Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 5 de 5
Filter
Add more filters











Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
J Health Care Poor Underserved ; 35(2): 425-438, 2024.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38828574

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: There are significant inequities in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening and outcomes. Via literature review, we assessed CRC screening rates for the vulnerable populations served by free clinics. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted for publications on CRC screening in free clinics. Outcomes included CRC screening characteristics, population demographics, and limitations. A methodological quality assessment was completed. RESULTS: Out of 63 references, six studies were included, representing 8,844 participants. Black or Hispanic participants were the plurality in all but one study. All participants were uninsured. Median CRC screening rate was 48.4% (range 6.6-78.9%). Screening methods included colonoscopy, fecal occult blood test, flexible sigmoidoscopy, and fecal immunochemical test. Clinics offering only one screening method had a mean screening rate of 7.2% while those with multiple methods had a screening rate of 65.4%. CONCLUSION: Access to multiple CRC screening modalities correlates with higher screening rates in free clinics. More work is needed to increase CRC screening in free clinics.


Subject(s)
Colorectal Neoplasms , Early Detection of Cancer , Humans , Colorectal Neoplasms/diagnosis , Early Detection of Cancer/statistics & numerical data , Medically Uninsured/statistics & numerical data , Health Services Accessibility , Ambulatory Care Facilities , Occult Blood
2.
Acad Med ; 99(9): 1032-1037, 2024 Sep 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38466619

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: Letters of recommendations (LORs) are key components of academic medicine applications. Given that bias against students and trainees underrepresented in medicine (UIM) has been demonstrated across assessment, achievement, and advancement domains, the authors reviewed studies on LORs to assess racial, ethnic, and UIM differences in LORs. Standardized LORs (SLORs), an increasingly common form of LORs, were also assessed for racial and ethnic differences. METHOD: A systematic review was conducted for English-language studies that assessed racial or ethnic differences in LORs in academic medicine published from database inception to July 16, 2023. Studies evaluating SLORs underwent data abstraction to evaluate their impact on the given race or ethnicity comparison and outcome variables. RESULTS: Twenty-three studies describing 19,012 applicants and 41,925 LORs were included. Nineteen studies (82.6%) assessed LORs for residency, 4 (17.4%) assessed LORs for fellowship, and none evaluated employment or promotion. Fifteen of 17 studies (88.2%) assessing linguistic differences reported a significant difference in a particular race or ethnicity comparison. Of the 7 studies assessing agentic language (e.g., "strong," "confident"), 1 study found fewer agentic terms used for Black and Latinx applicants, and 1 study reported higher agency scores for Asian applicants and applicants of races other than White. There were mixed results for the use of communal and grindstone language in UIM and non-UIM comparisons. Among 6 studies, 4 (66.7%) reported that standout language (e.g., "exceptional," "outstanding") was less likely to be ascribed to UIM applicants. Doubt-raising language was more frequently used for UIM trainees. When SLORs and unstructured LORs were compared, fewer linguistic differences were found in SLORs. CONCLUSIONS: There is a moderate bias against UIM candidates in the domains of linguistic differences, doubt-raising language, and topics discussed in LORs, which has implications for perceptions of competence and ability in the high-stakes residency and fellowship application process.


Subject(s)
Racism , Humans , Correspondence as Topic , School Admission Criteria/statistics & numerical data , Ethnicity/statistics & numerical data , Ethnicity/psychology , Internship and Residency , Students, Medical/psychology , Students, Medical/statistics & numerical data
3.
Adv Radiat Oncol ; 9(1): 101313, 2024 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38260218

