Citations

Clear

386 citation(s) found for "Ruddy, Kathryn J".

Impact of Addition of Carboplatin AUC ≥ 4 to Antiemetic Guidelines for Triple Antiemetic Prophylaxis: A Gap in Quality of Care, Guideline Adoption, and Avoiding Acute Care
Navari, Rudolph M. , Ruddy, Kathryn J. , LeBlanc, Thomas W. , Clark-Snow, Rebecca, Wickham, Rita , Binder, G. , Coberly, Tammy Bratton, Schmerold, Luke, Roeland, Eric , Leblanc, Thomas , Roeland, Eric J , Potluri, Ravi C.

Mayo Clinic

JCO Oncology Practice | December 4, 2019 | Volume: 16 | Issue: 2 | Pages: e132-e138

10.1200/jop.19.00457 | PMID 31800352 Get It

PURPOSE: After ASCO and National Comprehensive Cancer Network guideline recommendations for triple antiemetic prophylaxis for carboplatin area under the curve (AUC) ≥ 4, and the publication of studies documenting avoidable acute care after chemotherapy involving nausea and vomiting (NV) and other toxicities, we studied clinician adherence to the guideline change and assessed avoidable acute-care use. METHODS: Using a large electronic health record database, we evaluated antiemetic prophylaxis as recommended in the guidelines and post-chemotherapy avoidable acute-care use (defined as involving any of NV or 8 other toxicities) for patients initiating carboplatin or other chemotherapy from October 2012 to August 2018. RESULTS: We identified 11,554 carboplatin courses. After the guideline change adding neurokinin-1 receptor antagonists (RAs) for carboplatin AUC ≥ 4, its use rose to 20% of courses from the prior average of 16%; virtually all courses also included a 5-HT3 RA plus dexamethasone. We found avoidable acute care in 23% of courses; one quarter of these events were associated with NV. Acute care rates after carboplatin mirrored those after other highly emetogenic chemotherapy or oxaliplatin and exceeded those after other chemotherapy regimens. The > 80% shortfall in adherence may have been caused by low awareness or acceptance of the guideline change and/or by poor awareness of avoidable acute-care use after carboplatin. CONCLUSION: Neurokinin-1 RA prophylaxis for carboplatin AUC ≥ 4 remains low and largely unchanged despite National Comprehensive Cancer Network and ASCO 2017 recommendations for inclusion. NV and avoidable acute care involving NV seen after carboplatin were consistent with other highly emetogenic chemotherapy. Clinician action is required to remediate incomplete prophylaxis and to no longer place patient outcomes, resources for cancer treatment, and clinician reimbursement at risk.
Acute care and hydration due to chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) among patients receiving NEPA prophylaxis for anthracycline + cyclophosphamide (AC).
Roeland, Eric , Navari, Rudolph M. , Ruddy, Kathryn J. , LeBlanc, Thomas W. , Clark-Snow, Rebecca, Wickham, Rita S., Binder, G. , Bailey, William L., Leblanc, Thomas , Roeland, Eric J , Schwartzberg, Lee Steven

Mayo Clinic

Journal of Clinical Oncology | November 25, 2019 | Volume: 37 | Issue: 31_suppl | Pages: 112-112

