Cancer Centers in the News

The following links highlight some of the most up-to-date news from the 27 NCCN Member Institutions. The media coverage below includes major national news outlets, industry magazines, medical journals, and press releases.

The news is listed in reverse chronological order for ease of use.

11/20/2017
NCCN, in Collaboration with Pfizer, Awards Nine Grants for Quality Improvement in Breast Cancer Care

NCCN and Pfizer announce funding for projects evaluating different clinical care pathways to improve breast cancer care, with a particular emphasis on underserved patients.

FORT WASHINGTON, PA [November 20, 2017] — The National Comprehensive Cancer Network® (NCCN®) Oncology Research Program (ORP) and Pfizer Global Medical Grants today announced they have awarded funding to nine projects that use clinical care pathways to implement quality improvement (QI) initiatives along the continuum of care for underserved patients with breast cancer.

Some of the selected projects examine care choices, including how to optimize chemotherapy delivery, manage symptoms, adhere to guidelines, improve clinical pathways, and utilize shared decision-making. Other projects concentrate on specific patient groups, such as African Americans, younger women, and patients living in rural areas.

“Our Request for Proposals (RFP) specifically sought out centers that focus on treating underserved patients with cancer,” explained Susan Most, RN, MBA, director of clinical operations, NCCN ORP. “By highlighting technological advances and multidisciplinary collaboration, we hope to encourage the widespread adoption of best practices for reducing costs and improving quality in breast cancer patient care.”

More than 90 letters of intent were submitted to the RFP and subsequently 23 full proposals were requested for review.

“The volume of proposals submitted speaks to the significant unmet need in this area,” said Julia Perkins Smith, MD, vice president, Oncology Medical North America, Pfizer. “We were very impressed with the quality of the proposals we received from academic and community medical systems across the country and are very excited to announce the grant recipients.”

A review committee – led by NCCN and including a medical representative from Pfizer – approved the following proposals:

  • East Carolina University; Improving the Quality of Breast Cancer Care in an Underserved Rural Setting
  • Emory University School of Medicine; Care Pathway Development, Implementation and Assessment to Improve Outcomes in African American (AA) Breast Cancer Patients
  • Intermountain Healthcare; Improving Clinical Pathways and Care Delivery in Breast Cancer
  • Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine; Reducing Discontinuation Rate of Adjuvant Endocrine Therapy through Symptom Monitoring and Management
  • Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine; Optimizing Delivery of Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy to Breast Cancer Patients who are Appropriate Candidates at Johns Hopkins
  • Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine; Innovating Patient-Facing Care Pathways in Breast Cancer using the 4R model, 4R = Right Information / Care / Patient / Time
  • Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine; Statewide Learning Collaborative to Improve Adherence to Breast Cancer Guidelines
  • Roswell Park Alliance Foundation; Breast Cancer Pathways Impact on Shared Decision Making and Patient Experience In Academic and Community Practice
  • University of Nebraska Board of Regents dba University of Nebraska Medical Center; Clinical Pathway for the Timely & Appropriate Treatment and Support of Young Women Diagnosed with Breast Cancer

“We are pleased to work with Pfizer to help bring about better experiences and results for patients with breast cancer,” said Most.

The projects are set to begin in January 2018 and run for two years. Each program is required to provide evidence of scalability and sustainability. Data based on the project outcomes will be evaluated and disseminated in early 2020.

This is the third collaboration between NCCN ORP and Pfizer. NCCN ORP has a history of strong and enduring collaborations with investigators and industry. For more information about NCCN ORP, visit NCCN.org/ORP.

# # #

About the National Comprehensive Cancer Network

The National Comprehensive Cancer Network® (NCCN®), a not-for-profit alliance of 27 leading cancer centers devoted to patient care, research, and education, is dedicated to improving the quality, effectiveness, and efficiency of cancer care so that patients can live better lives. Through the leadership and expertise of clinical professionals at NCCN Member Institutions, NCCN develops resources that present valuable information to the numerous stakeholders in the health care delivery system. As the arbiter of high-quality cancer care, NCCN promotes the importance of continuous quality improvement and recognizes the significance of creating clinical practice guidelines appropriate for use by patients, clinicians, and other health care decision-makers.

The NCCN Member Institutions are: Fred & Pamela Buffett Cancer Center, Omaha, NE; Case Comprehensive Cancer Center/University Hospitals Seidman Cancer Center and Cleveland Clinic Taussig Cancer Institute, Cleveland, OH; City of Hope Comprehensive Cancer Center, Los Angeles, CA; Dana-Farber/Brigham and Women’s Cancer Center | Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, Boston, MA; Duke Cancer Institute, Durham, NC; Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA; Huntsman Cancer Institute at the University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT; Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center/Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins, Baltimore, MD; Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center of Northwestern University, Chicago, IL; Mayo Clinic Cancer Center, Phoenix/Scottsdale, AZ, Jacksonville, FL, and Rochester, MN; Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY; Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL; The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center - James Cancer Hospital and Solove Research Institute, Columbus, OH; Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, NY; Siteman Cancer Center at Barnes-Jewish Hospital and Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO; St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital/The University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, TN; Stanford Cancer Institute, Stanford, CA; University of Alabama at Birmingham Comprehensive Cancer Center, Birmingham, AL; UC San Diego Moores Cancer Center, La Jolla, CA; UCSF Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, San Francisco, CA; University of Colorado Cancer Center, Aurora, CO; University of Michigan Comprehensive Cancer Center, Ann Arbor, MI; The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; University of Wisconsin Carbone Cancer Center, Madison, WI; Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Nashville, TN; and Yale Cancer Center/Smilow Cancer Hospital, New Haven, CT.

Clinicians, visit NCCN.org. Patients and caregivers, visit NCCN.org/patients. Media, visit NCCN.org/news. Follow NCCN on Twitter @NCCNnews and Facebook @National.Comprehensive.Cancer.Network.

>View Article<



11/16/2017
Smoking after a cancer diagnosis - Lighting up can be a source of shame and treatment complications for cancer patients, but Fred Hutch researchers are here to help them quit
>View Article<



11/07/2017
The Importance of a Partner in Cancer Therapy

NCCN Foundation Young Investigator Award Spotlight
This feature article is part of an ongoing installment highlighting the research and accomplishments of past recipients of the NCCN Foundation Young Investigator Awards. In 2017, the spotlight series focuses on the 2015 NCCN Foundation Young Investigator Awardees whose research was presented during the NCCN 22nd Annual Conference.