ABSTRACT

Purpose: Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) is considered the standard of care for medically inoperable early-stage non-small cell lung cancer. There is mixed evidence on the prognostic significance of tumor metabolic activity assessed by positron emission tomography combined with computed tomography (PET/CT) using F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG). The objectives of this study were to evaluate the maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax) pretreatment and at 3 and 6 months after SBRT for prediction of tumor control and survival outcomes. Methods and Materials: Consecutive patients from a single institution with T12N0M0 non-small cell lung cancer receiving primary treatment with SBRT with pretreatment FDG-PET/CT (n = 163) and follow-up FDG-PET/CT at 3 or 6 months (n = 71) were included. Receiver operator characteristic analysis was performed to dichotomize variables for Kaplan-Meier survival analysis. Multivariate analysis was performed with Cox proportional hazards regression. Results: Median follow-up was 19 months. For the whole cohort, 1-year and 2-year local control, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) were 95.0% and 80.3%, 87.1% and 75.4%, and 67.0% and 49.6% respectively. The following pre-SBRT SUVmax cutoffs were significant: SUV > 4.0 for distant failure-free survival (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 3.33, P = .006), >12.3 for PFS (aHR, 2.80, P = .011), and >12.6 for OS (aHR, 3.00, P = .003). SUVmax decreases of at least 45% at 3 months (aHR, 0.15, P = .018), and 53% at 6 months (aHR, 0.12, P = .046) were associated with improved local failure-free survival. Conclusions: Pre-SBRT SUVmax cutoffs can predict distant failure, PFS, and OS. At both 3 and 6 months after SBRT, cutoffs for percentage change in SUVmax can potentially stratify risk of local recurrence.

4.
Pract Radiat Oncol ; 12(3): 200-209, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35177369

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) has become the standard of care for medically inoperable early-stage non-small cell lung cancer. We investigated 2 modalities of lung SBRT, CyberKnife (CK) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT), for differences in dosimetric parameters, tumor control, and clinical outcomes. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Patients who underwent SBRT for T1-2N0M0 non-small cell lung cancer from 2012 to 2018 were included. Dosimetric parameters for target volume coverage and organ-at-risk dose distribution were collected. Survival outcomes were evaluated using the Kaplan-Meier method with log-rank test. A multivariate Cox proportional hazards model was analyzed for local, regional, and distant tumor control; overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival; and radiation pneumonitis. RESULTS: Two hundred twenty-seven patients (142 CK, 85 VMAT SBRT) met inclusion criteria. Overall, the local, regional, and distant control rates were 89.3%, 86.3%, and 87.4% at 2 years, and the OS was 67.5% and 32.8% at 2 and 5 years, respectively. VMAT delivered higher maximum doses to the gross tumor volume and planning target volume and had a lower lung and heart V5. Although there was no difference in local or distant failure, progression-free survival, or OS, VMAT was associated with superior freedom from regional failure (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.26; P = .045). With no difference between treatment modalities, 11.9% of patients developed grade 1 to 2 radiation pneumonitis. There were no grade 3+ events of radiation pneumonitis. CONCLUSIONS: This study revealed that VMAT and CK provided comparable local and distant control and survival outcomes; however, VMAT exhibited better regional control. Further study in this regard is imperative.


Subject(s)
Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung , Lung Neoplasms , Radiation Pneumonitis , Radiosurgery , Radiotherapy, Intensity-Modulated , Small Cell Lung Carcinoma , Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung/pathology , Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung/radiotherapy , Humans , Lung Neoplasms/pathology , Particle Accelerators , Radiation Pneumonitis/etiology , Radiosurgery/methods , Radiotherapy Dosage , Radiotherapy Planning, Computer-Assisted/methods , Radiotherapy, Intensity-Modulated/methods
5.
Clin Lymphoma Myeloma Leuk ; 21(11): 741-751, 2021 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34253497

ABSTRACT

Multiple myeloma is the second most common hematologic malignancy and remains incurable. Patients who fail multiple lines of therapy typically have a poor prognosis despite recent advances in myeloma treatment. Chimeric antigen receptor T (CAR T) cell treatment has emerged as a promising therapy for many hematologic malignancies, including recently approved and emerging applications for myeloma treatment. A systematic review of the available clinical trial data for CAR T therapies in multiple myeloma was undertaken. All multiple myeloma trials registered at ClinicalTrials.gov were reviewed and studies mentioning CAR T and studying relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (R/R MM) were included. PubMed, Google Scholar, and conference proceedings were also reviewed to determine which trials had reported data. Twenty-seven registered clinical trials in humans with published data were identified as of March 10, 2021. The majority of these trials were CAR T cells targeting B-cell maturation antigen (BCMA), and many were Phase I studies. Data demonstrated promising short-term (<12 months) efficacy with low incidence of grade 3 or higher toxicities. CAR T cell therapy in R/R MM remains a promising treatment modality. While one biologic has recently received FDA-approval, the majority of products remain investigational and in early-phase trials. More investigation is needed to determine which CAR T constructs and combination therapies optimize patient outcomes.


Subject(s)
Immunotherapy, Adoptive/methods , Multiple Myeloma/drug therapy , Humans
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL