Browsing by Author "Osarogiagbon, Raymond U."

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
    Survival impact of postoperative therapy modalities according to margin status in non–small cell lung cancer patients in the United States
    (Elsevier, 2017) Smeltzer, Matthew P.; Lin, Chun Chieh; Kong, Feng-Ming; Jemal, Ahmedin; Osarogiagbon, Raymond U.; Department of Radiation Oncology, IU School of Medicine
    Objective Unlike complete (R0) resection guidelines, current National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) adjuvant therapy guidelines after incomplete (R1/R2) resection of non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) are based on low-level evidence. We attempted to validate them. Methods Patients with pathologic stage I-IIIA NSCLC from 2004 to 2011 in the National Cancer Database were stratified by margin status, NCCN-specified stage groupings, and adjuvant therapy exposure (none, radiotherapy, chemotherapy, or both). Five-year overall survival (OS) and hazard ratios, adjusted for patient and institutional characteristics, were compared. We used a parallel analysis of R0 resections to validate our methodology. Results We analyzed 3461 R1/R2, and 78,979 R0 resections. After R0 resection, the NCCN-recommended option was associated with the best survival across all stage groups, supporting our analytic approach. Patients with R1/R2 stage IA treated with radiation had a 26% OS, compared with 58% with no treatment (P = .003). In patients with stage IB/IIA(N0) R1/R2, radiation was associated with a 25% OS compared with 47% with no treatment (P = .025) and 62% with chemotherapy (P < .007). Chemoradiation was not associated with a survival benefit in either group. Patients with IIA(N1)/IIB and IIIA had better survival with chemotherapy or chemoradiation. No group had a survival benefit with radiation alone. Conclusions NCCN adjuvant therapy guidelines after complete resection, based on high-level evidence, are validated, but not guidelines for patients with incompletely resected early-stage NSCLC, which are based on low-level evidence. Monomodality postoperative radiotherapy was not validated for any stage. Specific studies are needed to determine optimal management after incomplete resection.