Browsing by Author "Garrett-Mayer, Elizabeth"

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Changes in breast density and circulating estrogens in postmenopausal women receiving adjuvant anastrozole
    (AACR, 2011-12) Prowell, Tatiana M.; Blackford, Amanda L.; Byrne, Celia; Khouri, Nagi F.; Dowsett, Mitchell; Folkerd, Elizabeth; Tarpinian, Karineh S.; Powers, Pendleton P.; Wright, Laurie A.; Donehower, Michele G.; Jeter, Stacie C.; Armstrong, Deborah K.; Emens, Leisha A.; Fetting, John H.; Wolff, Antonio C.; Garrett-Mayer, Elizabeth; Skaar, Todd C.; Davidson, Nancy E.; Stearns, Vered
    Factors associated with an increased risk of breast cancer include prior breast cancer, high circulating estrogens, and increased breast density. Adjuvant aromatase inhibitors are associated with a reduction in incidence of contralateral breast cancer. We conducted a prospective, single-arm, single-institution study to determine whether use of anastrozole is associated with changes in contralateral breast density and circulating estrogens. Eligible patients included postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive early-stage breast cancer who had completed local therapy, had an intact contralateral breast, and were recommended an aromatase inhibitor as their only systemic therapy. Participants received anastrozole 1 mg daily for 12 months on study. We assessed contralateral breast density and serum estrogens at baseline, 6, and 12 months. The primary endpoint was change in contralateral percent breast density from baseline to 12 months. Secondary endpoints included change in serum estrone sulfate from baseline to 12 months. Fifty-four patients were accrued. At 12 months, compared with baseline, there was a nonstatistically significant reduction in breast density (mean change: -16%, 95% CI: -30 to 2, P = 0.08) and a significant reduction in estrone sulfate (mean change: -93%, 95% CI: -94 to -91, P < 0.001). Eighteen women achieved 20% or greater relative reduction in contralateral percent density at 12 months compared with baseline; however, no measured patient or disease characteristics distinguished these women from the overall population. Large trials are required to provide additional data on the relationship between aromatase inhibitors and breast density and, more importantly, whether observed changes in breast density correlate with meaningful disease-specific outcomes.
  • 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
    Modernizing Clinical Trial Eligibility Criteria: Recommendations of the ASCO-Friends of Cancer Research Performance Status Work Group
    (American Association for Cancer Research, 2021-05-01) Magnuson, Allison; Bruinooge, Suanna S.; Singh, Harpreet; Wilner, Keith D.; Jalal, Shadia; Lichtman, Stuart M.; Kluetz, Paul G.; Lyman, Gary H.; Klepin, Heidi D.; Fleury, Mark E.; Hirsch, Brad; Melemed, Allen; Arnaldez, Fernanda I.; Roy, Upal Basu; Schenkel, Caroline; Sherwood, Shimere; Garrett-Mayer, Elizabeth; Medicine, School of Medicine
    Purpose: Performance status (PS) is one of the most common eligibility criteria. Many trials are limited to patients with high-functioning PS, resulting in important differences between trial participants and patient populations with the disease. In addition, existing PS measures are subjective and susceptible to investigator bias. Experimental design: A multidisciplinary working group of the American Society of Clinical Oncology and Friends of Cancer Research evaluated how PS eligibility criteria could be more inclusive. The working group recommendations are based on a literature search, review of trials, simulation study, and multistakeholder consensus. The working group prioritized inclusiveness and access to investigational therapies, while balancing patient safety and study integrity. Results: Broadening PS eligibility criteria may increase the number of potentially eligible patients for a given clinical trial, thus shortening accrual time. It may also result in greater participant diversity, potentially reduce trial participant and patient disparities, and enable clinicians to more readily translate trial results to patients with low-functioning PS. Potential impact on outcomes was explored through a simulation trial demonstrating that when the number of Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group PS2 participants was relatively small, the effect on the estimated HR and power was modest, even when PS2 patients did not derive a treatment benefit. Conclusions: Expanding PS eligibility criteria to be more inclusive may be justified in many cases and could result in faster accrual rates and more representative trial populations.