The Importance of a Partner in Cancer Therapy 

Study finds that married or partnered patients are more likely to receive and complete guidelines-concordant cancer

Whether or not a patient is married is an understood predictor in clinical outcomes, including in patients with cancer. While researchers know that partnered patients have better overall survival than unmarried patients, it is unknown exactly why.

To further investigate this issue, Christine M. Veenstra, MD, MSHP, a medical oncologist at University of Michigan Comprehensive Cancer Center, set out to study outcomes among patients with stage III colon cancer, comparing the treatment and outcomes of patients who were married or partnered against those who were not.

Veenstra was a 2015 recipient of the NCCN Foundation® Young Investigator Award, which funds promising researchers early in their careers.

The partnered patient population

Veenstra and colleagues examined medical records for nearly 400 patients within the Michigan Cancer Research Consortium with stage III colon cancer, noting their partnered status, and compared the treatment that the patients received to the recommendations from the National Comprehensive Cancer Network® (NCCN®) as outlined in the 2015 version of the NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines®) for Colon Cancer.

According to Veenstra, because the NCCN Guidelines® for stage III resected colon cancer are clear, comprehensive, and evidence-based, they provide an excellent case for investigating concordance. The protocol outlined in the 2015 Guidelines included surgery, followed by six months of adjuvant chemotherapy, preferably two-drug combination chemotherapy.

While 85% of the patients studied received either combination or single-agent chemotherapy, partnered patients were far more likely to complete the six-month course, perhaps also increasing their likelihood of overall survival.

“We found that patients who had a partner were almost twice as likely to complete the full six months of chemotherapy. This finding is important as it points to a possible mechanism for improved outcomes that we had not recognized earlier,” said Veenstra.

Although the state of partnership does not change the physical characteristics of one’s cancer or the likelihood of his or her response to treatment, there are theories for this disparity. Regarding the specific treatments outlined in this study, the most common side effect and reason patients give for stopping treatment was neuropathy.

“Partners may help patients manage and cope with the physical side effects of treatment, as well as provide important encouragement and positive support that unpartnered patients do not necessarily have,” explained Veenstra. She also noted that general support could be a factor, such as someone to provide transportation or fill prescriptions at the pharmacy.

Bridging the gap

Now that Veenstra has identified a mechanism behind improved outcomes for a particular patient population, work can immediately be done to improve adherence to NCCN Guidelines-concordant care in unpartnered patients. One way to do this, Veenstra says, is to train clinicians to recognize and be aware of the risks facing unpartnered patients. 

“The unpartnered patient population is at risk of not completing or receiving recommended care. We must work to ensure that support systems are in place so that patients are able to stay the course of treatment,” Veenstra. These support systems can include extended family and friends, as well as local support groups and patient advocacy organizations.

Veenstra acknowledges that there are a few more steps to her research. Next, she plans to work directly with patients and their partners.

“I am interviewing patients and their partners about the role that the partners play and its impact on the patient—I want to be able to look at this from the couple’s perspective—in their own words,” said Veenstra.

She also plans to extend her research across the cancer care continuum, particularly surveillance of high-risk survivors and their partners, to better understand how clinicians can intervene to improve quality of care.

Advancing the care of patients with cancer

In 2015, Veenstra was one of five grant recipients through the NCCN Foundation Young Investigator Award program, which funded her research for this project. The NCCN Young Investigator Awards provide vital funding to some of the nation’s top next-generation cancer researchers guiding the course of treatment innovation and advancement. Moreover, the program makes it possible for junior faculty to develop the unique skillset necessary in a today’s competitive research environment by enabling them to balance research and clinical duties early in their careers, as well as introducing them to a network of senior investigators from leading cancer centers.

Through the grant program, young investigators, like Veenstra, are nominated by leaders at NCCN Member Institutions for their dedication to discovering cutting-edge breakthroughs and interventions in cancer care.

“The NCCN Foundation Young Investigator Award has been critical in this early point in my research career. It has provided the support for the study, as well as protected my time as a researcher to build my research program in this area so that I can grow to become an independent researcher,” said Veenstra.

Veenstra notes that funding from the NCCN Foundation allowed her to advance her research, and she has since received a National Cancer Institute Cancer Prevention, Control, Behavioral Sciences, and Population Sciences Career Development Award (K07), which is supporting the aforementioned interview trial.

“It is important at an early stage of a research career to have the opportunity to grow and attain grants to build and expand studies. It’s the Young Investigator Award that protects this time for me,” said Veenstra.

Dr. Veenstra’s study, Partnered Status & Receipt of NCCN Guideline-Concordant Colon Cancer Care, was presented at the General Poster Session during the NCCN 22nd Annual Conference in March 2017.

More information is available at JNCCN.org.

###

>View Article<



10/25/2017
Fred Hutch researchers engineer complex TCR immunotherapy that may target relapsing leukemia (Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center)
>View Article<



10/24/2017
New Study Finds Hospital Emergency Departments Should Improve Practices for Treating Older Adults with Cancer

Original research in JNCCN advocates for hospital emergency departments to develop systems that will reduce unnecessary hospitalizations for older patients with cancer.

[FORT WASHINGTON, PA — October 24, 2017] A new study finds that patients with cancer, especially those aged 75 or older, are more likely to be admitted to the hospital – and less likely to be observed and released home – than patients without cancer. That’s despite the fact that inpatient admission is not always the best treatment option available. Observation status is often preferable because it minimizes patients' exposure to the inconvenience and risk of a hospital admission, while also reserving hospital resources for those who need it most.

The research was led by Allison Lipitz-Snyderman, PhD, Assistant Attending Outcomes Research Scientist, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, along with Adam Klotz, MD; Renee L. Gennarelli, MS; and Jeffrey Groeger, MD. The findings were published in the October issue of JNCCN – Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network.

