Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 8 of 8 items for

  • Author: Michael J. Overman x
  • Refine by Access: All x
Clear All Modify Search
Full access

Small Bowel Adenocarcinoma: Etiology, Presentation, and Molecular Alterations

Katrina S. Pedersen, Kanwal Raghav, and Michael J. Overman

Small bowel adenocarcinoma (SBA) is a rare cancer that has been treated similarly to colorectal cancer (CRC) in the advanced setting. Incidence has been increasing as detection efforts have been improving for these challenging-to-diagnose tumors, but patients frequently experience prolonged nonspecific symptoms due to delayed diagnosis. As a result of such delays and likely due to variant biology, patient outcomes for SBA are inferior to those for CRC at all stages of diagnosis. Recent molecular studies highlight the genomic differences underpinning these tumors and suggest new future pathways for treatment, distinct from CRC.

Full access

A Prospective Six Sigma Quality Improvement Trial to Optimize Universal Screening for Genetic Syndrome Among Patients With Young-Onset Colorectal Cancer

Sean Dineen, Patrick M. Lynch, Miguel A. Rodriguez-Bigas, Sarah Bannon, Melissa Taggart, Colleen Reeves, Cathy Modaro, Michael Overman, George J. Chang, John M. Skibber, and Y. Nancy You

Background: Improving the quality of health care is a national priority, and providing patient-centered care is one of the 6 key areas for quality improvement. In the setting of patients with young-onset colorectal cancer (CRC), appropriate genetic workup and testing for potential underlying inherited CRC syndromes is fundamental to patient-centered care. Lynch syndrome (LS) is the most common of these inherited syndromes, and current recommendations from the NCCN and other professional societies advocate universal screening for LS among young patients with CRC. However, practical implementation of these guidelines often falls short. Methods: We conducted a prospective quality improvement intervention trial to optimize universal screening for LS in young (age <50 years) patients, involving 356 eligible patients during the 12-month preintervention period and 299 patients during the postintervention. Results: Applying the Six Sigma conceptual framework, we demonstrated a significant increase in use of tumor-based molecular testing and subsequent confirmatory germline mutation testing for LS. This led to identification of more patients to be managed as having LS and of more first- and second-degree relatives to benefit from the testing results. Conclusions: This study demonstrated the successful application of a quality improvement conceptual framework for the universal adoption of molecular biomarker testing in patients with cancer, and for improving adherence to NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology for CRC Screening. As molecular and genetic testing is becoming increasingly common, we present a prototype study for improving the adoption of molecular studies and the provision of guideline-based patient-centered care.

Full access

Radiographic and Serologic Response to First-Line Chemotherapy in Unresected Localized Pancreatic Cancer

Caitlin A. Hester, Giampaolo Perri, Laura R. Prakash, Jessica E. Maxwell, Naruhiko Ikoma, Michael P. Kim, Ching-Wei D. Tzeng, Brandon Smaglo, Robert Wolff, Milind Javle, Michael J. Overman, Jeffrey E. Lee, and Matthew H.G. Katz

Background: This study aimed to determine the clinical relevance of putative radiographic and serologic metrics of chemotherapy response in patients with localized pancreatic cancer (LPC) who do not undergo pancreatectomy. Studies evaluating the response of LPC to systemic chemotherapy have focused on histopathologic analyses of resected specimens, but such specimens are not available for patients who do not undergo resection. We previously showed that changes in tumor volume and CA 19-9 levels provide a clinical readout of histopathologic response to preoperative therapy. Methods: Our institutional database was searched for patients with LPC who were treated with first-line chemotherapy between January 2010 and December 2017 and did not undergo pancreatectomy. Radiographic response was measured using RECIST 1.1 and tumor volume. The volume of the primary tumor was compared between pretreatment and posttreatment images. The percentage change in tumor volume (%Δvol) was calculated as a percentage of the pretreatment volume. Serologic response was measured by comparing pretreatment and posttreatment CA 19-9 levels. We established 3 response groups by combining these metrics: (1) best responders with a decline in %Δvol in the top quartile and in CA 19-9, (2) nonresponders with an increase in %Δvol and in CA 19-9, and (3) other patients. Results: This study included 329 patients. Individually, %Δvol and change in CA 19-9 were associated with overall survival (OS) (P≤.1), but RECIST 1.1 was not. In all, 73 patients (22%) were best responders, 42 (13%) were nonresponders, and there were 214 (65%) others. Best responders lived significantly longer than nonresponders and others (median OS, 24 vs 12 vs 17 months, respectively; P<.01). A multivariable model adjusting for type of chemotherapy regimen, number of chemotherapy doses, and receipt of radiotherapy showed that best responders had longer OS than did the other cohorts (hazard ratio [HR], 0.35; 95% CI, 0.21–0.58 for best responders, and HR, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.37–0.83 for others). Conclusions: Changes in tumor volume and serum levels of CA 19-9—but not RECIST 1.1—represent reliable metrics of response to systemic chemotherapy. They can be used to counsel patients and families on survival expectations even if pancreatectomy is not performed.

