2

CANCER CENTER HAPPENINGS

RUSH UNIVERSITY CANCER CENTER AT A GLANCE

CANCER RESEARCH PROGRAM

SUPPORTING PATIENTS THROUGH CANCER

SOLVING THE PUZZLE OF LUNG CANCER

LOW-TEMPERATURE PLASMA SCALPEL

PHOTOIMMUNOTHERAPY FOR HEAD AND NECK CANCERS

IMPROVING DIAGNOSTICS FOR LYMPHOMA

INTEGRATING BIG DATA WITH CANCER CARE

QUALITY OF LIFE AFTER SKULL BASE AND SINUS TUMOR SURGERY

BREAST CANCER RESEARCHER PROFILE

DISEASE SITE PROGRAMS

CANCER REGISTRY REPORT

REPRESENTATIVE PUBLICATIONS

Table of Contents

Cancer care is extremely complicated. And it’s getting more complex every day — from intricate radiotherapies to advanced immunotherapies to revolutionary cancer surgeries. On top of this, we are caring for a patient population that is emotionally, physically and sometimes financially stressed.

That’s why integration is at the core of everything at the Rush University Cancer Center.

TREATING THE WHOLE PATIENT

At Rush, we have integrated basic sciences, clinical trials, advanced treatments and innovative surgical techniques to provide the impressive level of care patients expect from our nationally ranked academic medical center.

Rush’s strong research and scientific base gives our patients access to the latest research, immunotherapies, diagnostic technologies and surgical techniques. Notably, our clinical trials program has continued to grow this year, offering our patients access to novel therapies and specialized care from experienced providers. You can read more about our clinical trials program and immunotherapy research on page 7 of this report.

With our patients at the center of everything we do, we also recognize that they need more than just access to the most advanced treatment options. They also need personalized support.

At Rush, we are focused on helping patients navigate the complexities of cancer care. As a member of the Coleman Supportive Oncology Initiative — an innovative effort among eight Chicago medical centers to implement improvements in supportive oncology — Rush has become a leader in providing meaningful supportive care.

The supportive care program at Rush includes psychosocial support, financial assistance, patient navigation, palliative care, pain management, nutrition counseling and more for our cancer patients. You can read more about our supportive care efforts on page 9 of this report.

BRINGING IT ALL TOGETHER

By successfully integrating basic science research, clinical trials, advanced treatments and innovative surgical techniques with our dedicated supportive care program, Rush is providing truly comprehensive and personalized care to our patients.

This report highlights how we are integrating different elements of cancer care in the following areas:

• Advanced treatments, including immunotherapy and photoimmunotherapy

• Using big data to provide more accurate and personalized diagnostics and care

• State-of-the-art surgical techniques that provide more accurate diagnostics, improved quality of life, options for treating formerly inoperable cancers and lower transfusion rates

• Improved screening methods

• Clinical trials and translational research

• Supportive care that addresses the needs of the whole patient

We also present our 2015 cancer registry report on page 25.

A TEAM EFFORT

We would like to take this opportunity to thank the many organizations with which Rush collaborates to provide high-quality patient care, including the Commission on Cancer of the American College of Surgeons and the American Cancer Society.

In addition, we would like to extend our gratitude to everyone involved in the cancer program for their dedication and commitment to our patients. At each and every level at Rush, staff make unique contributions that raise our standards of care.

Chairs’ Letter

Aidnag Diaz, MD, MPHChair, Cancer Committee

Robert DeCresce, MDInterim Director, Cancer Center

Aidnag Diaz, MD, MPH, (left) and Robert DeCresce, MD

On the cover: Medical oncologist Marta Batus, MD, is working on a predictive study that uses a blood test to help determine patients who will respond best to

immunotherapies for advanced stage malignancies.

3

5

7

9

11

13

15

17

18

19

21

22

25

27

3 4

Rush University Cancer Center Happenings

IMPROVING GENETIC TESTING FOR CANCER

In 2016, the Rush Inherited Susceptibility to Cancer (RISC) Program participated in a soft launch for a genetic test that looks at a patient’s somatic mutation tumor profile in conjunction with analyzing the patient’s germline genetics. This is one of the first tests of its kind, and Rush was chosen as one of the select institutions to participate in the test’s soft launch.

The test can distinguish between somatic genetic mutations (present in malignant tissue) and germline mutations (present in every cell in the body). This type of testing can aid in more personalized treatment options for patients and find potential clinical trials for which a patient may be eligible.

ONCOLOGY CARE MODEL

In partnership with the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), clinicians from Rush are streamlining the care process for chemotherapy patients, while also improving the patient experience and outcomes through an innovative oncology care model.

The oncology care model is a new payment and delivery model created to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of cancer care for patients undergoing chemotherapy. The goals of this initiative are to improve health outcomes for cancer patients and improve the quality of cancer care from diagnosis to survivorship.

The model enables and encourages clinicians to coordinate care, allowing patients access to treatments that address their individual needs. The practice requirements of the program include the effective use of electronic health records, 24-hour access to clinicians who can consult patients’ records in real time, comprehensive treatment plans, patient navigation, using data to conduct ongoing quality improvements and using therapies consistent with nationally recognized clinical guidelines.

QUALITY IMPROVEMENTS FOR PALLIATIVE CARE

Nurses on the two inpatient hematology, oncology, stem cell transplant units launched a quality improvement project to increase screening and access to palliative care and improve holistic patient care.

Through the nurse-led initiative, staff on the unit did the following:

• Developed an evidence-based, electronic and comprehensive screening tool to help determine if patients could benefit from a palliative care consult

• Screened patients upon admission, weekly and when their status changed

• Initiated a palliative care inquiry when indicated during the screening process

This project helped increase staff awareness of palliative care through the screening process. It also increased the number of patients screened for distress to help improve access to palliative care support. Staff felt empowered to advocate for their patients’ palliative care needs and collaborate with the multidisciplinary team to enhance patient care.

INNOVATIVE ROBOTIC SURGERY FOR PROSTATE CANCER

Srinivas Vourganti, MD, urologist, is working with a novel investigational device that will allow transperineal prostate procedures, including prostate biopsy, with robotic assistance. The platform could potentially be useful in the development of novel clinical trials aimed at focal (partial gland) therapy for prostate cancer.

For prostate biopsy, the device uses a real-time, 3D image-guided system that enables the cancer foci position to be pinpointed within 1 mm accuracy.

This technique enables complete prostate coverage, while also lowering the rate of complications (e.g., sepsis, hematuria).

THE NCI-MATCH TRIAL

As part of its commitment to personalized cancer care, Rush is participating in the National Cancer Institute Molecular Analysis for Therapy Choice (NCI-MATCH) trial. This national trial matches patients who have advanced solid tumors, lymphomas and myelomas that are no longer responding to standard therapies to clinical trials with investigational drugs.

The NCI-MATCH trial analyzes patients’ biopsy specimens to determine whether they contain certain mutations for which targeted drugs exist.

Patients who have one of the mutations may be eligible to participate in a trial for a drug that has either been approved for another cancer indication or is still being tested in clinical trials.

MELANOMA SURVEILLANCE CLINIC

The Melanoma Surveillance Clinic at Rush utilizes photographic surveillance to carefully monitor high-risk patients for new or changing moles. Evidence has found that photographic surveillance can help detect melanoma earlier when it may be more curable, while also reducing the number of biopsies patients have.

This program, led by Arthur R. Rhodes, MD, allows physicians to compare all of patients’ visible moles and anatomic sites of the total skin surface to photographic baseline, which consists of at least 28 photographs.

ADVANCED CARE FOR NEUROENDOCRINE TUMORS

In 2016, Rush began the neuroendocrine tumor program. Led by Xavier M. Keutgen, MD, endocrine surgeon, the program provides comprehensive care for the following types of neuroendocrine tumors:

• Neuroendocrine tumors of the gastrointestinal tract and lungs (including carcinoid tumors)

• Neuroendocrine tumors of the pancreas (including insulinoma, gastrinoma, VIPoma, glucagonoma, somatostatinoma and nonfunctioning)

• Neuroendocrine tumors of the pituitary gland

• Neuroendocrine tumors resulting from genetic conditions such as Von Hippel-Lindau syndrome, multiple endocrine neoplasia Type 1, neurofibromatosis and tuberous sclerosis

• Medullary thyroid cancer

• Pheochromocytomas and paragangliomas

Rush is the first hospital in Chicago to use 68-Gallium DOTATATE PET CT, the most sensitive diagnostic test for neuroendocrine tumors. It pinpoints tumor location with greater than 90 percent accuracy, compared with the 30 to 70 percent accuracy of an octreotide scan, the next-most-sensitive test.

Endocrine surgeon Xavier M. Keutgen, MD

Breast surgeon Katherine Kopkash, MD, and resident

Michael Keating, MD

INTRAOPERATIVE SPECIMEN IMAGING FOR BREAST CANCER

In 2016, breast surgeons Katherine Kopkash, MD, and Andrea Madrigrano, MD, started using a 3D intraoperative specimen imaging system at Rush. Rather than sending the specimen to radiology and waiting for results, breast surgeons and radiologists can review the specimens immediately in the operating room with this system. Surgeons are then able to take more tissue if necessary.

