Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 3 of 3 items for

  • Author: Seema Nagpal x
Clear All Modify Search
Full access

Jonathan W. Riess, Seema Nagpal, Joel W. Neal and Heather A. Wakelee

Leptomeningeal carcinomatosis (LM) is an infrequent yet morbid and often fatal complication of non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Management of LM is multimodal, often involving systemic chemotherapy, radiotherapy, and a variety of symptom management maneuvers to address elevated intracranial pressure, pain, and mood changes that can accompany the disease. It is increasingly recognized that tumors with actionable mutations in NSCLC, including epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations and anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) translocations, respond well to systemic therapy with tyrosine kinase inhibitors yet often progress in the central nervous system. More information is needed regarding the natural history and optimal management of LM in specific molecular subtypes of NSCLC. This case report summarizes the management of a patient with ALK-positive NSCLC who developed LM while on targeted treatment with crizotinib within the context of current NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology and recently published studies.

Full access

Megan Gershon, Justine Pena, Chamnjot Bains, Sarah Salas, Tresa McGranahan and Seema Nagpal

Background: The development of oral chemotherapies (OC) have transformed cancer care for millions of patients. Most patients with brain tumors have temozolomide (TMZ) delivered to their home. While this has improved the patient experience, it presents significant challenges to safety of prescription, administration, and side effect monitoring. While there are guidelines for documentation, there is not a best practices system for managing OC. This project identified areas of latent errors and implemented a standardized process for OC management. Methods: After review of the literature, we developed a process map for our institution’s practice and performed hazard analysis. We then evaluated the process at 3 other neuro-oncology practices. Based on these evaluations, changes were implemented at several stages (Table 1). Objective binary measures that could be recorded for every TMZ prescription were collected by chart review of the 6 months prior to process change. These measures were monitored every 2 weeks after process change implementation using run charts. A baseline process mean was calculated for each measure from the 6 months before program implementation. Successful change implementation was defined as 7 consecutive 2-week averages that were continually on one side of the process mean. Results: At the time of this abstract submission, we had successfully reduced refills for OC and increased documentation of dose calculation and dose ordered. There is improvement in independent dose calculation by 2 providers and dedicated chemotherapy teaching visits; however, these have not yet reached criteria for process change. Additionally, oral chemotherapy order sets were created in the electronic medical records system and an on-site specialty pharmacy was added as another safety measure in OC management. Conclusions: This project used published studies and multi-institutional process mapping and hazard analysis to implement a standardized ordering of TMZ for patients with brain tumors. This process can be implemented for OC management in other oncology practices.

Full access

Louis Burt Nabors, Jana Portnow, Mario Ammirati, Joachim Baehring, Henry Brem, Nicholas Butowski, Robert A. Fenstermaker, Peter Forsyth, Jona Hattangadi-Gluth, Matthias Holdhoff, Steven Howard, Larry Junck, Thomas Kaley, Priya Kumthekar, Jay S. Loeffler, Paul L. Moots, Maciej M. Mrugala, Seema Nagpal, Manjari Pandey, Ian Parney, Katherine Peters, Vinay K. Puduvalli, John Ragsdale III, Jason Rockhill, Lisa Rogers, Chad Rusthoven, Nicole Shonka, Dennis C. Shrieve, Allen K. Sills Jr, Lode J. Swinnen, Christina Tsien, Stephanie Weiss, Patrick Yung Wen, Nicole Willmarth, Mary Anne Bergman and Anita Engh

For many years, the diagnosis and classification of gliomas have been based on histology. Although studies including large populations of patients demonstrated the prognostic value of histologic phenotype, variability in outcomes within histologic groups limited the utility of this system. Nonetheless, histology was the only proven and widely accessible tool available at the time, thus it was used for clinical trial entry criteria, and therefore determined the recommended treatment options. Research to identify molecular changes that underlie glioma progression has led to the discovery of molecular features that have greater diagnostic and prognostic value than histology. Analyses of these molecular markers across populations from randomized clinical trials have shown that some of these markers are also predictive of response to specific types of treatment, which has prompted significant changes to the recommended treatment options for grade III (anaplastic) gliomas.