BACKGROUND. Serous and mucinous ovarian tumors of low malignant potential (LMP-S and LMP-M, respectively) are noninvasive tumors that portend excellent survival when confined to the ovary. Comparison of the survival for women with LMP tumors staged as distant with women who have carcinoma may have important implications for diagnostic terminology and clinical management. METHODS. The authors compared relative survival rates among patients diagnosed with ovarian tumors during the period 1988-1999 (with follow-up through 2000) by histologic type, disease stage, tumor grade (for carcinomas), and patient age, using data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program. RESULTS. The overall relative survival rate at 10 years (Ϯ 1.96 standard errors) was 96.9% Ϯ 2.3% for women with LMP-S tumors, 30.4% Ϯ 1.7% for women with serous carcinoma (CA-S); 94.0% Ϯ 3.1% for women with LMP-M tumors, and 64.7% Ϯ 3.4% for women with mucinous carcinoma (CA-M). The survival rate at 10 years for women with distant-stage LMP-S tumors was 89.9% Ϯ 5.3%, compared with 96.1% Ϯ 8.6% for women with well differentiated, localized CA-S. The survival rate for women with distant-stage LMP-M tumors at 5 years was 85.5% Ϯ 9.0%, compared with 95.5% Ϯ 3.4% for women with well differentiated, localized CA-M (data for 10 years were limited). Mucinous ovarian neoplasms were associated with an excess of second malignancies of the digestive tract. CONCLUSIONS. Relative survival among women with distant-stage LMP tumors was not 100% and resembled the survival of women who had carcinoma exhibiting favorable prognostic features (localized stage). Future studies of women with high-stage LMP tumors are required to clarify the pathogenesis of extraovarian lesions and their implications for management and prognosis.
Racial and ethnic diversity has historically been difficult to achieve in National Cancer Institute-sponsored clinical trials, even while as many as 80% of those trials have faced difficulty in meeting overall recruitment targets. In an attempt to address these issues, NRG Oncology recently convened a comprehensive workshop titled "Clinical Trials Enrollment: Challenges and Opportunities." Discussants at the workshop included representatives of the three legacy groups of the NRG (ie, Gynecologic Oncology Group, National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Program, and Radiation Therapy Oncology Group), a minority-based community clinical oncology program, a large integrated health care system, the leadership of the National Cancer Institute, and a large patient advocacy group. This article summarizes the concepts discussed at the workshop, which included: needs assessments, infrastructural support, training of investigators and research staff, specific clinical trial recruitment strategies (both system and community based), and development and mentoring of young investigators. Many new, more specific tactics, including use of diverse cancer care settings, direct-to-consumer communication, and the need for centralized information technology such as the use of software to match trials to special populations, are presented. It was concluded that new, innovative trial designs and the realities of limited funding would require the adoption of effective and efficient recruiting strategies, specialized training, and stakeholder engagement. US clinical research programs must generate and embrace new ideas and pilot test novel recruitment strategies if they are to maintain their historic role as world leaders in cancer care innovation and delivery.
Purpose To identify patient and physician factors related to enrollment onto Gynecologic Oncology Group (GOG) trials. Methods Prospective study of women with primary or recurrent cancer of the uterus or cervix treated at a GOG institution from July 2010 to January 2012. Logistic regression examined probability of availability, eligibility and enrollment in a GOG trial. Odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for significant (p<0.05) results reported. Results Sixty institutions, 781 patients, and 150 physicians participated, 300/780 (38%) had a trial available, 290/300 had known participation status. Of these, 150 women enrolled (59.5%), 102 eligible did not enroll (35%), 38 (13%) were ineligible. Ethnicity and specialty of physician, practice type, data management availability, and patient age were significantly associated with trial availability. Patients with ≥ 4 comorbidities (OR 4.5; CI 1.7-11.8) had higher odds of trial ineligibility. Non-White patients (OR 7.9; CI 1.3-46.2) and patients of Black physicians had greater odds of enrolling (OR 56.5; CI 1.1- 999.9) in a therapeutic trial. Significant patient therapeutic trial enrollment factors: belief trial may help (OR 76.9; CI 4.9->1000), concern about care if not on trial (OR12.1; CI 2.1-71.4), pressure to enroll (OR .27; CI 0.12-.64), caregiving without pay (OR 0.13; CI.02-.84). Significant physician beliefs were: patients would not do well on standard therapy (OR 3.6; CI 1.6-8.4), and trial would not be time consuming (OR 3.3; CI 1.3-8.1). Conclusions Trial availability, patient and physician beliefs were factors identified that if modified could improve enrollment in cancer cooperative group clinical trials.
Cancer in Maryland is a serious health concern for minority and underserved populations in rural and urban areas. This report describes the National Cancer Institute (NCI) supported Maryland Special Populations Cancer Network (MSPN), a community-academic partnership. The MSPN's priority populations include African Americans, Native Americans, and other medically underserved residents of rural and urban areas. The MSPN has established a community infrastructure through formal collaborations with several community partners located in Baltimore City, the rural Eastern Shore, and Southern and Western Maryland, and among the Piscataway Conoy Tribe and the other 27 Native American Tribes in Maryland. Key partners also include the University of Maryland Eastern Shore and the University of Maryland Statewide Health Network. The MSPN has implemented innovative and successful programs in cancer health disparities research, outreach, and training; clinical trials education, health disparities policy, and resource leveraging. The MSPN addresses the goal of the NCI and the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) to reduce and eventually eliminate cancer health disparities. Community-academic partnerships are the foundation of this successful network.
Mobile health units are increasingly utilized to address barriers to mammography screening. Despite the existence of mobile mammography outreach throughout the US, there is a paucity of data describing the populations served by mobile units and the ability of these programs to reach underserved populations, address disparities, and report on outcomes of screening performance. To evaluate the association of variables associated with outcomes for women undergoing breast cancer screening and clinical evaluation on a mobile unit. Retrospective analysis of women undergoing mammography screening during the period 2008–2010. Logistic regression was fitted using generalized estimating equations to account for potential repeat annual visits to the mobile unit. In total, 4,543 mammograms and/or clinical breast exams were conducted on 3,923 women with a mean age of 54.6, 29 % of whom had either never been screened or had not had a screening in 5 years. Age < 50 years, lack of insurance, Hispanic ethnicity, current smoking, or having a family relative (<50 years of age) with a diagnosis of cancer were associated with increased odds of a suspicious mammogram finding (BIRADS 4,5,6). Thirty-one breast cancers were detected. The mobile outreach initiative successfully engaged many women who had not had a recent mammogram. Lack of insurance and current smoking were modifiable variables associated with abnormal screens requiring follow up.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.