The benefits of this system include the following:

• Shortened surgical time — an estimated 20 percent decrease in length of the procedure

• Decreased re-excision rates

• Improved cosmetic outcome due to lower volume of breast tissue removed

Rush is the only institution in the Chicago area — and one of few institutions within the Midwest — with 3D intraoperative breast specimen imaging.

4

5 6

COMPREHENSIVE CLINICS

Rush, which serves both adults and children with cancer, is home to The Coleman Foundation comprehensive clinics. These multidisciplinary clinics apply a team approach to patient care. The clinical team gathers to discuss the patient’s condition, review diagnostic tests and develop a treatment plan, often in collaboration with the patient’s diagnosing physician.

The comprehensive clinics are dedicated to the following:

• Blood cancers and bone marrow transplants

• Brain cancer

• Breast cancer

• Chest and lung tumors

• Gastrointestinal cancers

• Head and neck cancers

• Inherited susceptibility to cancer

• Leukemias

• Lymphomas

• Multiple myeloma

• Myelodysplastic/myeloproliferative neoplasms

• Prostate cancer

• Spine tumors

The cancer center also has tumor conferences for a number of different disease sites. See pages 22-24 for a complete list of disease site conferences.

SUPPORT SERVICES

Rush University Cancer Center is committed to helping patients and their families cope with the psychological, emotional and spiritual challenges often associated with a cancer diagnosis. Available support services at Rush include the following:

• Social work services, including a licensed clinical social worker dedicated to cancer patients at Rush, as well as a social worker from the American Cancer Society.

• Psychotherapy and other psychosocial oncology services to help patients, caregivers and families manage stress and physical symptoms.

• Nutrition counseling with a registered dietitian to help improve overall health and manage treatment side effects.

• Palliative care services, with recently expanded services that focus on reducing pain, stress and other symptoms.

• Pastoral services from chaplains at Rush to support the spiritual and emotional health of patients and families.

• Survivorship care planning that includes a comprehensive plan for patients and their primary care physicians regarding the care received and follow-up recommendations.

• Integrative therapies — such as acupuncture and massage therapy — through the Cancer Integrative Medicine Program.

• Genetic counselors dedicated to the cancer center to counsel patients with suspected predispositions to breast, gynecologic and gastrointestinal cancers, along with rare endocrine tumors and sarcomas.

RESIDENCY AND FELLOWSHIP PROGRAMS

• Residency in radiation oncology

• Residency in nuclear medicine

• Fellowship in hematology/medical oncology

• Fellowship in orthopedic oncology

• Fellowship in hospice and palliative medicine

• Residency in general surgery

ADVANCING MEDICINE THROUGH RESEARCH

The Rush University Cancer Center fosters research across four broad programs that aim to deepen understanding of cancer to better prevent, detect and treat it:

• Cancer biology

• Clinical, behavioral and translational research

• Molecular signatures and cancer outcomes

• Tumor immunology

Rush University Cancer Center at a GlanceThe Rush University Cancer Center comprises all cancer-related clinical, research and educational efforts at Rush, crossing 20 departments, divisions and sections; inpatient and outpatient areas; professional clinical activities; and the colleges of Rush University.

RECOGNITION AND ACCREDITATIONS

• Rush has received four consecutive outstanding achievement awards from the Commission on Cancer of the American College of Surgeons.

• The Coleman Foundation Blood and Bone Marrow Transplantation Clinic is accredited by the Foundation for the Accreditation of Cellular Therapy.

• Rush’s pathology and clinical laboratories are accredited by the Joint Commission.

• Four times in a row, Rush has received Magnet status — the highest recognition for nursing excellence — from the American Nurses Credentialing Center.

• The Regenstein Breast Imaging Center at Rush is an American College of Radiology-accredited Center of Excellence. This designation is awarded to centers that have received full accreditation in mammography, breast ultrasound, and stereotactic and ultrasound-guided needle biopsies.

• The Association for the Accreditation of Human Research Protection Programs has awarded Rush full accreditation with distinction in community programs, giving special recognition to Rush’s community-based participatory research.

• In 2016, Rush received Vizient's Quality Leadership Award, ranking No. 5 among 102 academic medical centers. It is the fourth consecutive time Rush has been ranked among the top five in the study and the eighth time since the University HealthSystem Consortium, now part of Vizient, began the study in 2005. Rush is the only medical center in Illinois to have received this award.

• The Rush Radiosurgery program is one of the few Novalis-certified radiosurgery centers in the country.

• Cancer services at Rush are consistently ranked among the best in the country by U.S. News & World Report.

FPO-urgent care clinic

SPOTLIGHT: URGENT CARE FOR CANCER PATIENTS

In 2016, the cancer center opened an urgent care, walk-in clinic specifically for cancer patients at Rush University Medical Center. The goal for the center is to help patients avoid unneeded trips to the emergency room and hospitalizations.

Location: Rush University Cancer Center, 1725 W. Harrison St., 10th floor, Chicago, IL 60612

Hours: 8 a.m. to 3 p.m., Monday through Friday

Patients who are experiencing the following symptoms during the above business hours can visit the walk-in clinic:

• Edema, including leg swelling

• Nausea and/or vomiting

• Pain

• Symptoms of low blood pressure, including dizziness, fatigue and shortness of breath

• Lightheadedness, dizziness or falls

• Diarrhea or bloody stool

• Increased fatigue

• Increased difficulty breathing (dyspnea) or increased or new cough

• Chest pain

• Fever or chills

6Nurse practitioner Terri O’Brien, MSN, RN, OCN, AGNP-C

7 8

Unprecedented Growth for Cancer Research Program Rush’s cancer clinical trials program experienced a renaissance in 2016, including the arrival of Timothy M. Kuzel, MD, as chief of the Division of Hematology, Oncology and Cell Therapy. Not only has the number of open trials multiplied — from around 30 in early 2015 to nearly 150 by the end of 2016 — but the focus of the research has broadened.

“Historically, our trials were mostly for breast cancer and lung cancer,” says Crista Brawley, PhD, CCRP, director of cancer clinical trials. “But thanks to Dr. Kuzel’s leadership and vision, we are also building up our genitourinary cancer, melanoma, lymphoma, pancreatic cancer, and head and neck cancer research programs.”

The expansion includes several early-phase, multisite trials, including studies of immunotherapy and other targeted therapies.

A PERFECT MATCH

It’s not a coincidence that the newer trials align with Rush’s patient population and areas of clinical expertise. “We want to make sure every study we take is a good fit for the types of cancers our oncologists treat,” Brawley says.

In addition to ensuring peak enrollment, this approach gives patients more treatment options at every stage of care. “Clinical trials are baked into routine cancer care here,” Brawley explains. “Our oncologists view

trials as viable options — not just last-ditch treatments — and do a terrific job of finding qualified patients to enroll. They are involved in these studies and believe in them.”

EXPLORING IMMUNOTHERAPY

Kuzel, for instance, brought his decades-long passion for immunotherapy to Rush, an institution already known for its pioneering use of immunotherapeutic agents. Rush was a leader in trials for Herceptin and TDM-1 — known as “super Herceptin” — for HER 2-positive breast cancer. Investigators at Rush have also participated in trials for lung cancer, melanoma and prostate cancer vaccines.

A nationally recognized authority in this rapidly evolving field, Kuzel is now conducting immunotherapy research at Rush across a wider range of disease sites. And he brought several basic scientists into the Division of Hematology, Oncology and Cell Therapy to help develop the next generation of targeted strategies (see sidebar).

DELIVERING A ONE-TWO PUNCH

Perhaps the most promising results are coming from combination immunotherapeutic approaches, which are being studied for patients who don’t respond to single-drug regimens.

One combined therapy already FDA-approved for melanoma marries ipilimumab and nivolumab, two checkpoint inhibitors that block receptor molecules on the surface of immune T cells. Kuzel is currently leading a trial comparing ipilimumab and nivolumab vs. anti-LAG-3 antibody and nivolumab for renal cancer; Rush was the first site in the U.S. to enroll a patient.

“We are seeing that when we combine therapies we often get higher rates of response and better efficacy,” Kuzel says. “So there is definitely reason to be encouraged by this approach.”

STREAMLINING THE PROCESS

With so many immunotherapy drugs being developed, and at such a fast pace, studying all of the various combinations is challenging. “It requires a lot of both patients and patience to get results,” Kuzel says.

To expedite the process, Rush has partnered with a pharmaceutical company to administer small, rapid rotations of various combination immunotherapies to renal cancer patients. The goal is to get these drugs to patients faster and more efficiently so clinicians can identify sooner whether a specific treatment warrants a more exhaustive trial.

“The process can take years. That’s why we are looking at novel trial designs that enable

us to know sooner whether a treatment has any merit,” Kuzel says. “If it does, we can then move more quickly into a large randomized trial that the FDA would sanction for approval.”

A PERSONALIZED APPROACH

Brawley and her colleagues in the Cancer Clinical Trials Office share Kuzel’s — and Rush’s — commitment to bringing the latest therapies to patients.