Allison Lipitz-Snyderman, PhD, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center

“Observation status allows for additional time to be certain that a patient's clinical status is stabilized and that the correct diagnosis has been made, providing the treating staff, patient, and caregiver with a greater feeling of security upon discharge,” explained Dr. Groeger. “Not all acutely ill patients in the emergency department will ultimately require inpatient admission prior to safe discharge. Patients in observation status should be suitable for rapid discharge once symptoms resolve or diagnoses are confirmed.”

After adjusting for patient characteristics, the researchers determined that there were only 43 observation status visits per 1,000 inpatient admissions among patients with cancer, versus 69 per 1,000 among the cancer-free group. In fact, cancer-free patients with prior inpatient admission were still more likely to be placed on observation status than those with cancer but without prior hospitalizations.

The research focused on Medicare beneficiaries aged 66 and older. Dr. Lipitz-Snyderman and her team analyzed SEER-Medicare data for a total of 151,193 patients with cancer, matched to a demographically similar control group. Those with cancer had been diagnosed with breast, colon, lung, or prostate cancer between 2006 and 2008.

Dr. Lipitz-Snyderman recommends more research to determine where there are opportunities to develop standards for emergency department staff to treat older patients with cancer in the most optimal way.

“By implementing a set of standards and treatment protocols for addressing specific clinical conditions, we can increase the systematic use of observation status for patients with cancer,” said Dr. Groeger. “Some examples include the management of pain, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, constipation, cellulitis, hypercalcemia, and steroid related hyperglycemia. Additionally, partnering with medical and surgical consultants can offer significant relief to patients with pleural effusions, ascites, as well as those with malfunction around the placement of catheters and drains.”

“This study raises important questions about how to provide medical care for older adults with cancer who present to the emergency department,” said Dr. Louise C. Walter, MD, Professor of Medicine, Chief, Division of Geriatrics, UCSF Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center. Dr. Walter is a member of the NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines®) Panel for Older Adult Oncology. “As a geriatrician, I would go beyond advocating for developing standards for emergency department staff to manage more patients with cancer in observation status. We need to think broadly about the best location to provide medical care for this population. This should include implementing more Hospital at Home models and Housecalls programs to provide the same level of acute care for certain conditions in a patient's home, in order to avoid the hazards of long emergency department stays and unnecessary hospitalizations.”

Complimentary access to the study, “A Population-Based Assessment of Emergency Department Observation Status for Older Adults with Cancer,” is available until December 11, 2017 on JNCCN.org.  

###

About JNCCN—Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network
More than 25,000 oncologists and other cancer care professionals across the United States read JNCCN—Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network. This peer-reviewed, indexed medical journal provides the latest information about best clinical practices, health services research, and translational medicine. JNCCN features updates on the NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines®), review articles elaborating on guidelines recommendations, health services research, and case reports highlighting molecular insights in patient care. JNCCN is published by Harborside Press. Visit JNCCN.org. To inquire if you are eligible for a FREE subscription to JNCCN, visit http://www.nccn.org/jnccn/subscribe.asp. Follow JNCCN on Twitter @JNCCN.

About the National Comprehensive Cancer Network
The National Comprehensive Cancer Network® (NCCN®), a not-for-profit alliance of leading cancer centers devoted to patient care, research, and education, is dedicated to improving the quality, effectiveness, and efficiency of cancer care so that patients can live better lives. Through the leadership and expertise of clinical professionals at NCCN Member Institutions, NCCN develops resources that present valuable information to the numerous stakeholders in the health care delivery system. As the arbiter of high-quality cancer care, NCCN promotes the importance of continuous quality improvement and recognizes the significance of creating clinical practice guidelines appropriate for use by patients, clinicians, and other health care decision-makers.

The NCCN Member Institutions are: Fred & Pamela Buffett Cancer Center, Omaha, NE; Case Comprehensive Cancer Center/University Hospitals Seidman Cancer Center and Cleveland Clinic Taussig Cancer Institute, Cleveland, OH; City of Hope Comprehensive Cancer Center, Los Angeles, CA; Dana-Farber/Brigham and Women’s Cancer Center | Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, Boston, MA; Duke Cancer Institute, Durham, NC; Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA; Huntsman Cancer Institute at the University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT; Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center/Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins, Baltimore, MD; Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center of Northwestern University, Chicago, IL; Mayo Clinic Cancer Center, Phoenix/Scottsdale, AZ, Jacksonville, FL, and Rochester, MN; Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY; Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL; The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center - James Cancer Hospital and Solove Research Institute, Columbus, OH; Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, NY; Siteman Cancer Center at Barnes-Jewish Hospital and Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO; St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital/The University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, TN; Stanford Cancer Institute, Stanford, CA; University of Alabama at Birmingham Comprehensive Cancer Center, Birmingham, AL; UC San Diego Moores Cancer Center, La Jolla, CA; UCSF Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, San Francisco, CA; University of Colorado Cancer Center, Aurora, CO; University of Michigan Comprehensive Cancer Center, Ann Arbor, MI; The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; University of Wisconsin Carbone Cancer Center, Madison, WI; Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Nashville, TN; and Yale Cancer Center/Smilow Cancer Hospital, New Haven, CT.

Clinicians, visit NCCN.org. Patients and caregivers, visit NCCN.org/patients. Media, visit NCCN.org/news. Follow NCCN on Twitter @NCCNnews and Facebook @National.Comprehensive.Cancer.Network.

>View Article<



10/19/2017
New Patient Guidelines from the National Comprehensive Cancer Network Offer Much-Needed Clarity around a Group of Rare Blood Cancers

New NCCN Guidelines for Patients® cover the basics and beyond for patients and caregivers coping with myeloproliferative neoplasms.

[FORT WASHINGTON, PA  — October 19, 2017] – Patients with blood cancers known as myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPN) have a new resource to help guide them through diagnosis and treatment, in the form of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network® (NCCN®)’s latest addition to the NCCN Guidelines for Patients®. This NCCN Guidelines for Patients focuses on the three most-prevalent types of MPN: polycythemia vera (PV), essential thrombocythemia (ET), and myelofibrosis (MF), which affect approximately 148,000, 134,000 and 13,000 patients in the United States, respectively. [1] Funding for these patient guidelines was provided through the NCCN Foundation® and the MPN Research Foundation.