10.1200/jco.2019.37.31_suppl.112 Get It

112 Background: In the US, the CMS OP-35 oncology outcome measure deems 30-day post-chemotherapy acute care involving nausea and emesis (NV) or 8 other toxicities as avoidable, with studies showing 15% of > 2500 patients receiving anthracycline + cyclophosphamide (AC)-based chemotherapy had avoidable acute care, of which 32% involved NV. Our aim was to evaluate resource use (emergency department [ED] visits, inpatient admissions [IP], or hydration) in a prospective trial of women with breast cancer who received combination netupitant/palonosetron (NEPA) + dexamethasone (DEX) for CINV prophylaxis for AC-based chemotherapy. Methods: Women initiating AC received oral or IV NEPA + DEX. Pre-specified endpoints included safety, complete response, acute care (ED/IP), unplanned IV hydrations (as determined by investigator), days of CINV, and ≥3 days of CINV. We defined CINV as emesis or rescue drug use up to 5 days after AC, and defined concomitant ED/IP or hydrations in the same period as CINV-related. We limited our analysis to the first 2 cycles, the median duration in the NEPA study. Results: 402 patients received ≥1 cycle of AC and 391 completed 2 cycles. Nine patients had IP (none CINV-related), and 5 patients had a total of 6 ED visits (1 CINV-related). Three patients had a CINV-related unplanned hydration. Patients had ≥1 day of CINV in 172 of 793 cycles (21.7%); of these, the majority had symptom duration for 1-2 days, while 78 (9.8%) had ≥3 days of CINV in a cycle. Conclusions: In this prospective CINV prophylaxis study in women receiving AC chemotherapy, < 1% of women receiving NEPA + DEX required acute care for CINV and < 1% required unplanned hydrations for CINV. These rates are below previously reported CINV-related acute care rates for AC suggesting NEPA may help avoid CINV-related acute care. Clinical trial information: NCT03403712.
Patient‐reported outcomes in the Translational Breast Cancer Research Consortium
Bowen, Deborah J. , Shinn, Eileen H. , Gregrowski, Sophie, Kimmick, Gretchen , Dominici, Laura S. , Smith, Karen L. , Rocque, Gabrielle B. , Ruddy, Kathryn J. , Pollastro, Teri, Melisko, Michelle , Ballinger, Tarah J. , Fayanju, Oluwadamilola M. , Smith, Karen Lisa , Rocque, Gabrielle , Fayanju, Oluwadamilola M , Wolff, Antonio C , Frank, Elizabeth S. , Ballinger, Tarah Jean , Wolff, Antonio C.

