Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 10 of 12 items for

  • Author: Mohammad M. Mohammad x
Clear All Modify Search
Full access

Juliana E. Hidalgo-López, Rashmi Kanagal-Shamanna, L. Jeffrey Medeiros, Zeev Estrov, C. Cameron Yin, Srdan Verstovsek, Sergej Konoplev, Jeffrey L. Jorgensen, Mohammad M. Mohammad, Roberto N. Miranda, Chong Zhao, John Lee, Zhuang Zuo and Carlos E. Bueso-Ramos

Background: JAK2 V617F mutation (mut) in acute myeloid leukemia (AML) is rare. We describe the clinicopathologic findings of a single-institution series of 11 de novo AML cases with JAK2 V617. Methods: We identified cases of de novo AML with JAK2 V617F over a 10-year period. We reviewed diagnostic peripheral blood and bone marrow (BM) morphologic, cytogenetic, and molecular studies, including next-generation sequencing. The control group consisted of 12 patients with JAK2 wild-type (wt) AML matched for age, sex, and diagnosis. Results: We identified 11 patients (0.5%) with JAK2 V617F, with a median age at diagnosis of 72.5 years (range, 36–90 years). Ten neoplasms were classified as AML with myelodysplasia-related changes and 1 as AML with t(8;21)(q22;q22). All JAK2mut AML cases showed at least bilineage dysplasia, 7 of 11 showed fibrosis, 8 of 11 had an abnormal karyotype, and 5 had deletions or monosomy of chromosomes 5 and 7. Using the European LeukemiaNet (ELN) classification, 9 patients (82%) with JAK2mut AML were intermediate-2 and adverse risk. Cases of JAK2mut AML did not have mutations in other activating signaling pathways (P=.013); 7 (64%) showed additional mutations in at least one gene involving DNA methylation and/or epigenetic modification. Patients with JAK2mut AML had a significantly higher median BM granulocyte percentage (12% vs 3.5%; P=.006) and a higher frequency of ELN intermediate-2 and adverse risk cytogenetics (P=.04) compared with those with JAK2wt AML. JAK2mut AML showed higher circulating blasts, but this difference was not significant (17% vs 5.5%; P=not significant). No difference was seen in the median overall survival rate of patients with JAK2mut AML versus those with JAK2wt AML (14 vs 13.5 months, respectively). Conclusions: De novo JAK2mut AML is rare and frequently found in patients with dysplasia, BM fibrosis, and abnormal karyotype with intermediate- or high-risk features; gene mutations in DNA methylation and epigenetic-modifying pathways; and absence of gene mutations in activating signaling pathways.

Full access

Philip E. Johnson, George Dahlman, Kirby Eng, Rekha Garg, Scott Gottlieb, James M. Hoffman, Peyton Howell, Mohammad Jahanzeb, Shirley Johnson, Emily Mackler, Mark Rubino, Brenda Sarokhan, F. Marc Stewart, Tim Tyler, Julie M. Vose, Sharon Weinstein, Edward C. Li and Jessica DeMartino

REMS are a particularly important issue for oncology and the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN). A disproportionate number of drugs with complex REMS are used in patients with cancer or hematologic disorders. REMS policies and processes within oncology may act as a model for other clinical areas. A breadth of experience and access to a wide knowledge base exists within oncology that will ensure appropriate development and consideration of the practical implications of REMS. NCCN is uniquely positioned to assume a leadership role in this process given its status as the arbiter of high-quality cancer care based on its world-leading institutions and clinicians. Notwithstanding the potential benefits, the successful design, implementation, and analysis of the FDA's recent requirement for REMS for some high-risk drugs and biologics will present significant challenges for stakeholders, including patients, providers, cancer centers, manufacturers, payors, health information technology vendors, and regulatory agencies. To provide guidance to these stakeholders regarding REMS challenges, the NCCN assembled a work group comprised of thought leaders from NCCN Member Institutions and other outside experts. The Work Group identified challenges across the REMS spectrum, including the areas of standardization, development and assessment of REMS programs, medication guides, provider knowledge and impact on prescribing, provider burden and compensation, and incorporation of REMS into clinical practice.