“As a physician, I find it makes a difference when patients and caregivers have access to the information they need when making treatment decisions, to complement what they’re hearing from me,” explained Brady L. Stein, MD, MHS, Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center of Northwestern University. Dr. Stein is a member of the NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines®) Panel for MPN. “Sitting in the hematologists’ office can be an overwhelming experience. These patient guidelines provide the most comprehensive at-home resource available for people with these rare diseases. They cover everything from basic explanations to complicated decision-making around diagnostic confirmation, supportive care techniques, treatment sequencing, adverse effects, and more.”

According to Dr. Stein, it’s not uncommon for patients diagnosed with MPN not to understand at first that their condition technically represents a chronic form of blood cancer, or that it can progress. In fact, most patients and caregivers have never even heard of MPN prior to diagnosis.

“When I was first diagnosed with ET, I actually left the office feeling relieved,” said Christy Sayre, a patient living with MPN. “It wasn’t until my pharmacist explained I had a prescription for a chemotherapy drug, that I really had any idea that I had cancer. I just assumed I’d only be taking a blood thinner. I’m grateful that these patient guidelines are helping me to understand what’s going on in my body, and why this chemotherapy is the right treatment path for me.”

“Having this free information available online and on their smartphones is particularly important for patients who can’t just reach out to a friend or relative who’s been through the same experience,” said Robert W. Carlson, MD, NCCN Chief Executive Officer. “The goal is not just to make them feel more informed, but also less isolated.”

NCCN Guidelines for Patients and NCCN Quick Guide™ sheets—one-page summaries of key points in the patient guidelines—are written in plain language and include patient-friendly tools, such as suggested questions for doctors, a glossary of terms, and medical illustrations of anatomy, tests, and treatment. They are based on the same clinical practice guidelines used by health care professionals around the world to determine the best way to treat a person with cancer. Each resource features unbiased expert guidance from the nation’s leading cancer centers designed to help people living with cancer understand and discuss their treatment options with their providers.

The NCCN Guidelines for Patients and NCCN Quick Guide™ sheet for MPN are available to read and download for free online at NCCN.org/patients and via the NCCN Patient Guides for Cancer mobile app. Printed editions can also be ordered from Amazon.com for a small fee.

NCCN currently offers NCCN Guidelines for Patients for the following: Brain, Breast, Colon, Esophageal, Kidney, Non-Small Cell Lung*, Ovarian, Pancreatic, Prostate, Rectal, Stomach and Thyroid Cancers; Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia; Adolescents and Young Adults with Cancer; Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia; Chronic Myelogenous Leukemia*; Distress/Supportive Care; Hodgkin Lymphoma; Lung Cancer Screening; Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma; Melanoma*; Multiple Myeloma*; Myelodysplastic Syndromes*; Myeloproliferative Neoplasms; Nausea and Vomiting/Supportive Care; Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphomas; Soft Tissue Sarcoma; and Waldenström’s Macroglobulinemia. * Indicates NCCN Guidelines with new updates coming soon.

NCCN Guidelines for Patients and NCCN Quick Guide™ sheets DO NOT replace the expertise and clinical judgment of the clinician.

###

About MPN Research Foundation

The MPN Research Foundation is the only organization fully dedicated to funding research into the myeloproliferative neoplasms, a rare group of blood cancers which include polycythemia vera, essential thrombocythemia and myelofibrosis. Founded in 2000 by a group of patients, the focus is to fund high innovation research that can expand our understanding of the MPNs and get us closer to a cure.

The Foundation’s Scientific Advisory Board works with the patient-led board of directors to utilize a rigorous selection process to ensure donations are allocated to the most innovative research projects. To date, the Foundation has awarded twelve million dollars for MPN research. More information may be obtained at http://www.mpnresearchfoundation.org/myMPN or by contacting us at mwoehrle(at)mpnrf.org or 312-683-7243.

MPN Research Foundation remains committed to a portfolio of research funding that includes an annual Request for Proposals for new scientific ideas of how to help patients with PV, ET and MF, as well as strategic research initiatives focused on areas of unmet need that could prove fruitful for improving the quality and/or length of life for MPN patients. You are invited to learn more at http://www.mpnresearchfoundation.org

About NCCN Foundation

NCCN Foundation® was founded by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network® (NCCN®) to empower people with cancer and advance oncology innovation. NCCN Foundation supports people with cancer and their caregivers at every step of their treatment journey by delivering unbiased expert guidance from the world’s leading cancer experts through the library of NCCN Guidelines for Patients® and other patient education resources. NCCN Foundation is also committed to advancing cancer treatment by funding the nation’s promising young investigators at the forefront of cancer research, initiating momentum in their careers and furthering the betterment of patients through their groundbreaking innovations. For more information about NCCN Foundation, visit http://www.nccnfoundation.org.

About the National Comprehensive Cancer Network

The National Comprehensive Cancer Network® (NCCN®), a not-for-profit alliance of 27 leading cancer centers devoted to patient care, research, and education, is dedicated to improving the quality, effectiveness, and efficiency of cancer care so that patients can live better lives. Through the leadership and expertise of clinical professionals at NCCN Member Institutions, NCCN develops resources that present valuable information to the numerous stakeholders in the health care delivery system. As the arbiter of high-quality cancer care, NCCN promotes the importance of continuous quality improvement and recognizes the significance of creating clinical practice guidelines appropriate for use by patients, clinicians, and other health care decision-makers.

The NCCN Member Institutions are: Fred & Pamela Buffett Cancer Center, Omaha, NE; Case Comprehensive Cancer Center/University Hospitals Seidman Cancer Center and Cleveland Clinic Taussig Cancer Institute, Cleveland, OH; City of Hope Comprehensive Cancer Center, Los Angeles, CA; Dana-Farber/Brigham and Women’s Cancer Center | Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, Boston, MA; Duke Cancer Institute, Durham, NC; Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA; Huntsman Cancer Institute at the University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT; Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center/Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins, Baltimore, MD; Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center of Northwestern University, Chicago, IL; Mayo Clinic Cancer Center, Phoenix/Scottsdale, AZ, Jacksonville, FL, and Rochester, MN; Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY; Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL; The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center - James Cancer Hospital and Solove Research Institute, Columbus, OH; Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, NY; Siteman Cancer Center at Barnes-Jewish Hospital and Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO; St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital/The University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, TN; Stanford Cancer Institute, Stanford, CA; University of Alabama at Birmingham Comprehensive Cancer Center, Birmingham, AL; UC San Diego Moores Cancer Center, La Jolla, CA; UCSF Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, San Francisco, CA; University of Colorado Cancer Center, Aurora, CO; University of Michigan Comprehensive Cancer Center, Ann Arbor, MI; The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; University of Wisconsin Carbone Cancer Center, Madison, WI; Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Nashville, TN; and Yale Cancer Center/Smilow Cancer Hospital, New Haven, CT.

