Project description:Cardio-oncology is a multidisciplinary field focusing on the management and prevention of cardiovascular complications in cancer patients and survivors. While the initial focus of this specialty was on heart failure associated with anthracycline use, novel anticancer agents are increasingly utilized and are associated with many other cardiotoxicities including hypertension, arrhythmias and vascular disease. Since its inception, the field has developed at a rapid pace with the establishment of programs at many major academic institutions and community practices. Given the complexities of this patient population, it is important for providers to possess knowledge of not only cardiovascular disease but also cancer subtypes and their specific therapeutics. Developing a cardio-oncology program at a stand-alone cancer center can present unique opportunities and challenges when compared to those affiliated with other institutions including resource allocation, cardiovascular testing availability and provider education. In this review, we present our experiences establishing the cardio-oncology program at Moffitt Cancer Center and provide guidance to those individuals interested in developing a program at a similar independent cancer institution.
Project description:As the immuno-oncology field continues the rapid growth witnessed over the past decade, optimising patient outcomes requires an evolution in the current response-assessment guidelines for phase 2 and 3 immunotherapy clinical trials and clinical care. Additionally, investigational tools-including image analysis of standard-of-care scans (such as CT, magnetic resonance, and PET) with analytics, such as radiomics, functional magnetic resonance agents, and novel molecular-imaging PET agents-offer promising advancements for assessment of immunotherapy. To document current challenges and opportunities and identify next steps in immunotherapy diagnostic imaging, the National Cancer Institute Clinical Imaging Steering Committee convened a meeting with diverse representation among imaging experts and oncologists to generate a comprehensive review of the state of the field.
Project description:Schistosomiasis remains a health burden in many parts of the world. The complex life cycle of Schistosoma parasites and the economic and societal conditions present in endemic areas make the prospect of eradication unlikely in the foreseeable future. Continued and vigorous research efforts must therefore be directed at this disease, particularly since only a single World Health Organization (WHO)-approved drug is available for treatment. The National Institutes of Health (NIH)-National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) Schistosomiasis Resource Center (SRC) at the Biomedical Research Institute provides investigators with the critical raw materials needed to carry out this important research. The SRC makes available, free of charge (including international shipping costs), not only infected host organisms but also a wide array of molecular reagents derived from all life stages of each of the three main human schistosome parasites. As the field of schistosomiasis research rapidly advances, it is likely to become increasingly reliant on omics, transgenics, epigenetics, and microbiome-related research approaches. The SRC has and will continue to monitor and contribute to advances in the field in order to support these research efforts with an expanding array of molecular reagents. In addition to providing investigators with source materials, the SRC has expanded its educational mission by offering a molecular techniques training course and has recently organized an international schistosomiasis-focused meeting. This review provides an overview of the materials and services that are available at the SRC for schistosomiasis researchers, with a focus on updates that have occurred since the original overview in 2008.
Project description:ImportanceOlder patients with cancer and their caregivers worry about the effects of cancer treatment on aging-related domains (eg, function and cognition). Quality conversations with oncologists about aging-related concerns could improve patient-centered outcomes. A geriatric assessment (GA) can capture evidence-based aging-related conditions associated with poor clinical outcomes (eg, toxic effects) for older patients with cancer.ObjectiveTo determine whether providing a GA summary and GA-guided recommendations to oncologists can improve communication about aging-related concerns.Design, setting, and participantsThis cluster-randomized clinical trial enrolled 541 participants from 31 community oncology practices within the University of Rochester National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program from October 29, 2014, to April 28, 2017. Patients were aged 70 years or older with an advanced solid malignant tumor or lymphoma who had at least 1 impaired GA domain; patients chose 1 caregiver to participate. The primary outcome was assessed on an intent-to-treat basis.InterventionsOncology practices were randomized to receive either a tailored GA summary with recommendations for each enrolled patient (intervention) or alerts only for patients meeting criteria for depression or cognitive impairment (usual care).Main outcomes and measuresThe predetermined primary outcome was patient satisfaction with communication about aging-related concerns (modified Health Care Climate Questionnaire [score range, 0-28; higher scores indicate greater satisfaction]), measured after the first oncology visit after the GA. Secondary outcomes included the number of aging-related concerns discussed during the visit (from content analysis of audiorecordings), quality of life (measured with the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy scale for patients and the 12-Item Short Form Health Survey for caregivers), and caregiver satisfaction with communication about aging-related patient concerns.ResultsA total of 541 eligible patients (264 women, 276 men, and 1 patient did not provide data; mean [SD] age, 76.6 [5.2] years) and 414 caregivers (310 women, 101 men, and 3 caregivers did not provide data; mean age, 66.5 [12.5] years) were enrolled. Patients in the intervention group were more satisfied after the visit with communication about aging-related concerns (difference in mean score, 1.09 points; 95% CI, 0.05-2.13 points; P = .04); satisfaction with communication about aging-related concerns remained higher in the intervention group over 6 months (difference in mean score, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.04-2.16; P = .04). There were more aging-related conversations in the intervention group's visits (difference, 3.59; 95% CI, 2.22-4.95; P < .001). Caregivers in the intervention group were more satisfied with communication after the visit (difference, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.12-1.98; P = .03). Quality of life outcomes did not differ between groups.Conclusions and relevanceIncluding GA in oncology clinical visits for older adults with advanced cancer improves patient-centered and caregiver-centered communication about aging-related concerns.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02107443.