Full access

Randall W. Burt, Jamie A. Cannon, Donald S. David, Dayna S. Early, James M. Ford, Francis M. Giardiello, Amy L. Halverson, Stanley R. Hamilton, Heather Hampel, Mohammad K. Ismail, Kory Jasperson, Jason B. Klapman, Audrey J. Lazenby, Patrick M. Lynch, Robert J. Mayer, Reid M. Ness, Dawn Provenzale, M. Sambasiva Rao, Moshe Shike, Gideon Steinbach, Jonathan P. Terdiman, David Weinberg, Mary Dwyer and Deborah Freedman-Cass

Mortality from colorectal cancer can be reduced by early diagnosis and by cancer prevention through polypectomy. These NCCN Guidelines for Colorectal Cancer Screening describe various colorectal screening modalities and recommended screening schedules for patients at average or increased risk of developing colorectal cancer. In addition, the guidelines provide recommendations for the management of patients with high-risk colorectal cancer syndromes, including Lynch syndrome. Screening approaches for Lynch syndrome are also described.

Full access

Randall W. Burt, James S. Barthel, Kelli Bullard Dunn, Donald S. David, Ernesto Drelichman, James M. Ford, Francis M. Giardiello, Stephen B. Gruber, Amy L. Halverson, Stanley R. Hamilton, Mohammad K. Ismail, Kory Jasperson, Audrey J. Lazenby, Patrick M. Lynch, Edward W. Martin Jr., Robert J. Mayer, Reid M. Ness, Dawn Provenzale, M. Sambasiva Rao, Moshe Shike, Gideon Steinbach, Jonathan P. Terdiman and David Weinberg

Overview Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most frequently diagnosed cancer in men and women in the United States. In 2009, an estimated 106,100 new cases of colon cancer and 40,870 new cases of rectal cancer will occur in the United States, and 49,920 people will die of colon and rectal cancers. Patients with lo-calized colon cancer have a 90% 5-year survival rate. CRC mortality can be reduced through early diagnosis and cancer prevention with polypectomy. Therefore, the goal of CRC screening is to detect cancer at an early, curable stage and to detect and remove clinically significant adenomas. Screening tests that can detect both early cancer and adenomatous polyps are encouraged, although the panel recognizes that patient preference and resource accessibility play a large role in test selection. Curent technology falls into 2 broad categories: structural and stool/fecal-based tests. Although some techniques are better established than others, panelists agreed that any screening is better than none. Structural Screening Tests Structural tests are able to detect both early cancer and adenomatous polyps using endoscopic or radiologic imaging. These have several limitations, including their relative invasiveness, the need for dietary preparation and bowel cleansing, and the time dedicated to the examination (typically a day). Endoscopic examinations require informed consent and sedation, and have related risks, including perforation and bleeding. Recently, a large cohort study of 53,220 Medicare patients between ages 66 and 95 years showed that risk for adverse events after colonoscopy increases with age. Colonoscopy Colonoscopy is the most complete...
Full access

Dawn Provenzale, Samir Gupta, Dennis J. Ahnen, Travis Bray, Jamie A. Cannon, Gregory Cooper, Donald S. David, Dayna S. Early, Deborah Erwin, James M. Ford, Francis M. Giardiello, William Grady, Amy L. Halverson, Stanley R. Hamilton, Heather Hampel, Mohammad K. Ismail, Jason B. Klapman, David W. Larson, Audrey J. Lazenby, Patrick M. Lynch, Robert J. Mayer, Reid M. Ness, Scott E. Regenbogen, Niloy Jewel Samadder, Moshe Shike, Gideon Steinbach, David Weinberg, Mary Dwyer and Susan Darlow

This is a focused update highlighting the most current NCCN Guidelines for diagnosis and management of Lynch syndrome. Lynch syndrome is the most common cause of hereditary colorectal cancer, usually resulting from a germline mutation in 1 of 4 DNA mismatch repair genes (MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, or PMS2), or deletions in the EPCAM promoter. Patients with Lynch syndrome are at an increased lifetime risk, compared with the general population, for colorectal cancer, endometrial cancer, and other cancers, including of the stomach and ovary. As of 2016, the panel recommends screening all patients with colorectal cancer for Lynch syndrome and provides recommendations for surveillance for early detection and prevention of Lynch syndrome-associated cancers.

Full access

Dawn Provenzale, Kory Jasperson, Dennis J. Ahnen, Harry Aslanian, Travis Bray, Jamie A. Cannon, Donald S. David, Dayna S. Early, Deborah Erwin, James M. Ford, Francis M. Giardiello, Samir Gupta, Amy L. Halverson, Stanley R. Hamilton, Heather Hampel, Mohammad K. Ismail, Jason B. Klapman, David W. Larson, Audrey J. Lazenby, Patrick M. Lynch, Robert J. Mayer, Reid M. Ness, M. Sambasiva Rao, Scott E. Regenbogen, Moshe Shike, Gideon Steinbach, David Weinberg, Mary A. Dwyer, Deborah A. Freedman-Cass and Susan Darlow

The NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for Colorectal Cancer Screening provide recommendations for selecting individuals for colorectal cancer screening, and for evaluation and follow-up of colon polyps. These NCCN Guidelines Insights summarize major discussion points of the 2015 NCCN Colorectal Cancer Screening panel meeting. Major discussion topics this year were the state of evidence for CT colonography and stool DNA testing, bowel preparation procedures for colonoscopy, and guidelines for patients with a positive family history of colorectal cancer.