Clinicians, visit NCCN.org. Patients and caregivers, visit NCCN.org/patients. Media, visit NCCN.org/news. Follow NCCN on Twitter @NCCNnews and Facebook @National.Comprehensive.Cancer.Network.

 


[1] Metha J, Wang H, Iqbal SU, Mesa R, Epidemiology of myeloproliferative neoplasms in the United States, Leuk Lymph 2014;55:595-600.

 

>View Article<



09/27/2017
Study Finds “Standard Care” Treatments in Breast Cancer Clinical Trials Not Always Standard

As reported in JNCCN, a recent study by researchers at The University of Sydney found that 29% of breast cancer clinical trials lack control arms consistent with the standard of care.

[FORT WASHINGTON, PA — September 27, 2017] Historically, randomized controlled trials have served as the state-of-the-art method for determining the efficacy and safety of new, innovative treatment regimens for patients with cancer and other diseases. It is imperative that such trials are carefully designed to ensure that they are scientifically and ethically sound and that experimental regimen is, indeed, superior or comparative to the current standard of care. Now, however, researchers from The University of Sydney, led by Rachel F. Dear, MBBS, PhD, found that 29% of breast cancer clinical trials reviewed failed to establish a control arm meeting the current standard of care.

Dr. Dear and colleagues published their findings in the September 2017 issue of JNCCN – Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network.

Rachel F. Dear, MBBS, PhD, The University of Sydney

“Inconsistency of choice of control arm undermines the quality of evidence generated by clinical trials, which in turn impacts systemic reviews, the development of clinical practice guidelines, planning of future trials, and, ultimately, patient care and outcomes,” said Dr. Dear.

The Declaration of Helsinki, which is a set of ethical rules regarding human experimentation such as clinical trials, states that the “benefits, risks, burdens, and effectiveness of a new method should be tested against those of the best current prophylactic, diagnostic, and therapeutic methods.” Therefore, modern clinical trial design should include control arms representing the most current, evidence-based treatment standards at the time of implementation.

To investigate the frequency of inappropriate comparators, the researchers analyzed phase III randomized controlled clinical trials in breast cancer—the most frequently studied cancer type worldwide. Taking studies from 2004 – 2014 comparing drug treatments to “standard of care,” the team compared the control arm drugs and dosing to the concurrent recommendations within the NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines®) for U.S. studies, and the German Gynecological Group (AGO) for European studies.

There were more than 229,000 patients enrolled in 210 trials analyzed. Sixty of the trials failed to provide control group treatment in line with the concurrent standard of care.  Among trials recruiting in the United States, the control arm was not considered standard in (11/83; 13%)—a much lower proportion than the overall cohort (60/210; 29%). In contrast, a higher proportion of trials that recruited exclusively outside of the United States were not consistent with the NCCN Guidelines (49/127; 39%).

“An inappropriate comparator, such as a drug or dose that is less effective than the standard of care, may result in a new treatment appearing more effective than it really is. Another type of inappropriate comparator may be a treatment that may not be inferior but is not provided or accepted as the standard of care, which will result in outcomes that are difficult to interpret and implement in the context of multiple standards across multiple trials,” said Dr. Dear.

In a multivariable model, it was less likely for the control arm to be consistent in trials that began in 2012–2014; involved women with early-stage breast cancer; or involved four or more countries of recruitment, or if the trial was not recruiting in the United States. Randomized breast cancer trials that included ER-positive disease were more likely to use control arms consistent with the NCCN Guidelines®.

To ensure that clinical trials achieve the ultimate goal of obtaining the best information to guide patient management, further investigation must be done as to the process of determining the optimal standard of care for clinical trial control groups, the researchers note.

“We were somewhat surprised to find little guidance available internationally to help trial investigators decide what care is appropriate to give women who are randomized to the comparison or “standard care” arm of clinical trials. Better guidance needs to be available to investigators to ensure provision of the best current care to patients in control groups of clinical trials,” Dr. Dear said.

"This study highlights the complexity when defining ‘standard care’ for the control arm of phase III clinical trials,” said Meena Moran, MD, Director of the Yale Radiation Breast Program at Yale Cancer Center/Smilow Cancer Hospital. “Other factors that need to be considered include how new fluxes of information make capturing standard of care in real time difficult, and controversies surrounding trials conducted outside of the United States. Nevertheless, this body of work provides a great starting point for identifying any deviations from ‘standard care’ in clinical trials that with further investigation, may prove to be clinically relevant or detrimental for patients.”

Complimentary access to the study, “‘Standard Care’ in Cancer Clinical Trials: An Analysis of Care Provided to Women in the Control Arms of Breast Cancer Clinical Trials,” is available until November 20, 2017 on JNCCN.org.  

###

About JNCCN—Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network
More than 24,000 oncologists and other cancer care professionals across the United States read JNCCN—Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network. This peer-reviewed, indexed medical journal provides the latest information about best clinical practices, health services research, and translational medicine. JNCCN features updates on the NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines®), review articles elaborating on guidelines recommendations, health services research, and case reports highlighting molecular insights in patient care. JNCCN is published by Harborside Press. Visit JNCCN.org. To inquire if you are eligible for a FREE subscription to JNCCN, visit http://www.nccn.org/jnccn/subscribe.asp

About the National Comprehensive Cancer Network
The National Comprehensive Cancer Network® (NCCN®), a not-for-profit alliance of leading cancer centers devoted to patient care, research, and education, is dedicated to improving the quality, effectiveness, and efficiency of cancer care so that patients can live better lives. Through the leadership and expertise of clinical professionals at NCCN Member Institutions, NCCN develops resources that present valuable information to the numerous stakeholders in the health care delivery system. As the arbiter of high-quality cancer care, NCCN promotes the importance of continuous quality improvement and recognizes the significance of creating clinical practice guidelines appropriate for use by patients, clinicians, and other health care decision-makers.

