Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 10 of 13 items for

  • Author: Yi-Lin Chen x
  • Refine by Access: All x
Clear All Modify Search
Full access

Szu-Chun Yang, Yi-Chen Yeh, Yi-Lin Chen, and Chao-Hua Chiu

Background: This study sought to determine whether exclusionary EGFR mutation testing followed by next-generation sequencing (NGS) is a cost-efficient and timely strategy in areas with high prevalence rates of EGFR mutation. Methods: We developed a decision tree model to compare exclusionary EGFR testing followed by NGS and up-front NGS. Patients entered the model upon diagnosis of metastatic lung adenocarcinoma. Gene alterations with FDA-approved targeted therapies included EGFR, ALK, ROS1, BRAF, RET, MET, NTRK, and KRAS. Model outcomes were testing-related costs; time-to-test results; monetary loss, taking both costs and time into consideration; and percentage of patients who could be treated by FDA-approved therapies. Stacked 1-way and 3-way sensitivity analyses were performed. Results: Exclusionary EGFR testing incurred testing-related costs of US $1,387 per patient, a savings of US $1,091 compared with the costs of up-front NGS. The time-to-test results for exclusionary EGFR testing and up-front NGS were 13.0 and 13.6 days, respectively. Exclusionary EGFR testing resulted in a savings of US $1,116 in terms of net monetary loss, without a reduction of patients identified with FDA-approved therapies. The EGFR mutation rate and NGS cost had the greatest impact on minimizing monetary loss. Given that the tissue-based NGS turnaround time was shortened to 7 days, up-front NGS testing would become the best strategy if its price could be reduced to US $568 in Taiwan. Conclusions: In areas with high prevalence rates of EGFR mutation, exclusionary EGFR testing followed by NGS, rather than up-front NGS, is currently a cost-efficient strategy for metastatic lung adenocarcinoma.

Full access

Bing-Yen Wang, Ping-Yi Lin, Shiao-Chi Wu, Hui-Shan Chen, Po-Kuei Hsu, Chih-Shiun Shih, Chao-Yu Liu, Chia-Chuan Liu, and Yao-Li Chen

The prognostic value for the post-chemoradiation therapy (CRT) pathologic stage is uncertain. The purpose of this study was to compare the pathologic stage in patients undergoing esophagectomy with and without preoperative CRT for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). This study retrospectively reviewed the data from 2151 patients with ESCC who underwent esophagectomy with or without preoperative CRT between 2008 and 2011 in Taiwan. Patients were divided into 2 groups. Group A consisted of patients treated with primary surgery without prior treatments (n=1301), and group B consisted of patients receiving preoperative CRT followed by esophagectomy (n=850). In group A, 679 patients received surgery alone, 92 received postoperative chemotherapy, 416 received postoperative chemoradiation therapy, and 114 received postoperative radiation therapy. In group A, the 3-year survival rates by pathologic stage were 82.2% for stage 0, 67.6% for stage I, 50.7% for stage II, 21.5% for stage III, and 14.8% for stage IV (P<.001). In group B, the 3-year survival rates of post-CRT pathologic stages 0, I, II, III, and IV were 59.4%, 46.0%, 40.3%, 19.1%, and 8.2%, respectively (P<.001). In multivariate analysis, the pathologic T, N, and M were all independent prognostic factors in both group A (esophagectomy alone) and B (CRT plus esophagectomy). The current, 7th edition of the esophageal TNM staging system could adequately stratify prognostic groups in patients with squamous cell carcinoma who were treated with preoperative CRT and esophagectomy.

Full access

Dong-Xu Qiu, Jian Li, Jin-Wei Zhang, Min-Feng Chen, Xiao-Mei Gao, Yong-Xiang Tang, Ye Zhang, Xiao-Ping Yi, Hong-ling Yin, Yu Gan, Gui-Lin Wang, Xiong-Bing Zu, Shuo Hu, and Yi Cai

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

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

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

Full access

Anal Carcinoma, Version 2.2012

Featured Updates to the NCCN Guidelines

Al B. Benson III, J. Pablo Arnoletti, Tanios Bekaii-Saab, Emily Chan, Yi-Jen Chen, Michael A. Choti, Harry S. Cooper, Raza A. Dilawari, Paul F. Engstrom, Peter C. Enzinger, Marwan G. Fakih, James W. Fleshman Jr., Charles S. Fuchs, Jean L. Grem, Lucille A. Leong, Edward Lin, Kilian Salerno May, Mary F. Mulcahy, Kate Murphy, Eric Rohren, David P. Ryan, Leonard Saltz, Sunil Sharma, David Shibata, John M. Skibber, William Small Jr., Constantinos T. Sofocleous, Alan P. Venook, Christopher Willett, and Deborah A. Freedman-Cass