Full access

Mohammad Abu Zaid, Paul C. Dinh Jr, Patrick O. Monahan, Chunkit Fung, Omar El-Charif, Darren R. Feldman, Robert J. Hamilton, David J. Vaughn, Clair J. Beard, Ryan Cook, Sandra Althouse, Shirin Ardeshir-Rouhani-Fard, Howard D. Sesso, Robert Huddart, Taisei Mushiroda, Michiaki Kubo, M. Eileen Dolan, Lawrence H. Einhorn, Sophie D. Fossa, Lois B. Travis and for the Platinum Study Group

Background: This study examined the prevalence of hypogonadism, its clinical and genetic risk factors, and its relationship to adverse health outcomes (AHOs) in North American testicular cancer survivors (TCS) after modern platinum-based chemotherapy. Patients and Methods: Eligible TCS were <55 years of age at diagnosis and treated with first-line platinum-based chemotherapy. Participants underwent physical examinations and completed questionnaires regarding 15 AHOs and health behaviors. Hypogonadism was defined as serum testosterone levels ≤3.0 ng/mL or use of testosterone replacement therapy. We investigated the role of 2 single nucleotide polymorphisms (rs6258 and rs12150660) in the sex hormone–binding globulin (SHBG) locus implicated in increased hypogonadism risk in the general population. Results: Of 491 TCS (median age at assessment, 38.2 years; range, 18.7–68.4 years), 38.5% had hypogonadism. Multivariable binary logistic regression analysis identified hypogonadism risk factors, including age at clinical evaluation (odds ratio [OR], 1.42 per 10-year increase; P= .006) and body mass index of 25 to <30 kg/m2 (OR, 2.08; P= .011) or ≥30 kg/m2 (OR, 2.36; P= .005) compared with <25 kg/m2. TCS with ≥2 risk alleles for the SHBG SNPs had a marginally significant increased hypogonadism risk (OR, 1.45; P= .09). Vigorous-intensity physical activity appeared protective (OR, 0.66; P= .07). Type of cisplatin-based chemotherapy regimen and socioeconomic factors did not correlate with hypogonadism. Compared with TCS without hypogonadism, those with hypogonadism were more likely to report ≥2 AHOs (65% vs 51%; P= .003), to take medications for hypercholesterolemia (20.1% vs 6.0%; P<.001) or hypertension (18.5% vs 10.6%; P= .013), and to report erectile dysfunction (19.6% vs 11.9%; P= .018) or peripheral neuropathy (30.7% vs 22.5%; P= .041). A marginally significant trend for increased use of prescription medications for either diabetes (5.8% vs 2.6%; P= .07) or anxiety/depression (14.8% vs 9.3%; P= .06) was observed. Conclusions: At a relatively young median age, more than one-third of TCS have hypogonadism, which is significantly associated with increased cardiovascular disease risk factors, and erectile dysfunction. Providers should screen TCS for hypogonadism and treat symptomatic patients.

Full access

Mohammad Abu Zaid, Wambui G. Gathirua-Mwangi, Chunkit Fung, Patrick O. Monahan, Omar El-Charif, Annalynn M. Williams, Darren R. Feldman, Robert J. Hamilton, David J. Vaughn, Clair J. Beard, Ryan Cook, Sandra K. Althouse, Shirin Ardeshir-Rouhani-Fard, Paul C. Dinh Jr, Howard D. Sesso, Lawrence H. Einhorn, Sophie D. Fossa, Lois B. Travis and for the Platinum Study Group