 

The NCCN Member Institutions are: Fred & Pamela Buffett Cancer Center, Omaha, NE; Case Comprehensive Cancer Center/University Hospitals Seidman Cancer Center and Cleveland Clinic Taussig Cancer Institute, Cleveland, OH; City of Hope Comprehensive Cancer Center, Los Angeles, CA; Dana-Farber/Brigham and Women’s Cancer Center | Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, Boston, MA; Duke Cancer Institute, Durham, NC; Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA; Huntsman Cancer Institute at the University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT; Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center/Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins, Baltimore, MD; Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center of Northwestern University, Chicago, IL; Mayo Clinic Cancer Center, Phoenix/Scottsdale, AZ, Jacksonville, FL, and Rochester, MN; Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY; Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL; The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center - James Cancer Hospital and Solove Research Institute, Columbus, OH; Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, NY; Siteman Cancer Center at Barnes-Jewish Hospital and Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO; St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital/The University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, TN; Stanford Cancer Institute, Stanford, CA; University of Alabama at Birmingham Comprehensive Cancer Center, Birmingham, AL; UC San Diego Moores Cancer Center, La Jolla, CA; UCSF Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, San Francisco, CA; University of Colorado Cancer Center, Aurora, CO; University of Michigan Comprehensive Cancer Center, Ann Arbor, MI; The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; University of Wisconsin Carbone Cancer Center, Madison, WI; Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Nashville, TN; and Yale Cancer Center/Smilow Cancer Hospital, New Haven, CT.

Clinicians, visit NCCN.org. Patients and caregivers, visit NCCN.org/patients. Media, visit NCCN.org/news.

>View Article<



09/07/2017
NCCN Announces First Patient Dosed in NCCN-Peregrine Pharmaceuticals Collaborative Study of Bavituximab

An NCCN ORP-funded study, examining effectiveness of bavituximab combination in patients with newly diagnosed glioblastomas, enrolled its first patient at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston, Massachusetts.

[FORT WASHINGTON, PA — September 7, 2017] Glioblastoma is the most common malignant primary brain tumor and is a uniformly fatal disease with five-year survival rates less than four percent despite aggressive treatment with surgery, radiation, and chemotherapy.1 Consequently, new therapies for this patient population are desperately needed.

The National Comprehensive Cancer Network® (NCCN®) today announced the dosing of the first patient in its Oncology Research Program (ORP)-funded study to investigate the effectiveness of bavituximab with radiation and temozolomide in patients with newly diagnosed glioblastomas.

The study, initiated by Elizabeth Gerstner, MD, Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, is one of three studies funded through a collaboration between NCCN ORP and Peregrine Pharmaceuticals—this patient marks the first enrollment into an NCCN ORP-funded investigator-initiated bavituximab trial.

“NCCN ORP congratulates Dr. Gerstner and Dana-Farber/Brigham and Women’s Cancer Center | Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center for initiation of this study, as well as the other investigators who will soon embark on their research of bavituximab in patients with cancer,” said Susan Most, MBA, RN, Director, Clinical Operations, NCCN ORP. “The fact that Peregrine Pharmaceuticals has entrusted the NCCN ORP with these investigator-initiated studies is an honor, and we are happy that patients at our esteemed institutions will have access to this novel immunotherapy.”

The following researchers received funding through a grant from Peregrine Pharmaceuticals:

  • Elizabeth Gerstner, MD, Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, “Phase II Clinical Trial of Bavituximab with Radiation and Temozolomide for Patients with Newly Diagnosed Glioblastoma”
  • Jessica Frakes, MD, Moffitt Cancer Center, “A Phase I Trial of Sorafenib and Bavituximab Plus Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy (SBRT) for First Line Treatment of Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma”
  • Ranee Mehra, MD, The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins, “Phase II Study of Pembrolizumab and Bavituximab for Progressive Recurrent/Metastatic Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Head and Neck”

Drs. Frakes and Mehra will begin enrolling patients in the coming months.

“We are hopeful that results from this trial, as well as from the two additional studies at NCCN Member Institutions, will continue to support our belief that bavituximab works to create a more immune active tumor microenvironment in which other therapies are able to have a greater anti-tumor effect,” said Joseph Shan, MPH, Vice President, Clinical and Regulatory Affairs of Peregrine. “We look forward to following this important study at the Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, as well as the planned trials at the Moffitt Cancer Center and The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins.”

Bavituximab is an investigational immune-modulatory monoclonal antibody that targets phosphatidylserine (PS), a phospholipid that inhibits the ability of immune cells to recognize and fight tumors.  Bavituximab is believed to reverse PS-mediated immunosuppression by blocking the engagement of PS with its receptors, as well as by sending an alternate immune activating signal.2 According to Peregrine, PS-targeting antibodies have been shown to shift the functions of immune cells in tumors, resulting in multiple signs of immune activation and anti-tumor immune responses. This mechanism may play an important role in allowing other cancer therapies to more effectively attack tumors by reversing the immunosuppression that limits the impact of those treatments.

Importantly, bavituximab has also demonstrated a favorable safety and tolerability profile across several clinical trials conducted to date, which may offer the compound a key advantage as the evolving cancer treatment landscape continues to shift to a combination therapy approach. 

The awardees responded to a Request for Proposals issued by ORP to the NCCN Member Institutions and their affiliate hospitals. Submissions were peer reviewed by the NCCN Bavituximab Scientific Review Committee. The funded concepts were selected based on several criteria, including scientific merit, existing data, and the types of studies necessary to further evaluate the efficacy of bavituximab.

NCCN ORP draws on the expertise of investigators from NCCN Member Institutions and their affiliated hospitals to facilitate all phases of clinical research. The research is made possible by collaborations with pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies in order to advance therapeutic options for patients with cancer.

For more information about NCCN ORP, visit NCCN.org/ORP.