The workup and management of squamous cell anal carcinoma, which represents the most common histologic form of the disease, are addressed in the NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for Anal Carcinoma. These NCCN Guidelines Insights provide a summary of major discussion points of the 2012 NCCN Anal Carcinoma Panel meeting. In summary, the panel made 4 significant changes to the 2012 NCCN Guidelines for Anal Carcinoma: 1) local radiation therapy was added as an option for the treatment of patients with metastatic disease; 2) multifield technique is now preferred over anteroposterior-posteroanterior (AP-PA) technique for radiation delivery and the AP-PA technique is no longer recommended as the standard of care; 3) PET/CT should now be considered for radiation therapy planning; and 4) a section on risk reduction was added to the discussion section. In addition, the panel discussed the use of PET/CT for the workup of anal canal cancer and decided to maintain the recommendation that it can be considered in this setting. They also discussed the use of PET/CT for the workup of anal margin cancer and for the assessment of treatment response. They reaffirmed their recommendation that PET/CT is not appropriate in these settings.

Full access

Metastatic Colon Cancer, Version 3.2013

Featured Updates to the NCCN Guidelines

Al B. Benson III, Tanios Bekaii-Saab, Emily Chan, Yi-Jen Chen, Michael A. Choti, Harry S. Cooper, Paul F. Engstrom, Peter C. Enzinger, Marwan G. Fakih, Moon J. Fenton, Charles S. Fuchs, Jean L. Grem, Steven Hunt, Ahmed Kamel, Lucille A. Leong, Edward Lin, Kilian Salerno May, Mary F. Mulcahy, Kate Murphy, Eric Rohren, David P. Ryan, Leonard Saltz, Sunil Sharma, David Shibata, John M. Skibber, William Small Jr, Constantinos T. Sofocleous, Alan P. Venook, Christopher G. Willett, Kristina M. Gregory, and Deborah A. Freedman-Cass

The NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for Colon Cancer begin with the clinical presentation of the patient to the primary care physician or gastroenterologist and address diagnosis, pathologic staging, surgical management, perioperative treatment, patient surveillance, management of recurrent and metastatic disease, and survivorship. The NCCN Colon Cancer Panel meets annually to review comments from reviewers within their institutions and to reevaluate and update their recommendations. In addition, the panel has interim conferences as new data necessitate. These NCCN Guidelines Insights summarize the NCCN Colon Cancer Panel's discussions surrounding metastatic colorectal cancer for the 2013 update of the guidelines. Importantly, changes were made to the continuum of care for patients with advanced or metastatic disease, including new drugs and an additional line of therapy.

Full access

Al B. Benson III, J. Pablo Arnoletti, Tanios Bekaii-Saab, Emily Chan, Yi-Jen Chen, Michael A. Choti, Harry S. Cooper, Raza A. Dilawari, Paul F. Engstrom, Peter C. Enzinger, James W. Fleshman Jr., Charles S. Fuchs, Jean L. Grem, James A. Knol, Lucille A. Leong, Edward Lin, Kilian Salerno May, Mary F. Mulcahy, Kate Murphy, Eric Rohren, David P. Ryan, Leonard Saltz, Sunil Sharma, David Shibata, John M. Skibber, William Small Jr., Constantinos T. Sofocleous, Alan P. Venook, and Christopher Willett

Full access

Al B. Benson III, Tanios Bekaii-Saab, Emily Chan, Yi-Jen Chen, Michael A. Choti, Harry S. Cooper, Paul F. Engstrom, Peter C. Enzinger, Marwan G. Fakih, Moon J. Fenton, Charles S. Fuchs, Jean L. Grem, Steven Hunt, Ahmed Kamel, Lucille A. Leong, Edward Lin, Kilian Salerno May, Mary F. Mulcahy, Kate Murphy, Eric Rohren, David P. Ryan, Leonard Saltz, Sunil Sharma, David Shibata, John M. Skibber, William Small Jr, Constantinos T. Sofocleous, Alan P. Venook, Christopher G. Willett, Kristina M. Gregory, and Deborah A. Freedman-Cass

The NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology for Colon Cancer begin with the clinical presentation of the patient to the primary care physician or gastroenterologist and address diagnosis, pathologic staging, surgical management, perioperative treatment, patient surveillance, management of recurrent and metastatic disease, and survivorship. The NCCN Colon Cancer Panel meets annually to review comments from reviewers within their institutions and to reevaluate and update their recommendations. In addition, the panel has interim conferences as new data necessitate. These NCCN Guidelines Insights summarize the NCCN Colon Cancer Panel’s discussions regarding the treatment of localized disease for the 2013 update of the guidelines.