That’s why cancer research nurses participate in all comprehensive cancer clinics and conferences. “We have a seat at the table along with the physicians, so we’re able to present any trials that may be good options for specific patients,” Brawley says. “Our

“ Patients are coming to Rush for trials because we offer the novel trials they are seeking.”

- TIMOTHY M. KUZEL, MD, CHIEF OF THE DIVISION OF HEMATOLOGY, ONCOLOGY, CELL THERAPY

goal is to make sure both the care teams and patients are able to make fully informed treatment decisions.”

The cancer clinical trials staff grew by more than 200 percent in 2016 to help investigators develop, activate and manage the influx of new trials.

With Kuzel at the helm and all of the operational pieces in place, the program anticipates continued expansion. “But more important than simply increasing volumes,” Kuzel says, “patients are coming to Rush for trials because we offer the novel trials they are seeking.”

The science behind immunotherapyBasic scientists at Rush are helping to shape the future of cancer care, including these current investigations related to immunotherapy and the immune response to cancer.

THE LAB OF SASHA SHAFIKHANI, PHD

Cancer patients are often more vulnerable to infection, indicating that tumors and/or tumor therapeutics impair innate immune defenses against pathogens. Similarly, the presence of infection correlates with accelerated tumor growth, and increased morbidity and mortality, indicating that infection impairs antitumor immune defenses. Shafikhani and his team are looking at how the presence of tumor and infection may lead to a state of immune-confusion affecting both antitumor and antibacterial immune defenses. “If we can understand the root cause of immune dysregulation in cancer patients, we can try to develop therapeutics to correct this immune confusion state and enhance the patient’s immune defenses against both tumor and infection,” Shafikhani says.

8

The cancer clinical trials team (left to right): director Crista Brawley, PhD, CCRP;

clinical research coordinator Tami Burge; clinical research coordinator Olivia Pahl;

regulatory manager Dawn Paulsen

THE LAB OF AMANDA MARZO, PHD

Management of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) currently consists of multiple-modality therapies, including surgery, radiation and chemotherapy. “Although significant advances have been made in targeted therapies, HNSCC recurrence, resistance to chemo-radiotherapy and cervical lymph node metastasis remain significant factors contributing to the poor prognosis of patients with HNSCC,” says Marzo.

Marzo’s lab is attempting to identify and characterize the molecular mechanisms underlying HNSCC initiation and progression, with the goal of enabling earlier diagnosis and developing more effective treatments. The group is studying the synergistic potential in targeting a combination of IL-15 therapy with co-inhibitory molecule blockade to elicit durable antitumor immunity and enhanced immunoreactivity of tumor antigen-specific CD8 T cells.

THE LAB OF VINEET GUPTA, PHD

Gupta and his team are developing novel, immune-targeted small molecule therapeutics to treat both cancer and autoimmune diseases. The group has developed novel compounds that target tumor-associated macrophages (TAMs) in the tumor microenvironment to enhance antitumor T-cell immunity.

“These agents show high efficacy in reducing tumor burden and growth in many experimental models of solid tumors, including pancreatic cancer, breast cancer, melanoma and lung cancer,” Gupta says.

He and colleagues are also working to develop this approach into an oral agent that could potentially be a treatment for solid tumors and sarcomas; they hope to initiate phase I clinical trials in patients in the second half of 2017.

9 10

Supporting Patients Through CancerThe Institute of Medicine (IOM) report Care for the Whole Patient reported that patients are less able to adhere to their treatment and manage their illnesses and health when psychological and emotional problems are present.

In recent years, the report has helped shine the spotlight on supportive care — and the critical need for it — especially among cancer patients.

“Cancer patients’ needs are complex, and we need to have a support system to successfully manage those needs,” says Aidnag Diaz, MD, radiation oncologist and chair of the cancer committee at Rush.

THE IMPORTANCE OF SUPPORTIVE CARE

While new treatments and techniques, like immunotherapy and plasma technology, are revolutionizing cancer care — and ultimately providing cancer patients with more options and improved outcomes — strengthening supportive care can be just as important for patients’ survival.

“It doesn’t matter how advanced patients’ treatments are if they do not have the means to travel to get to an appointment, if they do not have an emotional support network, if they are struggling financially or if they are not eating right,” says Diaz. “If they don’t have these important elements in place, they’ll have a lower chance of surviving the cancer.”

Rush is providing the best of both worlds: innovative, cutting-edge treatments, along with a robust supportive care program. “That’s what comprehensive cancer care is all about,” Diaz says.

BUILDING A SUPPORTIVE CARE PROGRAM

The goal of the supportive care program at Rush is to prevent, treat or manage the symptoms of cancer, the side effects of treatment, and the psychosocial, social and spiritual problems related to cancer.

Supportive care encompasses much more than end-of-life and palliative care. At Rush, supportive care includes the following range of services:

• Distress screening

• Psychosocial services

• Pain management

• Nutritional counseling

• Complementary, alternative therapies (e.g., acupuncture, massage therapy)

• Palliative care services

• Occupational therapy

• Financial counseling and support

• Transportation services

Infusion nurse coordinator Kati Cousins, BSN, RN, OCN

DISTRESS SCREENING

An important first step in supportive care is meaningful distress screening that helps reveal the severity of patients’ psychological, social, financial, nutritional and behavioral hardships. Rush has focused much of its supportive care efforts on implementing a comprehensive distress screening program to help guide patients to the supportive services they need.

Clinicians use a number of validated tools, including questionnaires, to determine patients’ levels of distress and specific needs. “We’re finding out a lot of information beyond distress; we’re also finding out if they have questions about their treatment, if they have spiritual concerns, how pain is interfering with their lives and what is happening in their day-to-day lives,” says James Gerhart, PhD, director of psychosocial oncology.

Providers then input patients’ answers into their electronic medical records, which automatically generates referrals to social work, palliative care, nutritional counseling and so on.

NURSES’ VITAL ROLE

Nurses in the infusion center have been instrumental in improving distress screening and connecting patients with the supportive services they need. Patients spend anywhere from 30 minutes to eight hours receiving an infusion, allowing them to get to know their infusion nurses well and feel comfortable confiding in them.

“We have always been concerned with the day-to-day quality of life issues of our patients,” says Kati Cousins, BSN, RN, OCN, infusion nurse coordinator. “The screening helps us identify specific hardships more thoroughly. These are not easy conversations to have, especially when it comes to psychosocial challenges, depression and financial struggles. But screening has helped open the door to have a frank conversation.”

Cousins and her colleagues regularly communicate with patients’ primary oncologists to help provide a comprehensive view of what is happening with the patient.

How stress affects outcomes of stem cell transplantStress can have indirect and direct effects on a cancer patient’s outcomes. Stress can interfere with patients’ ability to communicate well with their care team and follow their treatment plans properly.

“There is also evidence that shows when you are stressed, your immune system isn’t optimized,” says James Gerhart, PhD, director of psychosocial oncology. “We know that across almost every disease — including all kinds of cancer — depression is linked to mortality. That is why screening for distress and addressing it is such an important part of care.”

Gerhart and his colleagues looked at the role of trauma-related stress symptoms to help determine the role of stress in stem cell transplant outcomes.

The study, published in Psycho-Oncology, assessed emerging evidence that suggests trauma-related stress symptoms can predict significant health complications following stem cell transplant. The study looked at traumatic stress after stem cell transplant as a predictor of neutrophil recovery, a crucial component of immune defense against infection.

The study followed 51 autologous stem cell transplant recipients who were assessed for trauma-related stress symptoms seven days after transplant. The patients’ neutrophil counts were then collected for the first 30 days following transplant.

The study found that the presence of trauma-related stress symptoms seven days after stem cell transplant was significantly associated with slower neutrophil recovery.

The researchers concluded that while trauma-related stress symptoms may be a normal response to stem cell transplant, trauma-related stress following a transplant may interfere with neutrophil recovery and overall health.

“This study fits in with the rationale for why distress screening and supportive care are so important,” says Gerhart. “It provides good evidence that traumatic stress is related to poor medical outcomes for patients who receive a stem cell transplant.”

10

11 12

SCREENING: A LARGER PROGRAM, FEWER FALSE POSITIVES

The Rush lung cancer screening program has certification from the American College of Radiology (ACR) and is a designated center of excellence from the Lung Cancer Alliance.

The program also increased its year-over-year patient volume and added services provided by a new full-time lung cancer screening coordinator, Linda Dowling, RN. Dowling counsels patients before and after screenings, offers classes and one-on-one assistance to help them quit tobacco, and enrolls those who consent in Rush’s biorepository (see Translational Research below).

She works closely with Palmi Shah, MD, a thoracic radiologist who evaluates all screening patients using the ACR’s recently released Lung-RADS (lung CT screening reporting and data system) criteria. The ACR found that these criteria reduced false positives from 26.6 percent to 12.8 percent when retrospectively applied to National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) data.

The NLST results suggested in 2011 that screening with low-dose CT reduced mortality by 20 percent in older patients with the equivalent of a 30-year/pack-a-day smoking history. In 2013, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force enshrined the finding as a recommendation. Private insurance and CMS now cover low-dose CT screening for this population.

In 2015 and 2016, the lung cancer screening program identified 12 lung cancers, and five other clinically silent malignancies.