Mayo Clinic

Cancer | November 19, 2019 | Volume: 126 | Issue: 5 | Pages: 922-930

10.1002/cncr.32615 | PMID 31743427 Get It

Members of the Translational Breast Cancer Research Consortium conducted an expert‐driven literature review to identify a list of domains and to evaluate potential measures of these domains for inclusion in a list of preferred measures. Measures were included if they were easily available, free of charge, and had acceptable psychometrics based on published peer‐reviewed analyses. A total of 22 domains and 52 measures were identified during the selection process. Taken together, these measures form a reliable and validated list of measurement tools that are easily available and used in multiple cancer trials to assess patient‐reported outcomes in relevant patients.
Association of Genomic Domains in BRCA1 and BRCA2 with Prostate Cancer Risk and Aggressiveness
Patel, Vivek , Busch, Evan L. , Cronin, Angel M., Leslie, Goska , McGuffog, Lesley, Adlard, Julian , Agata, Simona , Agnarsson, Bjarni A. , Ahmed, Munaza, Aittomäki, Kristiina, Alducci, Elisa, Andrulis, Irene L. , Arason, Aðalgeir , Artioli, Grazia, Arver, Brita, Auber, Bernd , Azzollini, Jacopo , Barkardóttir, Rósa B. , Barroso, Alicia, Barrowdale, Daniel , Belotti, Muriel, Bertelsen, Birgitte , Blok, Marinus J. , Bodrogi, I., Bonadona, Valérie, Bondavalli, Davide , Boonen, Susanne E. , Borde, Julika , Borg, Åke , Bradbury, Angela R. , Brady, Angela, Brewer, Carole, Brunet, Joan , Buecher, Bruno , Caldés, Trinidad , Caliebe, Almuth , Calvello, Mariarosaria , Carrasco, Estela , Chan, Tsun Leung , Claes, Kathleen , Collaborators, GEMO Study, Collaborators, EMBRACE, Cortesi, Laura , Daly, Mary B., Damante, Giuseppe , Darder, Esther , Davidson, Rosemarie, Puppa, Lara Della , Ding, Yuan Chun , Ditsch, Nina , Donaldson, Alan, Dworniczak, Bernd , Easton, Douglas F. , Eccles, Diana M., Eeles, Rosalind A. , Ehrencrona, Hans , Ejlertsen, Bent , Engel, Christoph , Evans, D. Gareth , Faivre, Laurence, Faust, Ulrike , Feliubadaló, Lídia , Foretová, Lenka , Fountzilas, George , Frost, Debra, García‐Barberán, Vanesa , Gauthier‐Villars, Marion , Géczi, Lajos , Gehrig, Andrea, Gesta, Paul , Giannini, Giuseppe , Glendon, Gord , Goldgar, David E. , Greene, Mark H. , Gutierrez‐Barrera, Angelica M. , Hahnen, Eric , Hamann, Ute, Hauke, Jan , Herold, Natalie, Hogervorst, Frans B.L., Honisch, Ellen, Hulick, Peter J. , Investigators, kConFab, Investigators, Hebon, Izatt, Louise , Jager, Agnes , James, Paul A. , Janavičius, Ramūnas , Jensen, Uffe Birk , Jensen, Thomas D., Johannsson, Oskar T., John, Esther M. , Kang, Eunyoung , Kast, Karin, Kiiski, Johanna I. , Kim, Sung-Won, Ko, Kwang‐Pil , Konstantopoulou, Irene , Kramer, Gero , Krogh, Lotte, Kruse, Torben A., Kwong, Ava , Larsen, Mirjam, Lasset, Christine , Lautrup, Charlotte Kvist , Lee, Jihyoun , Lee, Jong Won, Lee, Min Hyuk , Lesueur, Fabienne , Liljegren, Annelie , Lindblom, Annika , Llovet, Patricia , López‐Fernández, Adrià , López‐Perolio, Irene, Lorca, Víctor , Loud, Jennifer T. , S.K., Edmond , Mai, Phuong L., Manoukian, Siranoush , Mari, Véronique , Martin, Lynn , Matricardi, Laura , Mebirouk, Noura, Medici, Veronica, Meijers‐Heijboer, Hanne , Meindl, Alfons , Mensenkamp, Arjen R. , Miller, Clare , Gomes, D. Molina , Montagna, Marco , Mooij, Thea M. , Mouret‐Fourme, Emmanuelle, Nathanson, Katherine L. , Navrátilová, Marie , Niederacher, Dieter , Nielsen, Finn C., Ņikitina-Zaķe, Liene , Offit, Kenneth, Oláh, Edith , Olopade, Olufunmilayo I. , Ong, Kai-Ren, Osório, Ana , Ott, Claus‐Eric , Park, Sue K. , Pedersen, Inge Søkilde , Peissel, Bernard , Peixoto, Ana , Peterlongo, Paolo , Petersen, Annabeth Høgh , Porteous, Mary, Pujana, Miguel Ángel , Ramser, Juliane, Rantala, Johanna, Rashid, Muhammad Usman , Rhiem, Kerstin, Rizzolo, Piera , Rookus, Matti A. , Rossing, Caroline Maria, Ruddy, Kathryn J. , Santos, Catarina , Saule, Claire , Scarpitta, Rosa , Schmutzler, Rita K., Schuster, Hélène, Senter, Leigha , Seynaeve, Caroline, Shah, Payal D. , Silvestri, Valentina , Simard, Jacques , Skytte, Anne‐Bine , Snape, Katie , Solano, Ángela R. , Soucy, Penny, Sunde, Lone , Sutter, Christian , Tan, Yen Y. , Teixeira, Manuel R. , Teo, Soo‐Hwang , Thomassen, Mads , Tibiletti, Maria Grazia , Toland, Amanda Ewart, Torres, Diana , Trainer, Alison H., Baan, Frederieke H. van der , Kolk, Lizet E. van der, Hest, Liselotte P. van , Varesco, Liliana , Varon-Mateeva, Raymonda, Viel, Alessandra , Vierstraete, Jeroen , Villa, Roberta, Wachenfeldt, Anna von , Wagner, Philipp , Wang‐Gohrke, Shan , Wappenschmidt, Barbara , Weitzel, Jeffrey N. , Wieme, Greet , Yadav, Siddhartha , Yoon, Sook‐Yee , Zanzottera, Cristina , Zorn, Kristin K. , D’Amico, Anthony V. , Freedman, Matthew L. , Pomerantz, Mark M., Chenevix‐Trench, Georgia , Antoniou, Antonis C. , Ottini, Laura , Nielsen, Henriette Roed, Durocher, Francine , Eccles, Diana , Caputo, Sandrine M. , Faivre, Laurence , Leslie, Goska , Adlard, Julian , Arnold, Norbert , Auber, Bernd , Azzollini, Jacopo , Barnes, Daniel R , Brunet, Joan , Caligo, Maria A , Campbell, Ian G , Claes, Kathleen B M , Darder, Esther , Dennis, Joe , Dworniczak, Bernd , Eeles, Rosalind A , Ehrencrona, Hans , Ejlertsen, Bent , Evans, D Gareth , Garre, Pilar , Greene, Mark H , Hulick, Peter J , Jager, Agnes , James, Paul , John, Esther M , Joseph, Vijai , Kim, Sung-Won , Konstantopoulou, Irene , Lesueur, Fabienne , Matricardi, Laura , Gomes, Denise Molina , Nevanlinna, H , Olopade, Olufunmilayo I , Palli, Domenico , Park, Sue K , Parsons, Michael T , Peterlongo, Paolo , Petersen, Annabeth Høgh , Pujana, Miquel Angel , Ruddy, Kathryn J , Scarpitta, Rosa , Shah, Payal D , Silvestri, Valentina , Southey, Melissa C , Spurdle, Amanda B , Stoppa-Lyonnet, Dominique , Sunde, Lone , Teixeira, Manuel R , Teo, Soo H , Tommasi, Stefania , Toss, Angela , van der Luijt, Rob B , Vierstraete, Jeroen , Wieme, Greet , Yadav, Siddhartha , Antoniou, Antonis C , Eccles, Diana , Weitzel, Jeffrey N , Torres, Diana , Nathanson, Katherine L , Arason, Adalgeir , Barrowdale, Daniel , Boonen, Susanne E , Cortesi, Laura , Engel, Christoph , Hahnen, Eric , Montagna, Marco , Viel, Alessandra , Simard, Jacques , Chenevix-Trench, Georgia , Ottini, Laura , Senter, Leigha , Faivre, Laurence , Rashid, Muhammad U , Calvello, Mariarosaria , Feliubadaló, Lidia , Hauke, Jan , Manoukian, Siranoush , Pomerantz, Mark M , Kwong, Ava , Lindblom, Annika , Friebel, Tara M. , Arnold, Norbert , Balmañà, Judith , Barnes, Daniel R. , Benı́tez, Javier , Bonadona, Valérie , Bonanni, Bernardo , Borg, Åke , Buys, Saundra S. , Cabezas-Camarero, Santiago , Caligo, Maria A. , Campbell, Ian , Carnevali, Ileana Wanda , Chu, Annie Tsz-Wai , Chung, Wendy K. , Cook, Jackie A , Couch, Fergus J. , Hoya, Miguel de la , Dı́ez, Orland , Domchek, Susan M. , Fostira, Florentia , Gerdes, Anne‐Marie , Godwin, Andrew K. , Herold, Natalie, Hopper, John L. , Jensen, Thomas Dyrso, Vijai, Joseph , Lasset, Christine , Lázaro, Conxi , Lemke, Johannes R. , Mai, Phuong L., Meindl, Alfons , Miller, Clare, Moserle, Lidia , Mulligan, Anna Marie , Nevanlinna, Heli , Palli, Domenico , Parsons, Michael T. , Perez-Segura, Pedro , Radice, Paolo , Rhiem, Kerstin , Robson, Mark E. , Sharma, Priyanka , Shin, Vivian Yvonne , Singer, Christian F. , Southey, Melissa C. , Spurdle, Amanda B. , Steele, Linda, Steinemann, Doris , Stoppa‐Lyonnet, Dominique , Stradella, Agostina , Tischkowitz, Marc D. , Tognazzo, Silvia , Toland, Amanda Ewart , Tung, Nadine , Asperen, Christi J. van , Luijt, Rob B. van der , Yannoukakos, Drakoulis , Neuhausen, Susan L. , Rebbeck, Timothy R.

