PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Justin E Bekelman

Publications and source records attributed to Justin E Bekelman.

5 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2006

Effectiveness of radiation therapy in older women with ductal carcinoma in situ.

BACKGROUND: For women with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), radiation therapy after conservative surgery lowers the risk of recurrence. However, emerging evidence suggests that radiation therapy confers only a marginal absolute benefit for older women with DCIS. In a cohort of older women with DCIS, we sought to determine whether radiation therapy was associated with a clinically significant benefit. METHODS: Using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare database from January 1, 1992, through December 31, 1999, we identified 3409 women aged 66 years or older treated with conservative surgery for DCIS. A proportional hazards model tested whether radiation therapy was associated with a lower risk of a combined outcome, defined as a subsequent ipsilateral in situ or invasive breast cancer reported by SEER and/or a subsequent mastectomy reported by Medicare claims. The 5-year event risk was determined for patients without and with high-risk features, which were defined as at least one of the following: age 66-69 years, tumor larger than 2.5 cm, comedo histology, and/or high grade. All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS: Radiation therapy was associated with a lower risk for each component of the combined outcome (hazard ratio = 0.32, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.24 to 0.44). For high-risk patients, the 5-year event risk was 13.6% without radiation therapy versus 3.8% with radiation therapy (difference = 9.8%, 95% CI = 6.5 to 13.2; P<.001). For low-risk patients, the 5-year event risk was 8.2% without radiation therapy versus 1.0% with radiation therapy (difference = 7.2%, 95% CI = 3.6 to 10.9; P<.001). Among healthy women aged 66-79 years, the number needed to treat with radiation therapy to prevent one event in 5 years was 11 for high-risk patients and 15-16 for low-risk patients. CONCLUSION: For older women with DCIS, radiation therapy appears to confer a substantial benefit that remains meaningful even among low-risk patients.

Age Factors↗
PubMed2006

Trends in the use of postoperative radiotherapy for resected non-small-cell lung cancer.

PURPOSE: A 1998 meta-analysis of postoperative radiotherapy (PORT) for non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) found that PORT did not improve outcomes. Yet practice guidelines differ in their recommendations with regard to PORT use. We examine temporal trends in PORT use before and after the 1998 meta-analysis. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Using data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Program, we identified 22,953 patients with Stage I, II, or IIIA NSCLC who had resection between 1992 and 2002 in the United States and characterized each patient according to nodal status (N0, N1, or N2 disease). We measured use of PORT by calendar year. We examined the association between clinical and demographic characteristics and receipt of PORT using logistic regression. RESULTS: For N0, N1, and N2 NSCLC, PORT use has declined. The proportion of patients with N0 disease receiving PORT declined from 8% in 1992 to 4% in 2002. For patients with N1 disease, PORT use declined from 51% in 1992 to 19% in 2002; and for patients with N2 disease, PORT use declined from 65% in 1992 to 37% in 2002. CONCLUSION: In the context of uncertainty about what constitutes optimal adjuvant treatment for resected NSCLC, PORT use has substantially declined.

Adult↗
PubMed2006

Effectiveness of radiation therapy for older women with early breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Recent clinical trials have questioned the necessity of breast radiation therapy for older women with early breast cancer. However, the effectiveness of radiation therapy for older women in the community setting has not been addressed. METHODS: We used the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare database from January 1, 1992, through December 31, 1999, to identify 8724 women aged 70 years or older treated with conservative surgery for small, lymph node-negative, estrogen receptor-positive (or unknown receptor status) breast cancer. We used a proportional hazards model to test whether radiation therapy was associated with a lower risk of a combined outcome, defined as a second ipsilateral breast cancer reported by SEER and/or a subsequent mastectomy reported by Medicare claims. All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS: Radiation therapy, compared with no radiation therapy, was associated with a lower risk of the combined outcome (hazard ratio = 0.19, 95% confidence interval = 0.14 to 0.28). Radiation therapy was associated with an absolute risk reduction of 4.0 events per 100 women at 5 years (i.e., from 5.1 events without radiation therapy to 1.1 with radiation therapy) and 5.7 events per 100 persons at 8 years (i.e., from 8.0 events without radiation therapy to 2.3 with radiation therapy) (P < .001, log-rank test). Radiation therapy was most likely to benefit those aged 70-79 years without comorbidity (number needed to treat [NNT] to prevent one event = 21 to 22 patients) and was least likely to benefit those aged 80 years or older with moderate to severe comorbidity (NNT = 61 to 125 patients). CONCLUSION: For older women with early breast cancer, radiation therapy was associated with a lower risk of a second ipsilateral breast cancer and subsequent mastectomy. Patients aged 70-79 years with minimal comorbidity were the most likely to benefit, and older patients with substantial comorbidity were least likely to benefit.

Age Factors↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Scope and impact of financial conflicts of interest in biomedical research: a systematic review.

CONTEXT: Despite increasing awareness about the potential impact of financial conflicts of interest on biomedical research, no comprehensive synthesis of the body of evidence relating to financial conflicts of interest has been performed. OBJECTIVE: To review original, quantitative studies on the extent, impact, and management of financial conflicts of interest in biomedical research. DATA SOURCES: Studies were identified by searching MEDLINE (January 1980-October 2002), the Web of Science citation database, references of articles, letters, commentaries, editorials, and books and by contacting experts. STUDY SELECTION: All English-language studies containing original, quantitative data on financial relationships among industry, scientific investigators, and academic institutions were included. A total of 1664 citations were screened, 144 potentially eligible full articles were retrieved, and 37 studies met our inclusion criteria. DATA EXTRACTION: One investigator (J.E.B.) extracted data from each of the 37 studies. The main outcomes were the prevalence of specific types of industry relationships, the relation between industry sponsorship and study outcome or investigator behavior, and the process for disclosure, review, and management of financial conflicts of interest. DATA SYNTHESIS: Approximately one fourth of investigators have industry affiliations, and roughly two thirds of academic institutions hold equity in start-ups that sponsor research performed at the same institutions. Eight articles, which together evaluated 1140 original studies, assessed the relation between industry sponsorship and outcome in original research. Aggregating the results of these articles showed a statistically significant association between industry sponsorship and pro-industry conclusions (pooled Mantel-Haenszel odds ratio, 3.60; 95% confidence interval, 2.63-4.91). Industry sponsorship was also associated with restrictions on publication and data sharing. The approach to managing financial conflicts varied substantially across academic institutions and peer-reviewed journals. CONCLUSIONS: Financial relationships among industry, scientific investigators, and academic institutions are widespread. Conflicts of interest arising from these ties can influence biomedical research in important ways.

Academies and Institutes↗