Fitting the Pieces TogetherSolving the Puzzle of Lung Cancer

SURGERY: BUSIEST IN ILLINOIS, AMONG THE BEST IN THE U.S.

In 2016, the Society of Thoracic Surgeons designated the Rush Department of Cardiovascular-Thoracic Surgery as a three-star program for lobectomy. It is the society’s highest rating, bestowed on the top 5 percent of thoracic surgery programs in the U.S.

Michael Liptay, MD, chairperson of the Department of Cardiovascular-Thoracic Surgery, attributes this unusually high quality to his team’s unusually robust experience. Thoracic surgeons at Rush have performed around 900 lung surgeries over the past three years, including more video-assisted thoracoscopic surgeries (VATS) than any other team in Illinois.

Rush’s growing lung cancer screening program (see Screening above) is likely to nudge this figure even higher. Between 2014 and 2016, thoracic surgeons at Rush performed VATS on nine of the 13 Rush patients whose cancers were detected via screening.

TRANSLATIONAL RESEARCH: THE SEARCH FOR BIOMARKERS CONTINUES

In 2016, the Rush University Cancer Center biorepository began collecting blood samples from lung cancer screening patients (see Screening above), expanding what was already one of the world’s largest institutional repositories of blood and tissue samples from patients with thoracic lesions. (Over the past decade, most patients whose lung tumors have been biopsied or resected at Rush have agreed to enroll the biorepository.)

Using this unique resource, a team led by biochemist Jeffrey A. Borgia, PhD, has been working to identify several distinct panels of protein biomarkers that will help personalize treatment selection in order to ensure that all patients, regardless of their stage of disease, receive the most effective care possible.

Thanks to the new samples from screening patients — about 10 percent of whom fall outside current screening criteria — the team is also searching for biomarkers that could lead to a “prescreening” test designed to detect additional populations that might benefit from screening.

THERAPEUTICS: FOCUS ON IMMUNOTHERAPIES, CANCER CACHEXIA

“What’s unique about our program is not only our breadth and depth but also our collaborative spirit.”

- MICHAEL LIPTAY, MD, CHAIRPERSON OF THE DEPARTMENT OF CARDIOVASCULAR-THORACIC SURGERY

Forty years into his career as a medical oncologist specializing in lung cancer, Philip Bonomi, MD, looks to the past to inform his vision of the future. “Consider breast cancer,” he says. “First mammography found more operable, early-stage cancers, then adjuvant chemotherapy was shown to help improve long-term survival, and then targeted therapies like Herceptin (trastuzumab) led to even greater improvements.” Five-year survival for breast cancer patients in the U.S. increased from 63 percent in the early 1960s to about 90 percent today.

Bonomi thinks lung cancer — whose five-year U.S. survival rate hovers around 16 percent — is headed in the same direction. “It won’t become evident for another 10 or 15 years,” he predicts. “Screening still needs to gain traction, and we need to figure out which targeted therapies are effective in some of those early-stage patients who need additional treatment.”

The lung cancer team at Rush is focused on solving precisely these parts of the lung cancer puzzle. In the past year, they have expanded Rush’s lung cancer screening program and conducted research that points the way toward more effective diagnosis and treatment. This work has built on their decades-long practice of applying their cumulative knowledge to the most pressing problems in the field — and, of course, to each individual patient’s case.

11

In 2016, medical oncologists at Rush continued to participate in multicenter trials of several immunotherapies for advanced and early-stage lung cancers, including the following:

• Phase I/Ib studies of investigational monoclonal antibodies and a small molecule, given as single agents and in combination to patients with advanced disease

• A phase III trial of osimertinib (AZD9291) — which targets a mutation in the epidermal growth factor receptor gene (EGFR mutation) — with and without adjuvant chemotherapy following surgery in early-stage patients

They will continue these studies this year, in addition to opening a phase III trial of chemotherapy combined with an immune-stimulating monoclonal antibody following surgery in early-stage lung cancer patients.

Researchers at Rush also continued their pioneering research on cancer cachexia. They had been among the first to report that weight gain during treatment for advanced lung cancer was associated with longer survival, suggesting that effective treatment can reverse the wasting (cachexia) that occurs in most patients at this stage. In the August 2016 issue of Annals of Oncology, they coauthored a large retrospective study confirming these earlier findings.

By continuing to study serial body weights and serum protein patterns in lung cancer patients, they hope to eventually identify targets for novel treatment strategies.

12

13 14

The low-temperature plasma scalpel is an innovative new surgical tool that kills cancerous tissue remnants while sparing healthy normal tissue. Rush is using the technology in certain sarcoma and pancreatic cancer surgeries.

“Low-temperature plasma technology is one of the most innovative and exciting tools in cancer surgery today,” says Steve Gitelis, MD, director of the Section of Orthopedic Oncology. “This tool has great potential as a surgical oncology tool, and Rush is becoming a leader in using this technology.”

IMPROVING SARCOMA SURGERY

Gitelis has used the argon hybrid low-temperature plasma device in more than 50 surgeries in the past year. Rush is one of a few U.S. hospitals that uses the plasma scalpel, and Gitelis is the only surgeon in the U.S. to use the device to remove sarcomas.

Traditional electrosurgical devices operate at high temperatures (typically 200°F or higher), which damage nerves, arteries and surrounding healthy tissue. The low-temperature plasma scalpel, however, operates at close to body temperature, which is less damaging.

“This is particularly important in limb-sparing sarcoma surgery to help preserve the vascular supply and the nerve supply to the organs near the tumor,” says Gitelis. “This tool allows me to operate next to those nerves and arteries with limited to no damage.”

Additionally, the device significantly reduces blood loss, which is critical in major, open sarcoma surgeries. In fact, transfusion rates are a fraction of what they are in orthopedic procedures using traditional methods.

HOPE FOR INOPERABLE PANCREATIC CANCER

The low-temperature helium plasma device is currently under investigational use for patients with inoperable cancers. An FDA compassionate use exemption allowed pancreatic cancer surgeon Keith Millikan, MD, to use this technology on a patient with inoperable stage IV pancreatic cancer. Rush was the first institution in the world to use the plasma scalpel on a human with pancreatic cancer.

The patient had borderline-resectable pancreatic cancer located very close to the portal vein and the superior mesenteric artery, along with cancerous nodules in the liver. “The patient had been receiving chemotherapy to keep the cancer at bay and had received the maximum amount of radiation possible; there were no other options for the patient,” said Millikan.

The patient underwent a Whipple procedure to remove parts of the pancreas, stomach, small intestine, liver tumor nodules and kidney. Millikan then used the plasma device to spray cold atmospheric plasma on the tissue immediately surrounding the tumor, the liver bed where he removed the nodules and the blood vessels to the intestine.

“The plasma sprays ions that change the intracellular mechanism of cancer cells without damaging normal tissue cells,” says Millikan. “The big advantage of this device is that we can get a larger margin. And since it doesn’t hurt normal tissue cells, we can spray it on the artery that goes to the intestines, the vein that goes to the liver, and on the whole margin of resection.”

The patient is receiving regular chemotherapy treatments to prevent recurrence, but is otherwise back to a normal lifestyle. “Even if we have not cured him, we have given him a high quality of life for a while,” says Millikan. “He is walking well, eating what he wants, maintaining his weight and having normal bowel function. He is stronger now than he’s been since he was diagnosed over a year ago.”

WHAT IS PLASMA?

Plasma is considered the fourth state of matter. It is an ionized gas (either argon or helium) that — when generated at a low temperature (about 60 to 98°F) — becomes cold atmospheric plasma.

The plasma scalpel has two applications: the argon hybrid low-temperature plasma device and the helium plasma device.

The argon device is approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) as a surgical cutting and coagulating tool. The thermoablative scalpel uses a high- frequency current to charge argon, which generates a beam of ions that cut and cauterize. Gitelis is also currently investigating using this device as an adjunct to prevent local recurrence.

The helium plasma device, currently under investigational use through a FDA compassionate use exemption, is an adjunct to cancer surgery. The device uses cold atmospheric plasma during surgery to eradicate microscopic cancerous tissues and cells and provides a better surgical margin of resection than conventional surgery.

Steven Gitelis, MD, is the only surgeon in the U.S. using plasma to remove sarcomas.

Cancer surgeon Keith Millikan, MD , (left) and director of the

Section of Orthopedic Oncology Steven Gitelis, MD, with the

plasma scalpel device

14

Steven Gitelis, MD, using the plasma scalpel to remove a

sarcoma

Low-Temperature Plasma Scalpel: A Groundbreaking New Surgical Tool

15 16

Photobombing Cancer: A New Therapy Enters the PictureTwo Rush physicians are leading the development of an innovative therapy that combines the immune system’s ability to precisely target cancer cells with laser energy’s ability to destroy them. This combination provides an option for patients in the final stages of head and neck cancer.

Kerstin Stenson, MD, director of the head and neck cancer program, and Mary Jo Fidler, MD, oncologist, are the principal investigators for a phase I clinical trial testing the experimental photoimmunotherapy technique for patients whose advanced head and neck cancer has not responded to chemotherapy or radiation and cannot be addressed surgically. Rush is the only center in Illinois offering this treatment

WHAT IS PHOTOIMMUNOTHERAPY?

