. Zager and Weining (Ken) Zhen

Full access

Paul F. Engstrom, Juan Pablo Arnoletti, Al B. Benson III, Jordan D. Berlin, J. Michael Berry, Yi-Jen Chen, Michael A. Choti, Harry S. Cooper, Raza A. Dilawari, Dayna S. Early, Peter C. Enzinger, Marwan G. Fakih, James Fleshman Jr., Charles Fuchs, Jean L. Grem, James A. Knol, Lucille A. Leong, Edward Lin, Mary F. Mulcahy, Eric Rohren, David P. Ryan, Leonard Saltz, David Shibata, John M. Skibber, William Small Jr., Constantinos Sofocleous, James Thomas, Alan P. Venook and Christopher Willett

Overview An estimated 5290 new cases (2100 men and 3190 women) of anal cancer (involving the anus, anal canal, or anorectum) will occur in the United States in 2009, accounting for approximately 1.9% of digestive system cancers, and an estimated 710 deaths due to anal cancer. Although considered to be a rare type of cancer, the incidence rate of invasive anal carcinoma in the United States increased by approximately 1.6-fold for men and 1.5-fold for women from 1973-1979 to 1994-2000 (see Risk Factors, facing page). This manuscript summarizes the NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology for managing squamous cell anal carcinoma, which represents the most common histologic form of the disease. Other types of cancers occurring in the anal region are addressed in other NCCN guidelines (i.e., anal adenocarcinoma and anal melanoma are managed according to the NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology on Rectal Cancer and Melanoma, respectively). Except where noted, the recommendations in these guidelines are classified as category 2A, meaning that uniform NCCN consensus was present among the panel based on lower-level evidence that the recommendation is appropriate. The panel unanimously endorses patient participation in a clinical trial over standard or accepted therapy. Risk Factors Anal carcinoma has been associated with human papilloma virus (HPV) infection (anal-genital warts); history of receptive anal intercourse or sexually transmitted disease; history of cervical, vulvar, or vaginal cancer; immunosuppression after solid organ transplantation or HIV infection; and smoking. Currently, the association between anal carcinoma and persistent infection with a high-risk form...
Full access

Matthew H. Kulke, Manisha H. Shah, Al B. Benson III, Emily Bergsland, Jordan D. Berlin, Lawrence S. Blaszkowsky, Lyska Emerson, Paul F. Engstrom, Paul Fanta, Thomas Giordano, Whitney S. Goldner, Thorvardur R. Halfdanarson, Martin J. Heslin, Fouad Kandeel, Pamela L. Kunz, Boris W. Kuvshinoff II, Christopher Lieu, Jeffrey F. Moley, Gitonga Munene, Venu G. Pillarisetty, Leonard Saltz, Julie Ann Sosa, Jonathan R. Strosberg, Jean-Nicolas Vauthey, Christopher Wolfgang, James C. Yao, Jennifer Burns and Deborah Freedman-Cass

Neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) comprise a broad family of tumors that may or may not be associated with symptoms attributable to hormonal hypersecretion. The NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology for Neuroendocrine Tumors discuss the diagnosis and management of both sporadic and hereditary NETs. This selection from the guidelines focuses on sporadic NETs of the pancreas, gastrointestinal tract, lung, and thymus.

Full access

Paul F. Engstrom, Juan Pablo Arnoletti, Al B. Benson III, Yi-Jen Chen, Michael A. Choti, Harry S. Cooper, Anne Covey, Raza A. Dilawari, Dayna S. Early, Peter C. Enzinger, Marwan G. Fakih, James Fleshman Jr., Charles Fuchs, Jean L. Grem, Krystyna Kiel, James A. Knol, Lucille A. Leong, Edward Lin, Mary F. Mulcahy, Sujata Rao, David P. Ryan, Leonard Saltz, David Shibata, John M. Skibber, Constantinos Sofocleous, James Thomas, Alan P. Venook and Christopher Willett