Mayo Clinic

Cancer Research | November 13, 2019 | Volume: 80 | Issue: 3 | Pages: 624-638

10.1158/0008-5472.can-19-1840 | PMID 31723001 Get It

Abstract Pathogenic sequence variants (PSV) in BRCA1 or BRCA2 (BRCA1/2) are associated with increased risk and severity of prostate cancer. We evaluated whether PSVs in BRCA1/2 were associated with risk of overall prostate cancer or high grade (Gleason 8+) prostate cancer using an international sample of 65 BRCA1 and 171 BRCA2 male PSV carriers with prostate cancer, and 3,388 BRCA1 and 2,880 BRCA2 male PSV carriers without prostate cancer. PSVs in the 3′ region of BRCA2 (c.7914+) were significantly associated with elevated risk of prostate cancer compared with reference bin c.1001-c.7913 [HR = 1.78; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.25–2.52; P = 0.001], as well as elevated risk of Gleason 8+ prostate cancer (HR = 3.11; 95% CI, 1.63–5.95; P = 0.001). c.756-c.1000 was also associated with elevated prostate cancer risk (HR = 2.83; 95% CI, 1.71–4.68; P = 0.00004) and elevated risk of Gleason 8+ prostate cancer (HR = 4.95; 95% CI, 2.12–11.54; P = 0.0002). No genotype–phenotype associations were detected for PSVs in BRCA1. These results demonstrate that specific BRCA2 PSVs may be associated with elevated risk of developing aggressive prostate cancer. Significance: Aggressive prostate cancer risk in BRCA2 mutation carriers may vary according to the specific BRCA2 mutation inherited by the at-risk individual.
Oxybutynin vs Placebo for Hot Flashes in Women With or Without Breast Cancer: A Randomized, Double-Blind Clinical Trial (ACCRU SC-1603)
Leon‐Ferre, Roberto A. , Novotny, Paul J. , Wolfe, Eric, Ruddy, Kathryn J. , Flora, Daniel , Dakhil, Christopher, Rowland, Kendrith M. , Graham, Mark L., Le‐Lindqwister, Nguyet, Loprinzi, Charles L. , Wolfe, Eric G, Ruddy, Kathryn J , Smith, Thomas J , Faubion, Stephanie S. , Smith, Thomas J.

Mayo Clinic

JNCI Cancer Spectrum | October 18, 2019 | Volume: 4 | Issue: 1 | Pages: No page available