Photoimmunotherapy is an extension of the existing photodynamic therapy technique that involves injecting patients with a photosensitive drug that produces a form of cell-killing oxygen when exposed to a specific light wavelength. But in photoimmunotherapy, physicians incorporate the immune system’s ability to target only cancer cells. The photosensitive drug is combined with cetuximab, a monoclonal antibody that specifically targets and binds

with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) proteins present at abnormally high levels on the surface of the vast majority of head and neck cancers.

Administered intravenously, this photosensitizer/antibody conjugate — referred to as a payload drug — circulates throughout the patient’s body but only latches onto the EGFR cells. The next day, Rush physicians affix tiny laser optic fibers near the surface of the tumor or directly into the tumor through small catheters. The laser light energy that then beams through the fibers sets off millions of molecular-level explosions where the photosensitizer/antibody conjugate has accumulated: the surface of cancer cells.

The weakened cancer cell walls collapse, nearby water molecules rush in and “the cancer cells basically burst,” says Stenson. “Almost immediately, you can see the tumor become necrotic. It becomes white, dies and melts away.”

IMPROVED PRECISION AND SAFETY

While photoimmunotherapy kills cancer quickly, Stenson stresses that what makes this first-in-class approach so unique and promising is how it allows her to precisely and selectively deliver cancer-killing power. The payload drug is inert unless activated by laser light, and the laser does not harm healthy tissue.

“Getting inside the cancer cell means we can get systemic treatment locally more than with any other treatment,” says Stenson.

The lethal blow delivered to cancer cells is delivered by water, not radiation or a toxic chemotherapy drug. Therefore, patients treated with photoimmunotherapy do not run the post-procedure risk of toxic sunburns as do patients who receive photodynamic therapy; those patients must stay out of the sun for several weeks due to trace amounts of the photosensitizer drug, which can be activated by sunlight.

“This technique is the epitome of collaboration between surgery and medical oncology. It is the most exciting and promising therapy I’ve ever been involved with.”

- KERSTIN STENSON, MD, DIRECTOR OF THE HEAD AND NECK CANCER PROGRAM

COLLABORATIVE CARE

While the technique is currently being tested only for recurrent head and neck cancer, there is potential for photoimmunotherapy to be used as a first-line therapy for other cancers, and possibly as a part of a novel combination therapy with surgery.

Fidler, who has led a series of research efforts designed to prove the effectiveness of immunotherapy and chemotherapy combinations for lung cancer, notes that that the EGFR proteins in lung cancer are also the signature of other tumor types. Thus, using other monoclonal antibodies in this technique may benefit patients beyond the head and neck population. If the clinical trial establishes the effectiveness of the technique, the photosensitizer could be combined with immune checkpoint inhibitors and immune-stimulating drugs that target other forms of cancer.

“This technique is the epitome of collaboration between surgery and medical oncology,” says Stenson. “It is the most exciting and promising therapy I’ve ever been involved with.”

15

Less Toxic Treatment for HPV-Related Oral CancerUp to 70 percent of oropharyngeal cancers are caused by human papillomavirus (HPV). In the past few years, there has been a significant increase in the incidence of HPV-related oral cancers in nonsmoking men.

“HPV-related cancer patients tend to be young men in the prime of their lives,” says Samer Al-Khudari, MD, head and neck surgeon. “Patients with these cancers typically have a better prognosis than patients who have oral cancers associated with tobacco and alcohol use.”

In the past, HPV-related cancers were treated the same way as non-HPV-related cancers: high doses of radiation, chemotherapy and open surgery. “Treatment was highly invasive and surgery was often disfiguring,” says Al-Khudari. “People survived the cancer, but they experienced a low quality of life.”

Research, however, has found that HPV-related cancers can — and should — be treated less invasively. Head and neck surgeons at Rush use minimally invasive transoral robotic surgery (TORS) to treat these HPV-related cancers of the throat, tonsil, tongue and larynx. With TORS, a surgeon uses a guided endoscope to access the back of the mouth and transorally remove the cancer and surrounding tissue, without damaging healthy surrounding tissue.

“TORS causes less long-term damage than open procedures,” says Al-Khudari. “Patients who undergo this type of surgery have fewer cosmetic and functional side effects. They also typically receive lower doses of radiation. All of this offers these patients a better quality of life in the long-term.”

“Patients who undergo this type of surgery have fewer cosmetic and functional side effects.”

- SAMER AL-KHUDARI, MD, HEAD AND NECK SURGEON

16

17 18

One of the biggest challenges of performing laparoscopic biopsies of these masses is accurately locating the mass amidst intra-abdominal tissue and fat. Surgeons often have to convert to open procedures to get the most accurate biopsy.

To address this issue, investigator-clinicians at Rush sought to adapt existing image-guided technology to improve minimally invasive, or laparoscopic, biopsies for these patients. “The goal is to reduce the frequency of, and need for, converting to an open procedure,” says Jonathan Myers, MD, general surgeon.

This approach reduces patients’ time in the hospital and recovery time, while also allowing them to begin treatment more promptly. “If patients have a big, open incision, they frequently can’t start chemotherapy for several weeks,” says Myers. “But with laparoscopic biopsy, patients can begin treatment within several days, which is a huge advantage.”

AN INTEGRATIVE PROCESS

Image-guided laparoscopy begins with surgeons uploading perioperative imaging into the platform prior to the procedure. The surgeons then sync the images to landmarks on the patient, allowing them to accurately navigate the laparoscopic instrument toward the target lesion and biopsy it — all while viewing it on a monitor.

Image-guided surgery has been widely used in neurosurgery, thoracic surgery and otolaryngology, and it is now playing a role in cancer diagnostics. Cancer surgeons at Rush have started using this technology to improve diagnostic accuracy for biopsies of intra-abdominal masses in patients with suspected lymphoma.

“This technique improves accuracy in getting to the actual tissue that will give the oncologist the most comprehensive, accurate diagnosis,” says Myers.

Frequently, patients will have multiple lymph nodes in their abdomen for a disease like lymphoma. This makes determining which lymph nodes to biopsy a challenge. To determine which lymph node to biopsy, Myers notes that a CT-PET scan, which shows tumor activity, is the preferred imaging test.

“The most useful lymph nodes to biopsy are ones that are PET-avid, which are the most active ones,” says Myers. “There’s no way to just look at a lymph node to know if it’s PET-avid or not. However, when I upload the CT-PET scan to our platform and sync that to our patient, I can look for a PET-avid mass or tumor on the monitor, and I can biopsy that exact one.”

The PET-avid mass or tumor provides the most accurate, useful information available — allowing the oncologists to determine a diagnosis and, ultimately, treatment protocols.

“Over the past several years, a CT-PET scan has become more important than other types of imaging, such as CT alone, in terms of determining the extent of disease, as well as the response to treatment and remission, which in turn determines the outcome of the patient,” says Parameswaran Venugopal, MD, hematologist.

PERSONALIZING TREATMENT

Appropriate tumor tissue sampling is the first step in the management of lymphoma. “We depend heavily on the results of the biopsy for determining treatment and managing the patient,” says Venugopal. “This unique biopsy technique has made a significant difference in our patient management.”

Lymphoma treatment, for instance, is personalized in terms of identifying targets — including proteins, pathways or molecular abnormalities — in the tumor cell. “We use those targets to personalize treatment options for each patient,” Venugopal says. “Without adequate tissue from the biopsy, we can’t personalize the treatment.”

This type of personalized care is the hallmark of Rush’s lymphoma program. The Coleman Foundation Comprehensive Lymphoma Clinic brings together a number of different specialists to review cases and determine treatment plans for patients.

In addition to combining clinical expertise, the lymphoma team also makes patients’ personal needs a priority. “We personalize everything to the patient when we are designing a treatment program,” says Kelly Szymanski, NP, lymphoma program coordinator. “In addition to their test results, we consider their backgrounds, preferences, support network, financial challenges, travel times and much more. We have a good support system here for them. It’s very much about each individual patient, not just their disease.”

Integrating Big Data with Cancer CareAs the role of big data in health care continues to make headlines, Rush has taken steps to integrate big data with a personal approach to cancer treatment through a partnership with Tempus, a tech startup focused on bringing genomic data to a clinical setting.

Through this partnership, cancer patients at Rush now have the option of undergoing genetic analysis that may allow their oncologists to customize treatments for their particular cancer.

Advances in genetic science and cancer care increasingly are enabling researchers and clinicians to design treatments for cancer that specifically target genetic mutations that lead to disease.

“As we get a better understanding of how these tumors grow and develop, we can design drugs that affect the mutated genes but not the normal ones,” says Robert DeCresce, MD, pathologist and interim director of the Rush University Cancer Center. “This is the area of big promise.”

STANDARDIZING MOLECULAR DIAGNOSTICS

Tempus takes a unique approach to testing, focusing on highly personalized data. “Currently, commercially available genetic testing is only able to inform on mutations that are identified within a tumor itself,” says Nick Pfanzelter, MD, medical oncologist. “However, our approach with Tempus will also look at the germline genes. That means we’ll be looking at both sporadic changes in the tumor and those that the patient was born

with. This provides a better understanding of the mutations in the cancer.”

