Explore the vast range of titles available.

Combined PET/MRI is a proposed imaging modality for rectal cancer, leveraging the advantages of MRI and 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose PET. Rectal cancer PET/MRI protocols typically include dedicated pelvis bed positions utilizing small field-of-view T2-weighted imaging. For staging of the primary tumor, PET/MRI can help delineate the extent of tumor better as well as the extent of tumor beyond the muscularis propria. PET uptake may help characterize small lymph nodes, and the use of hepatobiliary phase imaging can improve the detection of small hepatic metastases. The most beneficial aspect of PET/MRI may be in treatment response, although current data are limited on how to combine PET and MRI data in this setting. Limitations of PET/MRI include the inability to detect small pulmonary nodules and issues related to attenuation correction, although the development of new attenuation correction techniques may address this issue. Overall PET/MRI can improve the staging of rectal cancer, although this potential has yet to be fulfilled.

The daily injection burden of recombinant human growth hormone (r-hGH) replacement therapy to treat growth hormone deficiency (GHD) may reduce compliance and limit treatment benefit. Research is needed to evaluate patient preferences for GHD injection regimen and device features. Quantitatively evaluate factors driving preferences for r-hGH injection regimen and device features among pediatric (3-17 years, and caregivers) and adult (≥25 years) patients with GHD using a discrete choice experiment (DCE) approach. The DCE was part of a broader, cross-sectional observational field study to develop clinical outcome assessments (COAs) that assess the experience of patients taking r-hGH injections. Following ethics approval, discrete choice data were collected through an online questionnaire from consented participants recruited from eight sites in the United States. Participants were presented with 20 choice tasks, each comprising different combinations of two profiles. Participants were then shown the same set of three hypothetical device and injection profiles (ie, storage, preparation, injection type device, maintenance, dose setting, injection schedule) and asked whether they would choose each profile over their current device and schedule. Choice-based conjoint analyses were used to estimate the marginal utilities and values for treatment attributes. Subject preferences were estimated at individual and aggregate levels. Two hundred and twenty-four participants completed the DCE (n=75 adults, n=79 adolescent/caregiver dyads, n=70 child/caregiver dyads). Injection schedule was the strongest predictor of choice for the total sample and each patient group. Less frequent injection schedules were more likely to be chosen by participants. A \"ready to use\" injection was preferred, with no preference for auto-injector versus needle-free device. Most participants would choose the hypothetical injection devices and less frequent dosing over their current daily administered device schedule. Patients prefer a less frequent injection regimen for treating GHD. Addressing patient preferences may improve compliance, adherence, and ultimately, clinical outcomes.

To examine whether women whose partners are involved in their pregnancy are more likely to receive early prenatal care and reduce cigarette consumption over the course of the pregnancy. This study also examines sociodemographic predictors of father involvement during pregnancy. Data on 5,404 women and their partners from the first wave of the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study-Birth Cohort (ECLS-B) were used to examine the association between father involvement during pregnancy and maternal behaviors during pregnancy. Multivariate linear and logistic regression analyses were used and data were weighted to account for the complex survey design of the ECLS-B. Women whose partners were involved in their pregnancy were 1.5 times more likely to receive prenatal care in the first trimester and, among those who smoked at conception, to reduce their cigarette consumption 36% more than women whose partners were not involved in the pregnancy (p = .09). Fathers with less than a high school education were significantly less likely to be involved in their partner's pregnancy, while first-time fathers and fathers who reported wanting the pregnancy were significantly more likely to be involved. The positive benefits of father involvement often reported in the literature on child health and development can be extended into the prenatal period. Father involvement is an important, but understudied, predictor of maternal behaviors during the prenatal period, and improving father involvement may have important consequences for the health of his partner, her pregnancy, and their child.