Background: Testicular cancer survivors (TCS) are at significantly increased risk for cardiovascular disease (CVD), with metabolic syndrome (MetS) an established risk factor. No study has addressed clinical and genetic MetS risk factors in North American TCS. Patients and Methods: TCS were aged <55 years at diagnosis and received first-line chemotherapy. Patients underwent physical examination, and had lipid panels, testosterone, and soluble cell adhesion molecule-1 (sICAM-1) evaluated. A single nucleotide polymorphism in rs523349 (5-α-reductase gene, SRD5A2), recently implicated in MetS risk, was genotyped. Using standard criteria, MetS was defined as ≥3 of the following: hypertension, abdominal obesity, hypertriglyceridemia, decreased high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol level, and diabetes. Matched controls were derived from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. Results: We evaluated 486 TCS (median age, 38.1 years). TCS had a higher prevalence of hypertension versus controls (43.2% vs 30.7%; P<.001) but were less likely to have decreased HDL levels (23.7% vs 34.8%; P<.001) or abdominal obesity (28.2% vs 40.1%; P<.001). Overall MetS frequency was similar in TCS and controls (21.0% vs 22.4%; P=.59), did not differ by treatment (P=.20), and was not related to rs523349 (P=.61). For other CVD risk factors, TCS were significantly more likely to have elevated low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol levels (17.7% vs 9.3%; P<.001), total cholesterol levels (26.3% vs 11.1%; P<.001), and body mass index ≥25 kg/m2 (75.1% vs 69.1%; P=.04). On multivariate analysis, age at evaluation (P<.001), testosterone level ≤3.0 ng/mL (odds ratio [OR], 2.06; P=.005), and elevated sICAM-1 level (ORhighest vs lowest quartile, 3.58; P=.001) were significantly associated with MetS. Conclusions and Recommendations: Metabolic abnormalities in TCS are characterized by hypertension and increased LDL and total cholesterol levels but lower rates of decreased HDL levels and abdominal obesity, signifying possible shifts in fat distribution and fat metabolism. These changes are accompanied by hypogonadism and inflammation. TCS have a high prevalence of CVD risk factors that may not be entirely captured by standard MetS criteria. Cancer treatment–associated MetS requires further characterization.

Full access

Robert W. Carlson, D. Craig Allred, Benjamin O. Anderson, Harold J. Burstein, W. Bradford Carter, Stephen B. Edge, John K. Erban, William B. Farrar, Lori J. Goldstein, William J. Gradishar, Daniel F. Hayes, Clifford A. Hudis, Mohammad Jahanzeb, Krystyna Kiel, Britt-Marie Ljung, P. Kelly Marcom, Ingrid A. Mayer, Beryl McCormick, Lisle M. Nabell, Lori J. Pierce, Elizabeth C. Reed, Mary Lou Smith, George Somlo, Richard L. Theriault, Neal S. Topham, John H. Ward, Eric P. Winer and Antonio C. Wolff

Breast 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. The Breast Cancer Clinical Practice Guidelines presented here are the work of the members of the NCCN Breast Cancer Clinical Practice Guidelines Panel. Categories of evidence were assessed and are noted on the algorithms and in the text. Although not explicitly stated at every decision point of the Guidelines, patient participation in prospective clinical trials is the preferred option of treatment for all stages of breast cancer. The full breast cancer guidelines are not printed in this issue of JNCCN, but can be accessed online at www.nccn.org. 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 The American Cancer Society estimated that 184,450 new cases of invasive breast cancer would be diagnosed and 40,930 patients would die of the disease in the United States in 2008.1 In addition, approximately 67,770 women will be diagnosed with carcinoma in situ of the breast during the same...
Full access

David S. Ettinger, Wallace Akerley, Hossein Borghaei, Andrew C. Chang, Richard T. Cheney, Lucian R. Chirieac, Thomas A. D’Amico, Todd L. Demmy, Apar Kishor P. Ganti, Ramaswamy Govindan, Frederic W. Grannis Jr, Leora Horn, Thierry M. Jahan, Mohammad Jahanzeb, Anne Kessinger, Ritsuko Komaki, Feng-Ming (Spring) Kong, Mark G. Kris, Lee M. Krug, Inga T. Lennes, Billy W. Loo Jr, Renato Martins, Janis O’Malley, Raymond U. Osarogiagbon, Gregory A. Otterson, Jyoti D. Patel, Mary C. Pinder-Schenck, Katherine M. Pisters, Karen Reckamp, Gregory J. Riely, Eric Rohren, Scott J. Swanson, Douglas E. Wood, Stephen C. Yang, Miranda Hughes and Kristina M. Gregory

Most patients with non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) are diagnosed with advanced cancer. These guidelines only include information about stage IV NSCLC. Patients with widespread metastatic disease (stage IV) are candidates for systemic therapy, clinical trials, and/or palliative treatment. The goal is to identify patients with metastatic disease before initiating aggressive treatment, thus sparing these patients from unnecessary futile treatment. If metastatic disease is discovered during surgery, then extensive surgery is often aborted. Decisions about treatment should be based on multidisciplinary discussion.