USING DATA TO DRIVE TREATMENT

After sequencing a patient’s genes, Tempus performs a computerized analysis to compare the patient’s genetic information with the company’s large, proprietary biological database. The analysis uses machine learning and advanced bioinformatics to search for patterns that are potentially relevant for patients unlikely to respond to conventional therapies.

“Tempus tells us which drugs similar patients have been treated with and how similar patients have done based on national clinical trial information and Tempus’ database,” DeCresce says.

The company can also recommend current clinical trials that are accepting new participants and might benefit the patient.

The ultimate goal is to determine more targeted, personalized treatments. “We’re trying to identify either new mutations that might respond to new therapies or new tumor types for which an existing therapy might provide patient benefit,” says Pfanzelter. “We’re also hoping to find new combinations for patients.”

Improving Diagnostic Accuracy in Lymphoma

GETTING PATIENTS INVOLVED

BUILDING A COMPREHENSIVE MOLECULAR ONCOLOGY PROGRAM

Pfanzelter and Timothy Kuzel, MD, chief of the Division of Hematology, Oncology and Cell Therapy, are also planning to develop a molecular tumor board, with an estimated start date in mid-to late 2017. The tumor board will be open to all medical oncologists at Rush, allowing experts across the institution to present cases and pool their expertise to determine the best treatments for tumors with specific mutations.

“By leveraging knowledge within the institution and utilizing Tempus’ larger database, we’ll be able to provide patients with information about the effects of treatments that have been used at sites all over the country,” says Pfanzelter.

This type of information will help further inform and improve the new cancer therapies, such as immunotherapies that target driver mutations and harness the immune system.

“Having a research program designed to provide detailed information about how useful it is to target these driver mutations is essential,” says Pfanzelter.

HOW

Participation is voluntary. To receive the analysis, patients must agree to let their data be added anonymously to the Tempus database.

WHO

Rush is offering the Tempus genetic assessment to patients who have solid tumors and whose doctors think their patients can benefit from the service.

WHAT

Tempus can analyze up to 1,700 relevant genes using simple blood and tissue samples within two to three weeks of receiving the samples.

18

Hematologist Parameswaran Venugopal, MD

19 20

Quality of Life After Skull Base and Sinus Tumor SurgeryOne of the challenges in treating skull base and sinus tumors is that there is no easy way to access them. These tumors are often located precariously close to the optic nerve, olfactory nerve and brain. This creates a high risk for morbidity after surgery. Further, these cancers often present with nonspecific nasal symptoms, which means they are typically in a more advanced stage by the time they are diagnosed.

OLD VS. NEW

Transnasal endoscopic resection, however, has substantially changed the once-grim quality of life outlook for patients with these complex tumors.

Since 1960s, the primary method to treat these tumors was a craniotomy, a radical craniofacial resection. These large, open procedures can lead to high patient morbidity and significantly diminished quality of life after surgery. “People often can’t function and work in the same way after these surgeries,” says Pete Batra, MD, a rhinology and skull base surgeon and co-director of the Rush Center for Skull Base and Pituitary Surgery.

Improved endoscopic technologies over the last 10 years have helped pave the way for minimally invasive transnasal endoscopic resection, which provides comparable outcomes to open surgery to treat skull base and sinus tumors.

“Working through the nose, we can now resect these tumors using oncologic principles

with negative margins,” says Bobby Tajudeen, MD, a rhinology and skull base surgeon. “This minimally invasive approach also helps us avoid major side effects that affect quality of life, such as complete smell loss and cosmetic effects.”

Batra and Tajudeen are leaders in the field of transnasal endoscopic resection for skull base and sinus tumors. While patients with the most advanced and complex tumors may still require open procedures, the majority of patients can be treated with endoscopic resection, according to Batra.

PSYCHOLOGICAL IMPROVEMENTS

Batra and Tajudeen are also conducting extensive research on quality of life after minimally invasive procedures for these complex cancers.

Batra has done a number of studies assessing long-term changes in quality of life after endoscopic resection for sinus and skull base tumors. In one study, published in the

International Forum of Allergy & Rhinology, Batra and his colleagues followed 72 sinus cancer patients for two years after surgery, analyzing data at one year and then again at two years. The team measured patients’ quality of life with the sino-nasal outcome test (SNOT-20) — which looks at nasal symptoms, along with quality of life factors (e.g., sleep quality, mental state).

The study revealed that the endoscopic approach resulted in overall improvements in quality of life. “We found that patients’ nasal symptoms did get better, but they didn’t normalize,” says Batra. “But we did find that patients’ sleep function and overall psychological well-being improved significantly after undergoing surgery.”

Further, the study found that quality of life improvements across the board are lower for patients who are or have been smokers. “While you can intuitively assume that would be the case, there had not been data to back up that assumption; this is the first time we’ve

looked at the effect smoking has on quality of life improvements after this type of surgery,” says Batra.

SMELL PRESERVATION

A common side effect of skull base and sinus tumor surgery is complete smell loss. “Smell loss can be debilitating in terms of detecting hazards, and when you completely lose your sense of smell you also cannot taste anything, which certainly impedes quality of life,” says Tajudeen.

Endoscopic resection, however, may help preserve sense of smell in certain patients. For example, the gold standard treatment for esthesioneuroblastoma (also known as

olfactory neuroblastoma), a rare cancer in the nasal cavity, is en bloc craniofacial resection. But studies have shown that endoscopic approaches to treating this type of cancer have comparable survival and recurrence rates with decreased patient morbidity.

In a recent multi-institutional study, published in the International Forum of Allergy & Rhinology, Tajudeen and colleagues assessed smell outcomes of patients who underwent unilateral endoscopic resection of esthesioneuroblastoma.

“Historically, for this type of cancer, we’ve done aggressive surgery and resected many of the smell mechanisms,” Tajudeen says. “But this study shows that for carefully selected

patients who have one-sided tumors, we can do a minimally invasive endoscopic resection approach from one side, sparing the smell fibers.”

The study found that 43 percent of the patients had residual smell function, with 14 percent having normal or mildly reduced smell function.

Beyond smell preservation, this minimally invasive approach also offers all the other benefits of less aggressive surgery (see Endoscopic Resection vs. Open Surgery sidebar).

“It used to be that if you had this type of olfactory neuroblastoma, we would have to do very aggressive surgery, removing the dura and the olfactory nerves,” says Batra. “But with more thoughtful treatment like transnasal endoscopic resection, we can remove the cancer with comparable survival without open radical surgery. It’s a win-win.”

ENDOSCOPIC RESECTION OPEN SURGERY

LENGTH OF HOSPITAL STAY 2 to 5 days 7 to 14 days

PAIN MANAGEMENT- IN HOSPITAL Pain is generally managed with low-dose oral pain medications, including narcotics

Pain is managed with patient-controlled IV analgesia

PAIN MANAGEMENT - AT HOME Within a week after surgery, patients can be weaned off narcotics and onto extra strength acetaminophen

Narcotic oral medications are typically used 1 to 4 weeks (sometimes longer) after surgery

RETURN TO NORMAL ACTIVITY 2 to 6 weeks 4 to 12 weeks

COSMETIC SIDE EFFECTS No cosmetic side effects Vary; can include skin incisions to contour changes from free tissue transfer

ENDOSCOPIC RESECTION VS. OPEN SURGERY

Skull base surgeons Bobby Tajudeen, MD, (left) and Pete Batra, MD

“ With more thoughtful treatment like transnasal endoscopic resection, we can remove the cancer with comparable survival without open radical surgery. It’s a win-win.”- PETE BATRA, MD, CO-DIRECTOR OF THE RUSH CENTER FOR SKULL BASE AND PITUITARY SURGERY

20

21 22

FROM BENCH TO BEDSIDE

The impetus for Abukhdeir’s NF1 research stems from the evolving role of genetic testing for cancer.

“There are so many companies that can test for so many different genes, but there is little science behind what we can do with that information,” says Abukhdeir.

Abukhdeir worked with Cobleigh to investigate how one specific gene, PIK3R1, reacted to the treatment that a testing company recommended. Cobleigh shared genetic testing results for a patient who had a PIK3R1 mutation with Abukhdeir. “We looked at the literature and found that no one had ever tested the suggested treatment with this gene before,” he says. “So we decided to test it in our lab.”

He and his team found that the recommended drug was, in fact, not effective. At the same time, however, they found that other inhibitors effectively treated breast cancers carrying the PIK3R1 mutation.

“We are doing more bench work on these findings, but we’re pretty excited about the results,” Abukhdeir says. “We’re hoping to start a clinical trial to test this on patients.”

Researcher Profile:

Abde Abukhdeir, PhDTHE SCIENCE BEHIND TARGETED TREATMENTS FOR BREAST CANCER

For the past 20 years, the Lynn Sage Foundation’s Lynn Sage Scholars Program has funded some of the country’s most talented leaders in breast cancer research. This year Abde Abukhdeir, PhD, a breast cancer researcher at Rush, received one of two core scholarships from the foundation. He will receive $100,000 per year for a maximum of two years to fund his research, which focuses on molecular variants that lead to or contribute to drug resistance in breast cancer.