Colon Cancer Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology NCCN Categories of Evidence and Consensus Category 1: The recommendation is based on high-level evidence (e.g., randomized controlled trials) and there is uniform NCCN consensus. Category 2A: The recommendation is based on lower-level evidence and there is uniform NCCN consensus. Category 2B: The recommendation is based on lower-level evidence and there is nonuniform NCCN consensus (but no major disagreement). Category 3: The recommendation is based on any level of evidence but reflects major disagreement. All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise noted. Clinical trials: The NCCN believes that the best management for any cancer patient is in a clinical trial. Participation in clinical trials is especially encouraged. Overview Colorectal cancer is the fourth most frequently diagnosed cancer and the second leading cause of cancer death in the United States. In 2009, an estimated 106,100 new cases of colon and 40,870 cases of rectal cancer will occur. During the same year, it is estimated that 49,920 people will die from colon and rectal cancer.1 Despite these statistics, mortality from colon cancer has decreased slightly over the past 30 years, possibly due to earlier diagnosis through screening and better treatment modalities. This manuscript summarizes the NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology for managing colon cancer. The guidelines begin with clinical presentation to the primary care physician or gastroenterologist and address diagnosis, pathologic staging, surgical management, adjuvant treatment, management of recurrent and metastatic disease, and patient surveillance. When reviewing these guidelines, clinicians should be aware of...
Full access

Matthew H. Kulke, Al B. Benson III, Emily Bergsland, Jordan D. Berlin, Lawrence S. Blaszkowsky, Michael A. Choti, Orlo H. Clark, Gerard M. Doherty, James Eason, Lyska Emerson, Paul F. Engstrom, Whitney S. Goldner, Martin J. Heslin, Fouad Kandeel, Pamela L. Kunz, Boris W. Kuvshinoff II, Jeffrey F. Moley, Venu G. Pillarisetty, Leonard Saltz, David E. Schteingart, Manisha H. Shah, Stephen Shibata, Jonathan R. Strosberg, Jean-Nicolas Vauthey, Rebekah White, James C. Yao, Deborah A. Freedman-Cass and Mary A. Dwyer

Neuroendocrine tumors comprise a broad family of tumors, the most common of which are carcinoid and pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors. The NCCN Neuroendocrine Tumors Guidelines discuss the diagnosis and management of both sporadic and hereditary neuroendocrine tumors. Most of the recommendations pertain to well-differentiated, low- to intermediate-grade tumors. This updated version of the NCCN Guidelines includes a new section on pathology for diagnosis and reporting and revised recommendations for the surgical management of neuroendocrine tumors of the pancreas.

Full access

Paul F. Engstrom, Juan Pablo Arnoletti, Al B. Benson III, Yi-Jen Chen, Michael A. Choti, Harry S. Cooper, Anne Covey, Raza A. Dilawari, Dayna S. Early, Peter C. Enzinger, Marwan G. Fakih, James Fleshman Jr., Charles Fuchs, Jean L. Grem, Krystyna Kiel, James A. Knol, Lucille A. Leong, Edward Lin, Mary F. Mulcahy, Sujata Rao, David P. Ryan, Leonard Saltz, David Shibata, John M. Skibber, Constantinos Sofocleous, James Thomas, Alan P. Venook and Christopher Willett

Rectal Cancer Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology NCCN Categories of Evidence and Consensus Category 1: The recommendation is based on high-level evidence (e.g., randomized controlled trials) and there is uniform NCCN consensus. Category 2A: The recommendation is based on lower-level evidence and there is uniform NCCN consensus. Category 2B: The recommendation is based on lower-level evidence and there is nonuniform NCCN consensus (but no major disagreement). Category 3: The recommendation is based on any level of evidence but reflects major disagreement. All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise noted. Clinical trials: The NCCN believes that the best management for any cancer patient is in a clinical trial. Participation in clinical trials is especially encouraged. Overview In 2009 an estimated 40,870 new cases of rectal cancer will occur in the United States (23,580 cases in men; 17,290 cases in women). During the same year, an estimated 49,920 people will die from rectal and colon cancers.1 Although colorectal cancer is ranked as the fourth most frequently diagnosed cancer and the second leading cause of cancer death in the United States, mortality from colorectal cancer has decreased during the past 30 years. This decrease may be due to earlier diagnosis through screening and better treatment modalities. The recommendations in these clinical practice guidelines are classified as category 2A except where noted, meaning that there is uniform NCCN consensus, based on lower-level evidence (including...