ObjectiveTo evaluate the incidence and risk factors for mesorectal node metastasis (MRNM) in locally advanced cervical cancer.Methods/MaterialsWe performed an observational retrospective cohort study of 122 patients with cervical cancer who received definitive chemo-radiation treatment between December 2013 and June 2017 to evaluate the incidence of MRNM. Three diagnostic radiologists assessed all available pre-treatment images. In this study, the pelvic node metastasis was defined as ≥ 1.0 cm and MRNM as ≥ 0.5 cm for CT and MRI scans and as a maximum standardized uptake value of > 2.5 for PET/CT. The relationship of MRNM with FIGO stage, pelvic node metastasis, and mesorectal fascia involvement was evaluated.ResultsThe incidence of MRNM in all 122 patients was 8 (6.6%). However, in advanced stage (III– IV) patients, MRNM occurred in 4 of 39 (10.3%) compared with 4 of 83 (4.8%) in early stage (IB1–IIB) patients (p = 0.27). In patients with a positive pelvic node, MRNM occurred in 7 of 55 (12.7%) and 1 of 67 (1.5%) in those with negative pelvic node (p = 0.02). In addition, the incidence of MRNM was 3 of 9 (33.3%) in the presence of mesorectal fascia involvement and 5 of 113 (4.4%) among those without mesorectal fascia involvement (p = 0.013).ConclusionThis study indicates that pelvic node metastasis and mesorectal fascia involvement are high-risk factors for MRNM. Therefore, vigilance of reviewing images in the mesorectum for MRNM is necessary for high-risk patients.

Introduction This study aimed to describe medical oncologist’s opinions and perceptions regarding the management of dermatologic toxicities among metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients who were treated with panitumumab in the USA and assess if there were differences across demographic and clinical characteristics. Methods We developed a survey based on the current literature and expert opinions regarding the management of dermatologic toxicities. The survey was implemented online in September 2016. Eligible oncologists were board certified and had treated at least five new or continuing patients with mCRC in the last 3 months, among whom at least three patients had received or were currently receiving panitumumab. Results A total of 250 oncologists completed the survey. The data suggest that approximately 82% of patients received recommendations for moisturizer, 88% for sunscreen and 67% for ultraviolet (UV)-protective garments prior to or at the time of initiation of panitumumab therapy. There were minor differences in how dermatologic toxicities were managed across specific demographic or clinical groups. The data also suggest that the management associated with panitumumab use among mCRC patients can be greatly improved. Conclusions Our results highlight the urgent need for heightened education regarding dermatologic toxicity management among oncologists who treated mCRC patients with panitumumab. Easily implemented strategies, such as moisturizer, sunscreen, and UV-protective garments should be recommended to all patients. Funding Amgen, Inc. Plain Language Summary Plain language summary available for this article.

Objective Perform multireader analysis of objective and subjective lesion conspicuity for small pancreatic adenocarcinomas using rapid switching dual energy CT (rsDECT). Materials and methods With IRB approval, 51 abdominal multiphasic rsDECT scans in 46 subjects with small (<3 cm) pancreatic adenocarcinomas were retrospectively reviewed by three independent readers for objective and subjective lesion conspicuity. Measured variables during individual, blinded interpretive sessions of separate low (52) keV, PACS-equivalent (70) keV, and iodine material density (MD) image sets included Hounsfield units (HU) and mg/cc iodine for tumor, nontumoral pancreas, and subcutaneous fat. Objective measures included absolute lesion contrast (LC) and contrast to noise ratios (CNR). Subjective measures included image quality, lesion conspicuity, and reader confidence. Reader agreement was measured with kappa statistic; correlation with truth by Pearson coefficient, CNR with repeated mANOVA; subjective quality measures utilized Tukey–Cramer corrections for multiple testing, p  < 0.05 considered significant. Results Demographics: 26 F, 20 M, mean age 68 years, weight 75 kg, tumor size of 2.3 cm. LC was highest on 52 keV images for all three readers (mean 90.1 HU). Mean CNR for iodine MD images (4.87) was significantly higher than 52 keV (4.13) or 70 keV (3.9). Very high to near-perfect kappa values were observed for all individual measured objective variables but were best for 52 keV images (52 keV 0.89–0.95, 70 keV 0.76–0.83, iodine 0.87–0.92). 70 keV images scored best for subjective image quality; iodine MD images scored best for lesion conspicuity and reader confidence. Conclusion We observed very high reader agreement for independent objective rsDECT image variables and subjective rsDECT image scores in patients with small pancreatic adenocarcinomas. Maximal objective tumor to nontumoral LC was depicted on 52 keV and highest CNR on iodine MD images; readers scored the iodine MD images best for lesion conspicuity and confidence.