“Two of the biggest challenges in cancer are multidrug resistance and the lack of drug-able targets,” says Abukhdeir.

Abukhdeir and his team are investigating new, actionable targets by studying genes involved in breast cancer.

STUDYING THE GENETICS OF BREAST CANCER

Abukhdeir’s research revolves around the heterogeneous nature of cancer. For instance, in metastatic disease, one lesion is never identical to another. The genetic variability in the cells is responsible for different levels of drug resistance and aggressiveness of the cancer.

“Cancer is caused by damaged DNA,” he says. “There are changes in certain genes in breast cancers, and we treat these cancers differently based on these changes. There are a few genes that are very frequently changed, and we know what to do with those cancers when they change.”

However, there are many genetic mutations that are less common and, thus, studied less often and in less depth. “For those genes, we can only extrapolate about what drugs to give to patients based on what we know about biology rather than specific scientific testing,” he says. “My team and I are looking at these genes more scientifically.”

THE NF1 GENE

Abukhdeir’s Lynn Sage-funded research centers on the neurofibromin 1 (or NF1) gene. Every person has two copies of NF1 in each cell. Most breast cancer patients with a NF1 mutation have breast cells that developed one or two bad copies of NF1.

“Most labs in the cancer world look at what happens to the gene when a patient has cancer: Was it mutated or deleted — or are there extra copies of it?” says Abukhdeir. “Most labs use artificial tools that will deplete the gene product or put in tens or hundreds of copies of the gene, and then they’ll study the effects. While that is fine for certain studies, that is not what happens in a real patient.”

In his lab, Abukhdeir is working on recapitulating what happens in real patients, rather than looking at an exaggerated effect from putting in hundreds of copies of a gene. This provides more in-depth, realistic data. “We take a normal, noncancerous cell and genetically engineer it to manipulate one gene at a time to push it toward cancer — mimicking the natural process,” says Abukhdeir. “This allows us to see how and when a benign cell begins to change when we manipulate the gene.”

Collaborating with Melody Cobleigh, MD, medical oncologist, Abukhdeir hopes that his research will help determine how cancers with the NF1 mutation will react to certain drugs, with the ultimate goal of providing more targeted treatments to breast cancer patients.

“The role of my research is to find the preclinical evidence needed prior to moving into clinical trials to test the effect of specific drugs on breast cancers with NF1 mutations,” says Abukhdeir.

Disease Site ProgramsBONE AND SOFT TISSUE SARCOMAS

CLINICAL SPECIALISTS

Adult medical oncologist: Marta Batus, MD

Adult surgical oncologist: Jonathan Myers, MD

Diagnostic radiologists: James Cameron, MD; John Meyer, DO; Anthony Zelazny, MD

Interventional radiologist: Bulent Arslan, MD

Orthopedic oncology surgeons: Matthew Colman, MD; Steven Gitelis, MD

Pathologists: Leonidas Arvanitis, MD; Jerome Loew, MD; Brett Mahon, MD; Ira Miller, MD; Vijaya Reddy, MD

Pediatric medical oncologists: Paul Kent, MD; Nupur Mittal, MD

Pediatric palliative care: Rani Ganesan, MD

Pediatric physiatrist: Laura Deon, MD

Pediatric psychologist: Katherine McLean, PhD

Pediatric social worker: Erika Owens, MSW

Plastic and reconstructive surgeon: Gordon Derman, MD

Radiation oncologists: Ross Abrams, MD; Dian Wang, MD, PhD

Pediatric surgical oncologist: Srikumar Pillai, MD

SARCOMA CONFERENCE Wednesdays, 9 to 10 a.m., Janet Wolter, MD, Clinical and Educational Conference Room, 1010 Professional Building

BRAIN AND SKULL BASE TUMORS

CLINICAL SPECIALISTS Medical oncologists: Mary Jo Fidler, MD; John Showel, MD

Neuro-oncologist: Clement Pillainayagam, MD

Neuroradiologists: Sharon Byrd, MD; Miral Jhaveri, MD; Mehmet Kocak, MD

Neurosurgeons: Richard Byrne, MD; Lorenzo Muñoz, MD

Neurotologist: R. Mark Wiet, MD

Ophthalmologists: Adam Cohen, MD; Thomas Mizen, MD

Otolaryngologist/head and neck surgeons: Pete Batra, MD; Bobby Tajudeen, MD

Pathologists: Leonidas Arvanitis, MD; Paolo Gattuso, MD; Ritu Ghai, MD; Sukriti Nag, MD

Pediatric hematologist/oncologist: Paul Kent, MD

Radiation oncologists: Aidnag Diaz, MD, MPH; Neilyan Sen, MD

Speech pathologists: Mike Hefferly, PhD; Michele Simer, MS

BRAIN TUMOR CONFERENCE Tuesdays, 11:30 a.m. to 12:30 p.m., Janet Wolter, MD, Clinical and Educational Conference Room, 1010 Professional Building

BREAST CANCER

CLINICAL SPECIALISTS Diagnostic radiologists: Anne Cardwell, MD; Carol Corbridge, MD; Janice Dieschbourg, MD; Mireya Dondalski, MD; Paula Grabler, MD; Peter Jokich, MD; Gene Solmos, MD; Lisa Stempel, MD

Medical oncologists: Melody Cobleigh, MD; Ruta Rao, MD; Lydia Usha, MD

Pathologists: Paolo Gattuso, MD; Ritu Ghai, MD

Plastic and reconstructive surgeons: Anuja Antony, MD, MPH; John Cook, MD; Gordon Derman, MD; Keith Hood, MD; George Kouris, MD; Christina Tragos, MD

Radiation oncologists: Parul Barry, MD; Katherine Griem, MD; Neilyan Sen, MD

Surgical oncologists: Darius Francescatti, MD; Katherine Kopkash, MD; Andrea Madrigrano, MD; Christina O’Donoghue, MD; Norman Wool, MD; Thomas Witt, MD

BREAST TUMOR CONFERENCE Mondays, noon to 1 p.m., Janet Wolter, MD, Clinical and Educational Conference Room, 1010 Professional Building

ENDOCRINE AND THYROID CANCERS

CLINICAL SPECIALISTS Diagnostic radiologist: Amjad Ali, MD

Endocrine surgeons: Katy Heiden, MD; Xavier Keutgen, MD

Endocrinologists: Anila Bindal, MD; Raquel Carneiro, MD; Leon Fogelfeld, MD; Tiffany Hor, MD; Brian Kim, MD; Elizabeth McAninch, MD; Disha Narang, MD; Mahtab Sohrevardi, MD

Head and neck surgeons: Samer Al-Khudari, MD; Joseph Allegretti, MD; Thomas Nielsen, MD; Kerstin Stenson, MD

Medical oncologist: Mary Jo Fidler, MD

Pathologists: Paolo Gattuso, MD; Ritu Ghai, MD; Ji-Weon Park, MD

Radiation oncologists: Aidnag Diaz, MD; Neilyan Sen, MD

ENDOCRINE TUMOR CONFERENCE Second Wednesday of the month, 8 to 9 a.m., Endocrine Clinic Suite, 250 Professional Building

THYROID CANCER TUMOR CONFERENCE Every fourth Wednesday, 8 to 9 a.m., Janet Wolter, MD, Clinical and Educational Conference Room, 1010 Professional Building

22

23 24

GASTROINTESTINAL CANCERS

CLINICAL SPECIALISTS

Colorectal surgeons: Joanne Favuzza, DO; Bruce Orkin, MD; Marc Singer, MD

Gastroenterologists: Faraz Bishehsari, MD; Salina Lee, MD; John Losurdo, MD; Joshua Melson, MD, MPH; Sohrab Mobarhan, MD; Peter Sargon, MD

General surgeons: Daniel Deziel, MD; Minh Luu, MD; Keith Millikan, MD; Jonathan Myers, MD; Benjamin Veenstra, MD

Interventional radiologists: Bulent Arslan, MD; Allen Chen, MD; Jordan Tasse, MD; Ulku Cenk Turba, MD

Liver radiotherapists: Ross Abrams, MD; Neilyan Sen, MD

Medical oncologists: William Leslie, MD; Lawrence Schilder, DO

Pathologist: Shriram Jakate, MD

Radiation oncologists: Ross Abrams, MD; Dian Wang, MD, PhD

Thoracic surgeons: Andrew Arndt, MD; Gary Chmielewski, MD; Michael Liptay, MD; Christopher Seder, MD

Transplant hepatologists: Costica Aloman, MD; Sheila Eswaran, MD; Sujit Janardhan, MD, PhD; Nancy Reau, MD; Nikunj Shah, MD

Transplant surgeons: Edie Chan, MD; Martin Hertl, MD, PhD; Erik Schadde, MD

GASTROINTESTINAL TUMOR CONFERENCE Tuesdays, 12:30 to 1:30 p.m., Janet Wolter, MD, Clinical and Educational Conference Room, 1010 Professional Building

