Back to Authors

Lee, Percy

Mayo Clinic

City Of Hope National Medical Center

Citations 3

Executive Summary of the American Radium Society Appropriate Use Criteria for Management of Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Cervical Esophagus
Cancer, Expert Panel Management of Cervical Esophageal, Williams, Vonetta M. , Hallemeier, Christopher L. , Shah, Pari , Anker, Christopher J. , Abood, Gerard, Akselrod, Dmitriy , Kennedy, Timothy J., Lee, Percy, Sharma, Navesh , William, Small, Russo, Suzanne , Russo, Suzanne , Cancer, Expert Panel Management of Cervical Esophageal, Hallemeier, Christopher Leigh , Jethwa, Krishan R. , Selfridge, Jennifer Eva , Berlin, Jordan D. , Kim, Ed, Lee, Percy , William, Small, Tchelebi, Leila T.

American Journal of Clinical Oncology | February 6, 2025 | Volume: 48 | Issue: 4 | Pages: 163-179

10.1097/coc.0000000000001165 Get It

Objectives: Cervical esophageal cancer (CEC) is an uncommon malignancy accounting for <5% of all esophageal carcinomas. Treatment of CEC varies and is adapted from established regimens used for squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) or the lower esophageal and head and neck. The present systematic review and guidelines are intended to assist treatment decision making for patients with CEC based on the available evidence. Methods: Using the Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcome, Timing, and Study Design (PICOTS) framework, the evidence regarding treatment outcomes was assessed using Cochrane and PRISMA 2020 methodology. Eligible studies included prospective Phase II to III trials and retrospective analyses published between January 1, 2013 and February 23, 2024 in the Ovid Medline database. These references were assessed through the American Radium Society (ARS) Appropriate Use Criteria (AUC) methodology. A systematic review PRISMA 2020 checklist confirmed the completion of essential elements. RAND-UCLA consensus methodology was used by the expert panel to rate the appropriateness of the treatment options. Results: ARS AUC recommendations include (1) larynx preservation using endoscopic resection (EMR or ESD) alone for the typical case with pT1a cN0 cM0 CEC, (2) definitive CRT for the typical case with cT1bN0M0 in patients who cannot undergo endoscopic resection, (3) larynx-preserving using definitive CRT (with or without induction chemotherapy) for the typical case with nonmetastatic locally advanced CEC (advanced T-stage tumors or involved lymph nodes), with surgery reserved for those patients with incomplete response or locoregional recurrence. Conclusions: This ARS AUC summary provides guidelines for the management of SCC of the cervical esophagus provides based on available evidence. Topics that warrant further investigation include optimization of (1) patient selection; (2) multimodality therapies including chemotherapy, immunotherapy, and targeted agents; (3) radiation dose, schedule, and treatment volume; and (4) supportive care for patients with CEC. Ongoing trials continue to improve outcomes for patients with CEC.
American Radium Society Appropriate Use Criteria for the use of liver‐directed therapies for nonsurgical management of liver metastases: Systematic review and guidelines
Hallemeier, Christopher L. , Sharma, Navesh , Anker, Christopher J. , Lee, Percy, Williams, Vonetta M. , Kennedy, Timothy J., Jethwa, Krishan R. , Kumar, Rachit , Russo, Suzanne , Jethwa, Krishan , Small, William , Hallemeier, Christopher Leigh , Selfridge, Jennifer Eva , Lee, Percy , Jabbour, Salma K , Liu, David M. , Kim, Ed, Tchelebi, Leila T. , Russo, Suzanne

Cancer | July 6, 2023 | Volume: 129 | Issue: 20 | Pages: 3193-3212

10.1002/cncr.34931 Get It

AbstractThe liver is a common site of cancer metastases. Systemic therapy is widely accepted as the standard treatment for liver metastases (LM), although select patients with liver oligometastases may be candidates for potentially curative liver resection. Recent data support the role of nonsurgical local therapies such as ablation, external beam radiotherapy, embolization, and hepatic artery infusion therapy for management of LM. Additionally, for patients with advanced, symptomatic LM, local therapies may provide palliative benefit. The American Radium Society gastrointestinal expert panel, including members representing radiation oncology, interventional radiology, surgical oncology, and medical oncology, performed a systemic review and developed Appropriate Use Criteria for the use of nonsurgical local therapies for LM. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta‐Analyses methodology was used. These studies were used to inform the expert panel, which then rated the appropriateness of various treatments in seven representative clinical scenarios through a well‐established consensus methodology (modified Delphi). A summary of recommendations is outlined to guide practitioners on the use of nonsurgical local therapies for patients with LM.
American Radium Society (ARS) Appropriate Use Criteria (AUC) for Extrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma
Tchelebi, Leila T. , Levy, Anna T., Anker, Christopher J. , Kennedy, Timothy J., Grodstein, Elliot , Hallemeier, Christopher L. , Kumar, Rachit , Lee, Percy, Williams, Vonetta M. , Sharma, Navesh , Russo, Suzanne , Achilonu, Conrad Chibunna , Tchelebi, Leila , Achilonu, Conrad C , Jethwa, Krishan R. , Hallemeier, Christopher Leigh , Jabbour, Salma K , Kim, Ed, Lee, Percy , Small, William , Russo, Suzanne

American Journal of Clinical Oncology | December 19, 2022 | Volume: 46 | Issue: 2 | Pages: 73-84

10.1097/coc.0000000000000969 Get It

Although uncommon, extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (EHCC) is a deadly malignancy, and the treatment approaches remain controversial. While surgery remains the only cure, few patients are candidates for resection up front, and there are high rates of both local and distant failure following resection. Herein, we systematically review the available evidence regarding treatment approaches for patients with EHCC, including surgery, radiation, and chemotherapy. The evidence regarding treatment outcomes was assessed using the Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcome, and Study design (PICOS) framework. A summary of recommendations based on the available literature is outlined for specific clinical scenarios encountered by providers in the clinic to guide the management of these patients.