10.1093/jncics/pkz088 | PMID 32337497 Get It

Abstract Background Hot flashes (HFs) negatively affect quality of life among perimenopausal and postmenopausal women. This study investigated the efficacy of oxybutynin vs placebo in decreasing HFs. Methods In this randomized, multicenter, double-blind study, women with and without breast cancer with 28 or more HFs per week, lasting longer than 30 days, who were not candidates for estrogen-based therapy, were assigned to oral oxybutynin (2.5 mg twice a day or 5 mg twice a day) or placebo for 6 weeks. The primary endpoint was the intrapatient change from baseline in weekly HF score between each oxybutynin dose and placebo using a repeated-measures mixed model. Secondary endpoints included changes in weekly HF frequency, HF-related daily interference scale questionnaires, and self-reported symptoms. Results We enrolled 150 women. Baseline characteristics were well balanced. Mean (SD) age was 57 (8.2) years. Two-thirds (65%) were taking tamoxifen or an aromatase inhibitor. Patients on both oxybutynin doses reported greater reductions in the weekly HF score (5 mg twice a day: −16.9 [SD 15.6], 2.5 mg twice a day: −10.6 [SD 7.7]), placebo −5.7 (SD 10.2); P &lt; .005 for both oxybutynin doses vs placebo), HF frequency (5 mg twice a day: −7.5 [SD 6.6], 2.5 mg twice a day: −4.8 [SD 3.2], placebo: −2.6 [SD 4.3]; P &lt; .003 for both oxybutynin doses vs placebo), and improvement in most HF-related daily interference scale measures and in overall quality of life. Patients on both oxybutynin arms reported more side effects than patients on placebo, particularly dry mouth, difficulty urinating, and abdominal pain. Most side effects were grade 1 or 2. There were no differences in study discontinuation because of adverse effects. Conclusion Oxybutynin is an effective and relatively well-tolerated treatment option for women with HFs.
Follow-up Care for Breast Cancer Survivors
Ruddy, Kathryn J. , Sangaralingham, Lindsey R. , Jemal, Ahmedin , Haddad, Tufia C. , Allen, Summer V. , Ganz, Patricia A. , Havyer, Rachel D. , Shah, Nilay D. , Herrin, Jeph , Freedman, Rachel A. , Hieken, Tina J. , Boughey, Judy C.

Mayo Clinic

JNCI: Journal of the National Cancer Institute | October 14, 2019 | Volume: 112 | Issue: 1 | Pages: 111-113

10.1093/jnci/djz203 | PMID 31613369 Get It

Abstract Breast cancer survivorship guidelines recommend at least annual follow-up visits, yet the degree to which this occurs in clinical practice is uncertain. Claims data from a US commercial insurance database (OptumLabs) were used to identify women treated with curative intent surgery for newly diagnosed breast cancer between 2006 and 2014. In 25 035 women, median follow-up was 3 years. In the second year after surgery, 9.6% of the patients did not visit a primary care provider, an oncologist, or a surgeon (guideline-nonadherent). The guideline-nonadherent proportion increased from 7.8% in women diagnosed in 2006 to 12.2% in those diagnosed in 2014 (two-sided Wald P &lt; .001). During years 2–6, guideline-nonadherence was also associated with older age, nonwhite race, no radiation, no chemotherapy, no endocrine therapy, and increasing time after surgery. There is a substantial and increasing rate of inadequate follow-up among breast cancer survivors. This has the potential to impair outcomes.
Male breast cancer in the United States: Treatment patterns and prognostic factors in the 21st century
Yadav, Siddhartha , Karam, Dhauna , Riaz, Irbaz Bin , Xie, Hao , Durani, Urshila , Duma, Narjust , Mutter, Robert W. , Hawse, John R. , Jiménez, Rafael E. , Leon‐Ferre, Roberto A. , Ruddy, Kathryn J. , Florez, Narjust , Bin Riaz, Irbaz, Yadav, Siddhartha , Xie, Hao , Riaz, Irbaz B , Durani, Urshila , Giridhar, Karthik V. , Hieken, Tina J. , Boughey, Judy C. , Couch, Fergus J.