Full access

NCCN Guidelines Insights: Rectal Cancer, Version 6.2020

Featured Updates to the NCCN Guidelines

Al B. Benson III, Alan P. Venook, Mahmoud M. Al-Hawary, Mustafa A. Arain, Yi-Jen Chen, Kristen K. Ciombor, Stacey Cohen, Harry S. Cooper, Dustin Deming, Ignacio Garrido-Laguna, Jean L. Grem, Andrew Gunn, Sarah Hoffe, Joleen Hubbard, Steven Hunt, Natalie Kirilcuk, Smitha Krishnamurthi, Wells A. Messersmith, Jeffrey Meyerhardt, Eric D. Miller, Mary F. Mulcahy, Steven Nurkin, Michael J. Overman, Aparna Parikh, Hitendra Patel, Katrina Pedersen, Leonard Saltz, Charles Schneider, David Shibata, John M. Skibber, Constantinos T. Sofocleous, Elena M. Stoffel, Eden Stotsky-Himelfarb, Christopher G. Willett, Alyse Johnson-Chilla, and Lisa A. Gurski

The NCCN Guidelines for Rectal Cancer provide recommendations for the diagnosis, evaluation, treatment, and follow-up of patients with rectal cancer. These NCCN Guidelines Insights summarize the panel discussion behind recent important updates to the guidelines. These updates include clarifying the definition of rectum and differentiating the rectum from the sigmoid colon; the total neoadjuvant therapy approach for localized rectal cancer; and biomarker-targeted therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer, with a focus on new treatment options for patients with BRAF V600E– or HER2 amplification–positive disease.

Full access

Rectal Cancer, Version 2.2022, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology

Al B. Benson III, Alan P. Venook, Mahmoud M. Al-Hawary, Nilofer Azad, Yi-Jen Chen, Kristen K. Ciombor, Stacey Cohen, Harry S. Cooper, Dustin Deming, Ignacio Garrido-Laguna, Jean L. Grem, Andrew Gunn, J. Randolph Hecht, Sarah Hoffe, Joleen Hubbard, Steven Hunt, William Jeck, Kimberly L. Johung, Natalie Kirilcuk, Smitha Krishnamurthi, Jennifer K. Maratt, Wells A. Messersmith, Jeffrey Meyerhardt, Eric D. Miller, Mary F. Mulcahy, Steven Nurkin, Michael J. Overman, Aparna Parikh, Hitendra Patel, Katrina Pedersen, Leonard Saltz, Charles Schneider, David Shibata, John M. Skibber, Constantinos T. Sofocleous, Eden Stotsky-Himelfarb, Anna Tavakkoli, Christopher G. Willett, Kristina Gregory, and Lisa Gurski

This selection from the NCCN Guidelines for Rectal Cancer focuses on management of malignant polyps and resectable nonmetastatic rectal cancer because important updates have been made to these guidelines. These recent updates include redrawing the algorithms for stage II and III disease to reflect new data supporting the increasingly prominent role of total neoadjuvant therapy, expanded recommendations for short-course radiation therapy techniques, and new recommendations for a “watch-and-wait” nonoperative management technique for patients with cancer that shows a complete response to neoadjuvant therapy. The complete version of the NCCN Guidelines for Rectal Cancer, available online at NCCN.org, covers additional topics including risk assessment, pathology and staging, management of metastatic disease, posttreatment surveillance, treatment of recurrent disease, and survivorship.

Full access

Colon Cancer, Version 2.2021, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology

Al B. Benson III, Alan P. Venook, Mahmoud M. Al-Hawary, Mustafa A. Arain, Yi-Jen Chen, Kristen K. Ciombor, Stacey Cohen, Harry S. Cooper, Dustin Deming, Linda Farkas, Ignacio Garrido-Laguna, Jean L. Grem, Andrew Gunn, J. Randolph Hecht, Sarah Hoffe, Joleen Hubbard, Steven Hunt, Kimberly L. Johung, Natalie Kirilcuk, Smitha Krishnamurthi, Wells A. Messersmith, Jeffrey Meyerhardt, Eric D. Miller, Mary F. Mulcahy, Steven Nurkin, Michael J. Overman, Aparna Parikh, Hitendra Patel, Katrina Pedersen, Leonard Saltz, Charles Schneider, David Shibata, John M. Skibber, Constantinos T. Sofocleous, Elena M. Stoffel, Eden Stotsky-Himelfarb, Christopher G. Willett, Kristina M. Gregory, and Lisa A. Gurski

