Browsing by Author "Garon, Edward B."

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Defining comprehensive biomarker‐related testing and treatment practices for advanced non‐small‐cell lung cancer: Results of a survey of U.S. oncologists
    (Wiley, 2022) Mileham, Kathryn F.; Schenkel, Caroline; Bruinooge, Suanna S.; Freeman-Daily, Janet; Basu Roy, Upal; Moore, Amy; Smith, Robert A.; Garrett-Mayer, Elizabeth; Rosenthal, Lauren; Garon, Edward B.; Johnson, Bruce E.; Osarogiagbon, Raymond U.; Jalal, Shadia; Virani, Shamsuddin; Weber Redman, Mary; Silvestri, Gerard A.; Medicine, School of Medicine
    Background: An ASCO taskforce comprised of representatives of oncology clinicians, the American Cancer Society National Lung Cancer Roundtable (NLCRT), LUNGevity, the GO2 Foundation for Lung Cancer, and the ROS1ders sought to: characterize U.S. oncologists' biomarker ordering and treatment practices for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC); ascertain barriers to biomarker testing; and understand the impact of delays on treatment decisions. Methods: We deployed a survey to 2374 ASCO members, targeting U.S. thoracic and general oncologists. Results: We analyzed 170 eligible responses. For non-squamous NSCLC, 97% of respondents reported ordering tests for EGFR, ALK, ROS1, and BRAF. Testing for MET, RET, and NTRK was reported to be higher among academic versus community providers and higher among thoracic oncologists than generalists. Most respondents considered 1 (46%) or 2 weeks (52%) an acceptable turnaround time, yet 37% usually waited three or more weeks to receive results. Respondents who waited ≥3 weeks were more likely to defer treatment until results were reviewed (63%). Community and generalist respondents who waited ≥3 weeks were more likely to initiate non-targeted treatment while awaiting results. Respondents <5 years out of training were more likely to cite their concerns about waiting for results as a reason for not ordering biomarker testing (42%, vs. 19% with ≥6 years of experience). Conclusions: Respondents reported high biomarker testing rates in patients with NSCLC. Treatment decisions were impacted by test turnaround time and associated with practice setting and physician specialization and experience.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Knowledge Gaps and Research Priorities in Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor–related Pneumonitis. An Official American Thoracic Society Research Statement
    (American Thoracic Society - AJRCCM, 2019-09-15) Sears, Catherine R.; Peikert, Tobias; Possick, Jennifer D.; Naidoo, Jarushka; Nishino, Mizuki; Patel, Sandip P.; Camus, Philippe; Gaga, Mina; Garon, Edward B.; Gould, Michael K.; Limper, Andrew H.; Montgrain, Philippe R.; Travis, William D.; Rivera, M. Patricia; Medicine, School of Medicine
    Rationale: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have revolutionized cancer care but are associated with unique adverse events, including potentially life-threatening pneumonitis. The diagnosis of ICI-pneumonitis is increasing; however, the biological mechanisms, clinical and radiologic features, and the diagnosis and management have not been well defined. Objectives: To summarize evidence, identify knowledge and research gaps, and prioritize topics and propose methods for future research on ICI-pneumonitis. Methods: A multidisciplinary group of international clinical researchers reviewed available data on ICI-pneumonitis to develop and refine research questions pertaining to ICI-pneumonitis. Results: This statement identifies gaps in knowledge and develops potential research questions to further expand knowledge regarding risk, biologic mechanisms, clinical and radiologic presentation, and management of ICI-pneumonitis. Conclusions: Gaps in knowledge of the basic biological mechanisms of ICI-pneumonitis, coupled with a precipitous increase in the use of ICIs alone or combined with other therapies, highlight the importance in triaging research priorities for ICI-pneumonitis.