PurposeTo understand the extent to which metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients receive education on the prevention and management associated with skin rash following Vectibix treatment. Furthermore, to investigate how this adverse event affects a patient’s quality of life (QoL) and influences their treatment decisions.MethodsA cross-sectional survey was administered to 200 mCRC patients (100 Vectibix users and 100 Vectibix non-users). After excluding respondents who had used cetuximab, 61 Vectibix users and 56 Vectibix non-users remained.ResultsMost Vectibix users (79%) experienced a skin rash in response to treatment of which 65% considered the rash moderate, 27% mild, and 8% severe. Vectibix users generally felt they were adequately informed about the rash (83%), with the most common messages received related to sun protection. However, sunscreen was used by only 42% of patients prior to rash and 60% of patients following the appearance of rash. The use of oral antibiotics was low prior to rash (21%) and following rash (46%). Among patients experiencing a rash within the past week (n=16), 75% reported the rash had a large negative impact on their QoL based on the Dermatology Life Quality Index.ConclusionThere was a disconnect between patients feeling they were adequately informed and use of prevention and management strategies such as sun protection. This suggests a gap in patient education and adoption currently exists on management strategies both prior to and following the appearance of rash. Given the negative impact that skin toxicity has on the patient’s quality of life, it is essential that patients receive and subsequently utilize all information that can minimize rash severity.

Abstract Shared decision-making (SDM) is a key component of patient-centered healthcare. SDM is particularly pertinent in the relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) setting, in which numerous treatment options can present challenges for identifying optimal care. However, few studies have assessed the extent and relevance of SDM and patient-centered communication (PCC) in RRMM. To describe treatment decision-making patterns between physicians and patients in the RRMM setting, we conducted online surveys of patients and physicians in the USA to compare their perspectives on the process of treatment decision-making. We analyzed the surveys descriptively. Two hundred hematologists/oncologists and 200 patients with RRMM receiving second-line (n = 89), third-line (n = 65), and fourth-line (n = 46) therapy participated. Top treatment goals for physicians and patients included extending overall survival (among 76% and 83% of physicians and patients, respectively) and progression-free survival (among 54% and 77% of physicians and patients, respectively), regardless of the number of prior relapses. Thirty percent of physicians believed patients preferred a shared approach to treatment decision-making, while 40% of patients reported most often preferring a shared role in treatment decision-making. One-fourth of patients most often preferred physicians to make the final treatment decision after seriously considering their opinion. Thirty-two percent of physicians and 16% of patients recalled ≥3 treatment options presented at first relapse. Efficacy was a primary treatment goal for patients and physicians. Discrepancies in their perceptions during RRMM treatment decision-making exist, indicating that communication tools are needed to facilitate SDM and PCC. Lay Summary Shared decision-making (SDM) is an important facet of patient-centered healthcare. Multiple myeloma (MM) is a cancer of the bone marrow that can return (relapse) after treatment. SDM may be especially pertinent for relapsed MM as there is no uniform standard of care and treatment selection can be complex. Few studies have examined the extent and relevance of SDM and patient-centered communication (PCC) in this relapsed and/or refractory (RRMM) setting. We conducted online surveys of 200 patients who had received 1–3 previous therapies and 200 physicians to compare treatment decision-making patterns in RRMM in the USA. Both physicians and patients felt that extending patient survival was a top treatment goal, regardless of the number of prior relapses. A lower percentage of physicians believed patients preferred a shared approach to treatment decision-making than patients who reported preferring such a shared role. Twice as many physicians than patients recalled ≥3 treatment options presented at first relapse. In conclusion, while improving survival was an important treatment goal for physicians and patients, there are discrepancies in physician and patient perceptions during RRMM treatment decision-making. Thus, communication tools are needed to facilitate SDM and PCC. Graphical Abstract Graphical Abstract

Shared decision-making (SDM) is a key component of patient-centered healthcare. SDM is particularly pertinent in the relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) setting, in which numerous treatment options can present challenges for identifying optimal care. However, few studies have assessed the extent and relevance of SDM and patient-centered communication (PCC) in RRMM. To describe treatment decision-making patterns between physicians and patients in the RRMM setting, we conducted online surveys of patients and physicians in the USA to compare their perspectives on the process of treatment decision-making. We analyzed the surveys descriptively. Two hundred hematologists/oncologists and 200 patients with RRMM receiving second-line (n = 89), third-line (n = 65), and fourth-line (n = 46) therapy participated. Top treatment goals for physicians and patients included extending overall survival (among 76% and 83% of physicians and patients, respectively) and progression-free survival (among 54% and 77% of physicians and patients, respectively), regardless of the number of prior relapses. Thirty percent of physicians believed patients preferred a shared approach to treatment decision-making, while 40% of patients reported most often preferring a shared role in treatment decision-making. One-fourth of patients most often preferred physicians to make the final treatment decision after seriously considering their opinion. Thirty-two percent of physicians and 16% of patients recalled [greater than or equal to]3 treatment options presented at first relapse. Efficacy was a primary treatment goal for patients and physicians. Discrepancies in their perceptions during RRMM treatment decision-making exist, indicating that communication tools are needed to facilitate SDM and PCC. Lay summary Shared decision-making (SDM) is an important facet of patient-centered healthcare. Multiple myeloma (MM) is a cancer of the bone marrow that can return (relapse) after treatment. SDM may be especially pertinent for relapsed MM as there is no uniform standard of care and treatment selection can be complex. Few studies have examined the extent and relevance of SDM and patient-centered communication (PCC) in this relapsed and/or refractory (RRMM) setting. We conducted online surveys of 200 patients who had received 1-3 previous therapies and 200 physicians to compare treatment decision-making patterns in RRMM in the USA. Both physicians and patients felt that extending patient survival was a top treatment goal, regardless of the number of prior relapses. A lower percentage of physicians believed patients preferred a shared approach to treatment decision-making than patients who reported preferring such a shared role. Twice as many physicians than patients recalled [greater than or equal to]3 treatment options presented at first relapse. In conclusion, while improving survival was an important treatment goal for physicians and patients, there are discrepancies in physician and patient perceptions during RRMM treatment decision-making. Thus, communication tools are needed to facilitate SDM and PCC. Keywords: Shared decision-making, patient-centered communication, multiple myeloma, treatment selection

The purpose of the study is to describe oncologists’ perceptions and opinions about patient eligibility, guidelines, and barriers for use of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF), overall and stratified by their affiliation with the Oncology Care Model (OCM). In May 2018, we invited and recruited practicing US oncologists from a national database for an online survey. Level of agreement was identified using a seven-point scale, ranging from strongly disagree to strongly agree. Of 200 participating oncologists, 70 were OCM-affiliated. Overall, 65% of oncologists agreed or strongly agreed that all patients at high risk of febrile neutropenia (FN) should receive prophylactic G-CSF, and half agreed or strongly agreed that benefits of G-CSF outweigh the potential adverse effects. The most common barriers to G-CSF use for patients at high risk of FN included patient refusal (37.1% of OCM-affiliated oncologists vs. 21.5% of non-OCM-affiliated oncologists), not on protocol/not supported by guidelines (32.9% vs. 23.1%), lack of reimbursement to practice (30.0% vs. 15.4%), and concerns about insurance coverage (22.9% vs. 26.9%). More OCM-affiliated oncologists reported that their practices offer and strongly encourage adherence to a specific protocol for G-CSF use (49.2%) versus non-OCM oncologists (31.3%). Despite recommendations from national guidelines and strong evidence from randomized, controlled clinical trials, only two thirds of oncologists agree or strongly agree that all patients at high risk of FN should receive primary G-CSF prophylaxis. Decisions about G-CSF prophylaxis may be affected by factors other than risk of FN, such as patient choice, practice protocols/guidelines, lack of reimbursement, and insurance coverage.