This selection from the NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for Colon Cancer focuses on systemic therapy options for the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), because important updates have recently been made to this section. These updates include recommendations for first-line use of checkpoint inhibitors for mCRC, that is deficient mismatch repair/microsatellite instability-high, recommendations related to the use of biosimilars, and expanded recommendations for biomarker testing. The systemic therapy recommendations now include targeted therapy options for patients with mCRC that is HER2-amplified, or BRAF V600E mutation–positive. Treatment and management of nonmetastatic or resectable/ablatable metastatic disease are discussed in the complete version of the NCCN Guidelines for Colon Cancer available at NCCN.org. Additional topics covered in the complete version include risk assessment, staging, pathology, posttreatment surveillance, and survivorship.

Full access

Anal Carcinoma, Version 2.2023, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology

Al B. Benson III, Alan P. Venook, Mahmoud M. Al-Hawary, Nilofer Azad, Yi-Jen Chen, Kristen K. Ciombor, Stacey Cohen, Harry S. Cooper, Dustin Deming, Ignacio Garrido-Laguna, Jean L. Grem, J. Randolph Hecht, Sarah Hoffe, Joleen Hubbard, Steven Hunt, Hisham Hussan, William Jeck, Kimberly L. Johung, Nora Joseph, Natalie Kirilcuk, Smitha Krishnamurthi, Jennifer Maratt, Wells A. Messersmith, Jeffrey Meyerhardt, Eric D. Miller, Mary F. Mulcahy, Steven Nurkin, Michael J. Overman, Aparna Parikh, Hitendra Patel, Katrina Pedersen, Leonard Saltz, Charles Schneider, David Shibata, John M. Skibber, Constantinos T. Sofocleous, Eden Stotsky-Himelfarb, Anna Tavakkoli, Christopher G. Willett, Grant Williams, Frankie Algieri, Lisa Gurski, and Katie Stehman

This discussion summarizes the NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines for managing squamous cell anal carcinoma, which represents the most common histologic form of the disease. A multidisciplinary approach including physicians from gastroenterology, medical oncology, surgical oncology, radiation oncology, and radiology is necessary. Primary treatment of perianal cancer and anal canal cancer are similar and include chemoradiation in most cases. Follow-up clinical evaluations are recommended for all patients with anal carcinoma because additional curative-intent treatment is possible. Biopsy-proven evidence of locally recurrent or persistent disease after primary treatment may require surgical treatment. Systemic therapy is generally recommended for extrapelvic metastatic disease. Recent updates to the NCCN Guidelines for Anal Carcinoma include staging classification updates based on the 9th edition of the AJCC Staging System and updates to the systemic therapy recommendations based on new data that better define optimal treatment of patients with metastatic anal carcinoma.

Full access

Small Bowel Adenocarcinoma, Version 1.2020, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology

Al B. Benson III, Alan P. Venook, Mahmoud M. Al-Hawary, Mustafa A. Arain, Yi-Jen Chen, Kristen K. Ciombor, Stacey A. Cohen, Harry S. Cooper, Dustin A. Deming, Ignacio Garrido-Laguna, Jean L. Grem, Sarah E. Hoffe, Joleen Hubbard, Steven Hunt, Ahmed Kamel, Natalie Kirilcuk, Smitha Krishnamurthi, Wells A. Messersmith, Jeffrey Meyerhardt, Eric D. Miller, Mary F. Mulcahy, Steven Nurkin, Michael J. Overman, Aparna Parikh, Hitendra Patel, Katrina S. Pedersen, Leonard B. Saltz, Charles Schneider, David Shibata, John M. Skibber, Constantinos T. Sofocleous, Elena M. Stoffel, Eden Stotsky-Himelfarb, Christopher G. Willett, Alyse Johnson-Chilla, Kristina M. Gregory, and Lisa A. Gurski

Small bowel adenocarcinoma (SBA) is a rare malignancy of the gastrointestinal tract that has increased in incidence across recent years. Often diagnosed at an advanced stage, outcomes for SBA are worse on average than for other related malignancies, including colorectal cancer. Due to the rarity of this disease, few studies have been done to direct optimal treatment, although recent data have shown that SBA responds to treatment differently than colorectal cancer, necessitating a separate approach to treatment. The NCCN Guidelines for Small Bowel Adenocarcinoma were created to establish an evidence-based standard of care for patients with SBA. These guidelines provide recommendations on the workup of suspected SBA, primary treatment options, adjuvant treatment, surveillance, and systemic therapy for metastatic disease. Additionally, principles of imaging and endoscopy, pathologic review, surgery, radiation therapy, and survivorship are described.