###

About the National Comprehensive Cancer Network
The National Comprehensive Cancer Network® (NCCN®), a not-for-profit alliance of 27 leading cancer centers devoted to patient care, research, and education, is dedicated to improving the quality, effectiveness, and efficiency of cancer care so that patients can live better lives. Through the leadership and expertise of clinical professionals at NCCN Member Institutions, NCCN develops resources that present valuable information to the numerous stakeholders in the health care delivery system. As the arbiter of high-quality cancer care, NCCN promotes the importance of continuous quality improvement and recognizes the significance of creating clinical practice guidelines appropriate for use by patients, clinicians, and other health care decision-makers.

The NCCN Member Institutions are: Fred & Pamela Buffett Cancer Center, Omaha, NE; Case Comprehensive Cancer Center/University Hospitals Seidman Cancer Center and Cleveland Clinic Taussig Cancer Institute, Cleveland, OH; City of Hope Comprehensive Cancer Center, Los Angeles, CA; Dana-Farber/Brigham and Women’s Cancer Center | Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, Boston, MA; Duke Cancer Institute, Durham, NC; Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA; Huntsman Cancer Institute at the University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT; Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center/Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins, Baltimore, MD; Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center of Northwestern University, Chicago, IL; Mayo Clinic Cancer Center, Phoenix/Scottsdale, AZ, Jacksonville, FL, and Rochester, MN; Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY; Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL; The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center - James Cancer Hospital and Solove Research Institute, Columbus, OH; Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, NY; Siteman Cancer Center at Barnes-Jewish Hospital and Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO; St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital/The University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, TN; Stanford Cancer Institute, Stanford, CA; University of Alabama at Birmingham Comprehensive Cancer Center, Birmingham, AL; UC San Diego Moores Cancer Center, La Jolla, CA; UCSF Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, San Francisco, CA; University of Colorado Cancer Center, Aurora, CO; University of Michigan Comprehensive Cancer Center, Ann Arbor, MI; The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; University of Wisconsin Carbone Cancer Center, Madison, WI; Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Nashville, TN; and Yale Cancer Center/Smilow Cancer Hospital, New Haven, CT.

Clinicians, visit NCCN.org. Patients and caregivers, visit NCCN.org/patients. Media, visit NCCN.org/news.

 

 

1CBTRUS (2008) Statistical report: primary brain tumors in the United States, 2000-2004. Central Brain Tumor Registry of the United States.

2Yin Y, Huang X, Lynn KD, Thorpe PE. Phosphatidylserine-targeting antibody induces M1 macrophage polarization and promotes myeloid-derived suppressor cell differentiation. Cancer immunology research 2013 Oct; 1(4): 256-268.

 

 

>View Article<



08/18/2017
Link between Air Pollution and Cancer Risk (Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center/Seattle Cancer Care Alliance)
>View Article<



08/18/2017
GIST Tumors Linked To NF1 Mutations, Genetic Testing Needed (UC San Diego Moores Cancer Center)
>View Article<



08/17/2017
Lab Tests Show Molecule Appears to Spur Cell Death in Tumors, Inflammation (Duke Cancer Institute)
>View Article<



08/17/2017
Cancer is Way More Likely to Kill You if You Rely on “Natural” Therapies (Popular Science)
>View Article<



08/16/2017
Cell Cycle-Blocking Drugs Can Shrink Tumors by Enlisting Immune System in Attack on Cancer, Study Finds (Dana-Farber/Brigham and Women’s Cancer Center | Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center)
>View Article<



08/16/2017
Scientists Develop Blood Test That Spots Tumor-Derived DNA in People With Early-Stage Cancers (The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins)
>View Article<



08/15/2017
Birth Defects, Cancer Linked (Siteman Cancer Center at Barnes-Jewish Hospital and Washington University School of Medicine)
>View Article<



08/11/2017
Ohio State Cancer Researchers Validate a Clinical Test for Fusion Genes (The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center – James Cancer Center and Solove Research Institute)
>View Article<



08/11/2017
New NCCN Patient Resources for Rectal Cancer Now Available

Together with the NCCN Guidelines for Patients®: Colon Cancer, these free resources aid in decision-making for patients with colon and rectal cancers.

 

[FORT WASHINGTON, PA — August 11, 2017] It is estimated that more than 39,900 new cases of Rectal Cancer and more than 95,000 new cases of Colon Cancer will be diagnosed this year in the United States. In fact, Colorectal Cancer—Colon and Rectal Cancers together—is the third most commonly diagnosed cancer in both men and women.1 While Colon and Rectal Cancers share like disease symptoms and characteristics, it is imperative that patients with Rectal Cancer have access to treatment information tailored specifically to their diagnosis.

To empower patients with Rectal Cancer to make informed choices about their cancer care, the National Comprehensive Cancer Network® (NCCN®), through funding from NCCN Foundation®, have published the new NCCN Guidelines for Patients® and NCCN Quick Guide™ sheet for Rectal Cancer. These resources, as well as the NCCN patient resources for Colon Cancer published earlier this year, arm patients with the same evidence-based treatment information that their doctors use to aid in the shared-decision-making process with their care teams.

To ensure the resources get into patients’ hands, Fight Colorectal Cancer has sponsored both the NCCN Guidelines for Patients®: Colon and Rectal and directs patients to them through their medically-reviewed patient education materials on their website, such as Your Guide in the Fight and other blogs and web pages.

“NCCN Foundation is incredibly grateful to Fight Colorectal Cancer for their generous support of both the NCCN Guidelines for Patients for Colon and Rectal Cancers,” said Marcie R. Reeder, MPH, Executive Director, NCCN Foundation. “With more than 100,000 new cases of Colorectal Cancer diagnosed in the United States each year, we are pleased to now be able to empower the total patient population with the most up-to-date clinical options available to them at every stage of their cancer journey.”

NCCN Guidelines for Patients are easy-to-understand adaptations based on the same clinical practice guidelines used by health care professionals around the world to determine the best way to treat a person with cancer. Each resource features unbiased expert guidance from the nation’s leading cancer centers designed to help people living with cancer understand and discuss their treatment options with their providers.

"We are proud to support the evidence-based NCCN Guidelines for Patients for both Colon and Rectal cancers this year,” said Anjee Davis, President of Fight Colorectal Cancer. “We see these tools as invaluable resources to patients. The publications give our community the latest information on the standards of care in a patient-friendly way while providing the most updated information on clinical practice guidelines for health care providers."

