Browsing by Author "Henry, Elizabeth"

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Challenges and Opportunities in Developing an Oncology Clinical Trial Network in the United States Veterans Affairs Health Care System: The VA STARPORT Experience
    (MDPI, 2024-08-21) Solanki, Abhishek A.; Zheng, Kevin; Skipworth, Alicia N.; Robin, Lisa M.; Leparski, Ryan F.; Henry, Elizabeth; Rettig, Matthew; Salama, Joseph K.; Ritter, Timothy; Jones, Jeffrey; Quek, Marcus; Chang, Michael; Block, Alec M.; Welsh, James S.; Kumar, Aryavarta; Chao, Hann-Hsiang; Chen, Albert C.; Shapiro, Ronald; Bitting, Rhonda L.; Kwon, Robert; Stross, William; Puckett, Lindsay; Wong, Yu-Ning; Nickols, Nicholas G.; Carlson, Kimberly; VA STARPORT Investigators Group; Radiation Oncology, School of Medicine
    The United States Veterans Affairs (VA) Health Care System has a strong history of conducting impactful oncology randomized clinical trials (RCTs). We developed a phase II/III RCT to test the use of metastasis-directed therapy in Veterans with oligometastatic prostate cancer (OMPC)-the first VA RCT in OMPC that leverages novel imaging and advanced radiotherapy techniques. To accomplish this, we developed a clinical trial network to conduct the study. In this manuscript, we describe several challenges we encountered in study development/conduct and our strategies to address them, with the goal of helping investigators establish robust study networks to conduct clinical trials. In the study start-up, we encountered challenges in timely site activation, and leveraged project management to maximize efficiency. Additionally, there were several changes in the clinical paradigms in imaging and treatment that led to protocol amendments to ensure maximum equipoise, recruitment, and impact of the study. Specifically, we amended the trial to add de novo OMPC patients (from initially only recurrent OMPC) and expanded the study to allow up to 10 metastases (from initially five). Finally, in order to maintain local study team engagement, we developed initiatives to maximize collaboration and add value to the overall clinical program through study participation.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Making National Cancer Institute-Designated Comprehensive Cancer Center Knowledge Accessible to Community Oncologists via an Online Tumor Board: Longitudinal Observational Study
    (JMIR, 2022-05-19) Kalra, Maitri; Henry, Elizabeth; McCann, Kelly; Karuturi, Meghan S.; Bustamante Alvarez, Jean G.; Parkes, Amanda; Wesolowski, Robert; Wei, Mei; Mougalian, Sarah S.; Durm, Gregory; Qin, Angel; Schonewolf, Caitlin; Trivedi, Meghna; Armaghani, Avan J.; Wilson, Frederick H.; Iams, Wade T.; Turk, Anita A.; Vikas, Praveen; Cecchini, Michael; Lubner, Sam; Pathak, Priyadarshini; Spencer, Kristen; Koshkin, Vadim S.; Labriola, Matthew K.; Marshall, Catherine H.; Beckermann, Katy E.; theMednet.org NCI-CCC Tumor Board Program Collaborative Group; Sharifi, Marina N.; Bejjani, Anthony C.; Hotchandani, Varsha; Housri, Samir; Housri, Nadine; Medicine, School of Medicine
    Background: Expert knowledge is often shared among multidisciplinary academic teams at tumor boards (TBs) across the country, but these conversations exist in silos and do not reach the wider oncology community. Objective: Using an oncologist-only question and answer (Q&A) website, we sought to document expert insights from TBs at National Cancer Institute-designated Comprehensive Cancer Centers (NCI-CCCs) to provide educational benefits to the oncology community. Methods: We designed a process with the NCI-CCCs to document and share discussions from the TBs focused on areas of practice variation on theMednet, an interactive Q&A website of over 13,000 US oncologists. The faculty translated the TB discussions into concise, non-case-based Q&As on theMednet. Answers were peer reviewed and disseminated in email newsletters to registered oncologists. Reach and engagement were measured. Following each Q&A, a survey question asked how the TB Q&As impacted the readers' practice. Results: A total of 23 breast, thoracic, gastrointestinal, and genitourinary programs from 16 NCI-CCC sites participated. Between December 2016 and July 2021, the faculty highlighted 368 questions from their TBs. Q&As were viewed 147,661 times by 7381 oncologists at 3515 institutions from all 50 states. A total of 277 (75%) Q&As were viewed every month. Of the 1063 responses to a survey question on how the Q&A affected clinicians' practices, 646 (61%) reported that it confirmed their current practice, 163 (20%) indicated that a Q&A would change their future practice, and 214 (15%) reported learning something new. Conclusions: Through an online Q&A platform, academics at the NCI-CCCs share knowledge outside the walls of academia with oncologists across the United States. Access to up-to-date expert knowledge can reassure clinicians' practices, significantly impact patient care in community practices, and be a source of new knowledge and education.