Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology
-
The guideline aims to optimize health and quality of life for the post-treatment prostate cancer survivor by comprehensively addressing components of follow-up care, including health promotion, prostate cancer surveillance, screening for new cancers, long-term and late functional effects of the disease and its treatment, psychosocial issues, and coordination of care between the survivor's primary care physician and prostate cancer specialist. ⋯ Assess information needs related to prostate cancer, prostate cancer treatment, adverse effects, and other health concerns and provide or refer survivors to appropriate resources. Measure prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level every 6 to 12 months for the first 5 years and then annually, considering more frequent evaluation in men at high risk for recurrence and in candidates for salvage therapy. Refer survivors with elevated or increasing PSA levels back to their primary treating physician for evaluation and management. Adhere to ACS guidelines for the early detection of cancer. Assess and manage physical and psychosocial effects of prostate cancer and its treatment. Annually assess for the presence of long-term or late effects of prostate cancer and its treatment.
-
Approximately 1% of lung adenocarcinomas are driven by oncogenic ROS1 rearrangement. Crizotinib is a potent inhibitor of both ROS1 and ALK kinase domains. ⋯ Crizotinib was highly active at treating lung cancer in patients with a ROS1 rearrangement, suggesting that patients with lung adenocarcinomas should be tested for ROS1. Prospective clinical trials with crizotinib and other ROS1 inhibitors are ongoing or planned.
-
Breast cancer risk prediction models have underestimated risk for African American women, contributing to lower recruitment rates in prevention trials. A model previously developed for African American women was found to underestimate risk in the Black Women's Health Study (BWHS). ⋯ The BWHS model was well calibrated overall, and the predictive ability was best for younger women. The proportion of women predicted to meet the 1.66% cut point commonly used to determine eligibility for breast cancer prevention trials was greatly increased relative to previous models.