Mayo Clinic

Cancer | October 7, 2019 | Volume: 126 | Issue: 1 | Pages: 26-36

10.1002/cncr.32472 | PMID 31588557 Get It

Background Male breast cancer (MBC) is a rare disease for which there is limited understanding of treatment patterns and prognostic factors. Methods Men with TNM stage I to stage III breast cancer diagnosed between 2004 and 2014 in the National Cancer Data Base were included. Trends in treatment modalities were described using the average annual percentage change (AAPC) and estimated using Joinpoint software for the analysis of trends. Kaplan‐Meier curves and the multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression model were used to compare survival between subgroups and to identify prognostic factors. Results A total of 10,873 MBC cases were included, with a median age at diagnosis of 64 years. Breast‐conserving surgery was performed in 24% of patients, and 70% of patients undergoing breast conservation received radiotherapy. Approximately 44% of patients received chemotherapy, and 62% of patients with estrogen receptor–positive disease received endocrine therapy. Oncotype DX was ordered in 35% of patients with lymph node–negative, estrogen receptor–positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)‐negative tumors. During the study period, there was a significant increase in the rates of total mastectomy, contralateral prophylactic mastectomy, radiotherapy after breast conservation, ordering of Oncotype DX, and the use of endocrine therapy ( P < .05). On multivariate analysis, factors found to be associated with worse overall survival were older age, black race, higher Charlson Comorbidity Index, high tumor grade and stage of disease, and undergoing total mastectomy. Residing in a higher income area; having progesterone receptor–positive tumors; and receipt of chemotherapy, radiotherapy, and endocrine therapy were associated with better overall survival. Conclusions Despite the lack of prospective randomized trials in patients with MBC, the results of the current study demonstrated that the treatment of this disease has evolved over the years. These findings further the understanding of the modern treatment and prognosis of MBC, and identify several areas for further research.
NCCN Guidelines Insights: Survivorship, Version 2.2019
Sanft, Tara , Denlinger, Crystal S. , Demark‐Wahnefried, Wendy , Goldman, Mindy, Khakpour, Nazanin , Koura, Divya, Langbaum, Terry S., McDonough, Allison L. , Melisko, Michelle , Mooney, Kathi , Moslehi, Javid J. , O’Connor, Tracey L. , Overholser, Linda , Peterson, Lindsay L. , Pirl, William F. , Rodriguez, Maria Alma , Ruddy, Kathryn J. , Smith, Sophia K. , Syrjala, Karen L. , Urba, Susan G., Zee, Phyllis C. , McMillian, Nicole R., Freedman-Cass, Deborah A., Broderick, Gregory, Demark-Wahnefried, Wendy , Armenian, Saro H. , Baker, Kevin Scott , Broderick, Gregory A. , Friedman, Debra L. , Hudson, Melissa M. , Lally, Robin Mary , Moore, Halle C. F. , Paskett, Electra D. , Tevaarwerk, Amyé

Mayo Clinic

Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network | July 18, 2019 | Volume: 17 | Issue: 7 | Pages: 784-794

10.6004/jnccn.2019.0034 | PMID 31319383 Get It

The NCCN Guidelines for Survivorship provide screening, evaluation, and treatment recommendations for consequences of cancer and cancer treatment to aid healthcare professionals who work with survivors of adult-onset cancer. Guidance is also provided to help promote physical activity, weight management, and proper immunizations in survivors and to facilitate care coordination to ensure that all needs are addressed. These NCCN Insights summarize some of the topics discussed by the NCCN Survivorship Panel during the 2019 update of the guidelines, including the survivorship population addressed, ways to improve care coordination, and pain management.
Acupuncture: Real-world patient-reported outcomes of treatment-related symptoms in breast cancer survivors.
Zayas, Jacqueline , Ruddy, Kathryn J. , Bauer, Brent A. , Mallory, Molly J., Zahrieh, David M. , Loprinzi, Charles L. , Olson, Janet E. , Couch, Fergus J. , Yang, Ping , Cathcart-Rake, Elizabeth

Mayo Clinic

Journal of Clinical Oncology | May 28, 2019 | Volume: 37 | Issue: 15_suppl | Pages: e23111-e23111

10.1200/jco.2019.37.15_suppl.e23111 Get It

e23111 Background: Acupuncture has been shown to reduce aromatase inhibitor-induced arthralgias, as well as possibly hot flashes and fatigue, but research has been limited. The purpose of this study was to evaluate real world perceived benefit of acupuncture for commonly experienced symptoms among breast cancer survivors. Methods: Breast cancer survivors who had used acupuncture for cancer- or treatment-related symptoms were identified using an ongoing prospective Mayo Clinic Breast Disease Registry (MCBDR) cohort. In addition, Mayo Clinic electronic health records (EHR) were queried to identify additional participants. All identified patients were mailed a survey with acupuncture-related questions. Respondents were also asked to recall their severity of arthralgia, myalgia, post-surgical pain, hot flashes, nausea/vomiting, fatigue, depression, anxiety, insomnia, lymphedema, headache, and neuropathy from 1 to 5 (1 = mild, 5 = severe) before and after acupuncture treatment. Results: Acupuncture use was reported among 413 participants in MCBDR (12% of all enrollees) and 73 patients were identified in the Mayo EHR. 241 eligible women returned surveys (median age at diagnosis 50 yrs). Mean symptom severity scores decreased from before to after acupuncture by at least 1 point for all queried symptoms (Table). Conclusions: Acupuncture is frequently used by patients for a variety of breast cancer-related symptoms. Those who do pursue acupuncture usually perceive few toxicities and substantial benefits. Cost may be a barrier to treatment for some. [Table: see text]
Ondansetron versus palonosetron as a marker of non-adherence to antiemetic prophylaxis guidelines in highly emetogenic chemotherapy.
Roeland, Eric , Ruddy, Kathryn J. , LeBlanc, Thomas W. , Clark-Snow, Rebecca, Wickham, Rita S., Binder, G. , Sebastiani, Silvia , Papademetriou, Eros , Schmerold, Luke, Navari, Rudolph M. , Leblanc, Thomas , Roeland, Eric J , Sebastiani, Silvia, Potluri, Ravi C.

Mayo Clinic

Journal of Clinical Oncology | May 28, 2019 | Volume: 37 | Issue: 15_suppl | Pages: e23108-e23108

10.1200/jco.2019.37.15_suppl.e23108 Get It

e23108 Background: ASCO antiemetic guidelines recommend upfront triple prophylaxis (NK1 receptor antagonist (RA) + 5HT3 RA + dexamethasone) for patients receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC). Physicians exhibit high variation in HEC guideline adherence, principally involving inclusion of NK1 RA. Whether adherence is associated with selection of the specific 5HT3 RA agent remains inadequately studied. Methods: In the IBM Explorys electronic health record database, we used procedure and diagnosis codes to identify HEC courses and related nausea/vomiting (NV) from 2012 to 2018. We defined HEC guideline adherence as triple prophylaxis at chemotherapy initiation. We assigned HEC courses for ≥ 7 day cycles of cisplatin or anthracycline + cyclophosphamide (AC), or carboplatin (≥ 14 day cycles as a proxy for AUC ≥ 4) to prescribing oncologists based on encounter frequency. We categorized 5HT3 RA use of each physician treating ≥ 5 HEC courses based on their most commonly used 5HT3 and performed descriptive statistics. Results: Of 12,262 HEC courses, 57% involved physicians having greater use of ondansetron (OND) (mean OND to palonosetron (PALO) ratio of 3.9:1). These courses had lower guideline adherence (due to NK1 RA omission) and higher rates of NV for combined HEC, AC, and carboplatin. NV rates for cisplatin did not vary by 5HT3 agent used. Courses involving physicians with greater PALO use (mean OND:PALO ratio of 0.2:1) had superior adherence and NV rates, despite involving a slightly higher risk population (younger and/or female). Conclusions: According to HEC antiemetic guidelines, NK1 RA use should occur independent of 5HT3 RA agent selection. However, we observed less NK1 RA use where OND was preferred, which may have caused the observed higher rates of NV with OND. Further evaluation should assess whether pharmacy cost minimization is a driver of both OND preference and NK1 omission in HEC. [Table: see text]