“It is so important for patients and their families to have access to reliable, up-to-date and understandable information about their cancer to assist in composing questions and making decisions about their care when seeking guidance from their clinicians. The NCCN Guidelines for Patients and NCCN Quick Guide™ sheet for Rectal Cancer are such tools that we hope will be invaluable to those with rectal cancer and their friends and family as they manage the complexities of this disease,” said Al B. Benson, III, MD, Associate Director for Cooperative Groups, Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center of Northwestern University, and Chair of the NCCN Guidelines Panels for Colon, Rectal, and Anal Cancers. “Patient advocacy groups are important partners for both patients and clinicians and we are so grateful that Fight Colorectal Cancer has partnered with us at NCCN to create this new information and decision tool for patients everywhere.”

NCCN Guidelines for Patients and NCCN Quick Guide™ sheets—one-page summaries of key points in the patient guidelines—are written in plain language and include patient-friendly tools, such as questions to ask your doctor, a glossary of terms, and medical illustrations of anatomy, tests, and treatment. NCCN Guidelines for Patients and NCCN Quick Guide™ sheets DO NOT replace the expertise and clinical judgment of the clinician.

NCCN currently offers patient education materials for the following: Brain, Breast, Colon, Distress, Esophageal, Kidney, Non-Small Cell Lung, Ovarian, Pancreatic, Prostate, Rectal, Stomach, and Thyroid Cancers; Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia; Adolescents and Young Adults with Cancer; Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia; Chronic Myelogenous Leukemia; Hodgkin Lymphoma; Lung Cancer Screening; Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma; Melanoma, Multiple Myeloma; Myelodysplastic Syndromes; Nausea and Vomiting; Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphomas; Soft Tissue Sarcoma; and Waldenström’s Macroglobulinemia.

The NCCN Guidelines for Patients and NCCN Quick Guide™ sheet for Rectal Cancer are available to download free of charge from NCCN.org/patients and the NCCN Patient Guides for Cancer mobile app.

###

About NCCN Foundation®
NCCN Foundation® was founded by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network® (NCCN®) to empower people with cancer and advance oncology innovation. NCCN Foundation supports people with cancer and their caregivers at every step of their treatment journey by delivering unbiased expert guidance from the world’s leading cancer experts through the library of NCCN Guidelines for Patients® and other patient education resources. NCCN Foundation is also committed to advancing cancer treatment by funding the nation’s promising young investigators at the forefront of cancer research, initiating momentum in their careers and furthering the betterment of patients through their groundbreaking innovations. For more information about NCCN Foundation, visit NCCNFoundation.org.

About Fight Colorectal Cancer

Fight CRC is a national nonprofit advocacy organization fighting for a cure. It was founded in 2005 by Nancy Roach, a patient advocate who witnessed the need for colorectal cancer advocacy after her mother-in-law’s diagnosis. The organization plays an important role in rallying colorectal cancer advocates to action. Fight CRC is known for activism and patient empowerment throughout patient, academic, political, scientific, medical and nonprofit communities. With a mission focused on advocacy, research, patient education and awareness, the organization serves advocates in every state of the U.S. and many others around the world. Fight CRC is a 4-star charity by Charity Navigator and 93 cents of every dollar donated goes directly to colorectal cancer programs. To learn more, visit FightCRC.org.

About the National Comprehensive Cancer Network
The National Comprehensive Cancer Network® (NCCN®), a not-for-profit alliance of 27 leading cancer centers devoted to patient care, research, and education, is dedicated to improving the quality, effectiveness, and efficiency of cancer care so that patients can live better lives. Through the leadership and expertise of clinical professionals at NCCN Member Institutions, NCCN develops resources that present valuable information to the numerous stakeholders in the health care delivery system. As the arbiter of high-quality cancer care, NCCN promotes the importance of continuous quality improvement and recognizes the significance of creating clinical practice guidelines appropriate for use by patients, clinicians, and other health care decision-makers.

The NCCN Member Institutions are: Fred & Pamela Buffett Cancer Center, Omaha, NE; Case Comprehensive Cancer Center/University Hospitals Seidman Cancer Center and Cleveland Clinic Taussig Cancer Institute, Cleveland, OH; City of Hope Comprehensive Cancer Center, Los Angeles, CA; Dana-Farber/Brigham and Women’s Cancer Center | Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, Boston, MA; Duke Cancer Institute, Durham, NC; Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA; Huntsman Cancer Institute at the University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT; Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center/Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins, Baltimore, MD; Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center of Northwestern University, Chicago, IL; Mayo Clinic Cancer Center, Phoenix/Scottsdale, AZ, Jacksonville, FL, and Rochester, MN; Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY; Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL; The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center - James Cancer Hospital and Solove Research Institute, Columbus, OH; Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, NY; Siteman Cancer Center at Barnes-Jewish Hospital and Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO; St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital/The University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, TN; Stanford Cancer Institute, Stanford, CA; University of Alabama at Birmingham Comprehensive Cancer Center, Birmingham, AL; UC San Diego Moores Cancer Center, La Jolla, CA; UCSF Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, San Francisco, CA; University of Colorado Cancer Center, Aurora, CO; University of Michigan Comprehensive Cancer Center, Ann Arbor, MI; The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; University of Wisconsin Carbone Cancer Center, Madison, WI; Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Nashville, TN; and Yale Cancer Center/Smilow Cancer Hospital, New Haven, CT.

Clinicians, visit NCCN.org. Patients and caregivers, visit NCCN.org/patients. Media, visit NCCN.org/news.


1"Cancer Facts & Figures 2017." American Cancer Society, n.d. Web. 27 July 2017.

>View Article<



08/10/2017
Checkpoint Inhibitors Fire Up Different Types of T Cells to Attach Tumors (The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center)
>View Article<



08/10/2017
Moffitt Cancer Center Makes Strides to Improve Quality of Cancer Care for LGBTQ Patients (Moffitt Cancer Center)
>View Article<



08/09/2017
Carbone Study Finds Protein That Improves Immune Response in Colon Cancer (University of Wisconsin Carbone Cancer Center)
>View Article<