No abstract

Melanoma is a public health concern for all ethnic populations. Differences in disease stage at presentation contributes to disparities in survival. Understanding melanoma in minority populations may lead to early detection and ultimately save lives.

Stage migration is evident in the SEER registries in consort with increasing use of SLN biopsy. Although treatment trends are improving, SLN biopsy continues to be underused, particularly in the elderly and minority populations, in patients with truncal and head/neck melanomas, and also in some geographic regions of the United States.

The application of orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) for patients with hepatocellular cancer (HCC) necessitates highly selective criteria to maximize survival and to optimize allocation of a scarce resource. The objective of this study was to compare the outcomes of OLT for HCC in patients transplanted under Milan and UCSF criteria. The United Network of Organ Sharing (UNOS) database was queried for patients who had undergone OLT for HCC from 2002 to 2007, and 1,972 patients (Milan criteria, n = 1, 913; UCSF criteria, n = 59) were identified. Patients were stratified by pretransplant criteria (Milan versus UCSF), and clinical and pathologic factors and overall survival were compared. There were no differences in age, gender, diabetes mellitus, body mass index, and hepatitis B, or C status between the two groups. Overall survival was similar between the Milan and UCSF cohorts (1-, 2-, 3-, and 4-year survival rates: 88%, 81%, 76%, and 72% versus 91%, 80%, 68% and 51%, respectively, P = 0.21). Although the number of patients within UCSF criteria was small, our results nevertheless suggest that patients with HCC may have equivalent survival when transplanted under Milan and UCSF criteria. Long-term followup may better determine whether UCSF criteria should be widely adopted.

SUMMARYMost phase II screening designs available in the literature consider one treatment at a time. Each study is considered in isolation. We propose a more systematic decision-making approach to the phase II screening process. The sequential design allows for more efficiency and greater learning about treatments. The approach incorporates a Bayesian hierarchical model that allows combining information across several related studies in a formal way and improves estimation in small data sets by borrowing strength from other treatments. The design incorporates a utility function that includes sampling costs and possible future payoff. Computer simulations show that this method has high probability of discarding treatments with low success rates and moving treatments with high success rates to phase III trial.