GENITOURINARY CANCERS

CLINICAL SPECIALISTS

Medical oncologists: Timothy Kuzel, MD; Nick Pfanzelter, MD; John Showel, MD

Radiation oncologist: Dian Wang, MD, PhD

Urologists: Christopher Coogan, MD; Leslie Deane, MBBS; Shahid Ekbal, MD; Lev Elterman, MD; Jerome Hoeksema, MD; Narendra Khare, MD; Kalyan Latchamsetty, MD; Laurence Levine, MD; Charles McKiel Jr., MD; Dennis Pessis, MD; Srinivas Vourganti, MD

GENITOURINARY TUMOR CONFERENCE Last Tuesday of the month, 7 to 8 a.m., Janet Wolter, MD, Clinical and Educational Conference Room, 1010 Professional Building

GYNECOLOGIC CANCERS

CLINICAL SPECIALISTS

Gynecologic oncologists: Amina Ahmed, MD; Summer Dewdney, MD; Edgardo Yordan, MD

Medical oncologist: Lydia Usha, MD

Pathologists: Pincas Bitterman, MD; Ritu Ghai, MD

Plastic and reconstructive surgery specialists: Anuja Antony, MD, PhD; Gordon Derman, MD; George Kouris, MD

Radiation oncologists: Parul Barry, MD; Neilyan Sen, MD

GYNECOLOGIC TUMOR CONFERENCE Fridays, 7 to 8 a.m., Pathology Conference Room, 562 Jelke Building

HEAD AND NECK CANCERS

CLINICAL SPECIALISTS

Facial plastic and reconstructive surgeon: Peter Revenaugh, MD

Medical oncologists: Mary Jo Fidler, MD; John Showel, MD

Neuroradiologists: Sumeet Dua, MD; Miral Jhaveri, MD

Otolaryngologists/head and neck surgeons: Samer Al-Khudari, MD; Joseph Allegretti, MD; Pete Batra, MD; Thomas Nielsen, MD; Kerstin Stenson, MD; Bobby Tajudeen, MD

Disease Site ProgramsPathologists: Paolo Gattuso, MD; Ritu Ghai, MD

Radiation oncologists: Aidnag Diaz, MD, MPH; Neilyan Sen, MD

HEAD AND NECK TUMOR CONFERENCE Wednesdays, 7 to 8 a.m., Janet Wolter, MD, Clinical and Educational Conference Room, 1010 Professional Building

HEMATOLOGIC CANCERS

CLINICAL SPECIALISTS

Dermatologist: Warren Piette, MD

Geneticist: Wei-Tong Hsu, MD

Hematologists/oncologists: Lisa Boggio, MD; Irene Dehghan-Paz, MD; Sefer Gezer, MD; Debra Katz, MD; Melissa Larson, MD; Agne Paner, MD; Lawrence Schilder, DO; Jamile Shammo, MD; Mindy Simpson, MD; Parameswaran Venugopal, MD

Palliative medicine specialists: Elaine Chen, MD; Susan Nathan, MD; Sean O’Mahony, MB, BCh, BAO; Mei-Ean Yeow, MB, BCh

Pathologists: Jerome Loew, MD; Brett Mahon, MD; Ira Miller, MD

Radiation oncologist: Ross Abrams, MD

Radiologist: Amjad Ali, MD

Stem cell transplantation specialists: John Maciejewski, MD, PhD; Sunita Nathan, MD

HEMATOLOGIC CANCER CONFERENCES Leukemias: Mondays, 1 to 2 p.m.

Lymphomas: Thursdays, 8 to 9 a.m.

Multiple myeloma: every other Friday, 8 to 9 a.m.

Myelodysplasia/myeloproliferative disorders: every other Friday, 9 to 10 a.m.

Janet Wolter, MD, Clinical and Educational Conference Room, 1010 Professional Building

LIVER CANCER

CLINICAL SPECIALISTS

Diagnostic radiologist: Ryan Braun, MD

Hepatologists: Sheila Eswaran, MD, MS; Nancy Reau, MD; Nikunj Shah, MD

Interventional radiologists: Osman Ahmed, MD; Bulent Arslan, MD; Jordan Tasse, MD; Ulku Cenk Turba, MD

Medical oncologists: William Leslie, MD; Lawrence Schilder, DO

Transplant surgeons: Edie Chan, MD; Martin Hertl, MD, PhD; Erik Schadde, MD

LIVER CANCER CONFERENCE First and third Friday of the month, 7 to 8 a.m., 4th Floor, Tower, Suite 04413

LUNG AND THORACIC CANCERS

CLINICAL SPECIALISTS

Diagnostic radiologist: Palmi Shah, MD

Interventional radiologists: Osman Ahmed, MD; Bulent Arslan, MD; Jayesh Soni, MD; Jordan Tasse, MD; Ulku Cenk Turba, MD

Medical oncologists: Marta Batus, MD; Philip Bonomi, MD; Mary Jo Fidler, MD

Palliative medicine specialist: Elaine Chen, MD

Pathologists: Paolo Gattuso, MD; Ritu Ghai, MD; Mark Pool, MD

Pulmonary medicine specialists: Robert Balk, MD; Elaine Chen, MD; Carl Kaplan, MD; Prema Nanavaty, MD; Michael Silver, MD; Betty Tran, MD, MS; Mark Yoder, MD

Radiation oncologist: Gaurav Marwaha, MD

Thoracic surgeons: Andrew Arndt, MD; Gary Chmielewski, MD; Michael Liptay, MD; Christopher Seder, MD

LUNG AND THORACIC TUMOR CONFERENCE Thursdays, 10 to 11 a.m., Janet Wolter, MD, Clinical and Educational Conference Room, 1010 Professional Building

MELANOMA AND CUTANEOUS CANCERS

CLINICAL SPECIALISTS

Dermatologists: Motunrayo Adisa, MD; James Ertle, MD; Claudia Hernandez, MD; Mark Hoffman, MD; Mary Massa, MD; Sheetal Mehta, MD; Warren Piette, MD; Arthur Rhodes, MD, MPH; Michael Tharp, MD

Dermatopathologist: Motunrayo Adisa, MD

Diagnostic radiologist: Joy Sclamberg, MD

Immunologists: Amanda Marzo, PhD; Carl Ruby, PhD; Andrew Zloza, MD, PhD

Medical oncologists: Timothy Kuzel, MD; Nick Pfanzelter, MD

Neurosurgeon: Lorenzo Muñoz, MD

Ophthalmologist: Adam Cohen, MD

Pathologist: Vijaya Reddy, MD

Plastic and reconstructive surgeons: Gordon Derman, MD; George Kouris, MD; Peter Revenaugh, MD

Radiation oncologist: Ross Abrams, MD

Surgical oncologists: Keith Monson, MD

MELANOMA AND SOFT TISSUE TUMOR CONFERENCE Wednesdays, 11 a.m. to noon, Janet Wolter, MD, Clinical and Educational Conference Room, 1010 Professional Building

PEDIATRIC CANCERS

CLINICAL SPECIALISTS

Orthopedic oncologist: Steven Gitelis, MD

Pediatric endocrinologists: Stelios Mantis, MD; Carla Minutti, MD

Pediatric hematologist/oncologists: Lisa Boggio, MD; Paul Kent, MD; Nupur Mittal, MD; Mindy Simpson, MD

Pediatric neuroradiologists: Sharon Byrd, MD; Mehmet Kocak, MD

Pediatric neurosurgeon: Lorenzo Muñoz, MD

Plastic and reconstructive surgeon: Gordon Derman, MD

Radiation oncologists: Ross Abrams, MD; Aidnag Diaz, MD, MPH

SPINE TUMORS

CLINICAL SPECIALISTS

Neurosurgeons: Richard Fessler, MD; Ricardo Fontes, MD, PhD; John O’Toole, MD, MS

Neuro-oncologist: Clement Pillainayagam, MD

Orthopedic surgeons: Matthew Colman, MD; Kern Singh, MD

Radiation oncologist: Aidnag Diaz, MD, MPH

SPINE TUMOR CONFERENCE Thursdays, 9 a.m. to noon, Woman’s Board Cancer Treatment Center, 500 S. Paulina St.

24

25 26

2015 Cancer Registry ReportPRIMARY SITE TOTAL ANALYTIC NON-ANALYTIC MALE FEMALE

ORAL CAVITY & PHARYNX 113 94 19 77 36

Tongue 37 31 6 26 11

Salivary Glands 17 13 4 11 6

Floor of Mouth 9 5 4 6 3

Gum & Other Mouth 20 18 2 10 10

Nasopharynx 5 4 1 3 2

Tonsil 12 11 1 11 1

Oropharynx 7 7 0 6 1

Hypopharynx 5 5 0 3 2

Other Oral Cavity & Pharynx 1 0 1 1 0

DIGESTIVE SYSTEM 440 367 73 219 221

Esophagus 27 21 6 19 8

Stomach 52 44 8 33 19

Small Intestine 13 12 1 9 4

Colon 108 89 19 33 75

Rectosigmoid Junction 6 4 2 4 2

Rectum 35 24 11 22 13

Anus, Anal Canal & Anorectum 27 21 6 12 15

Liver & Intrahepatic Bile Duct 67 58 9 41 26

Gallbladder & Other Biliary Tract 17 14 3 6 11

Pancreas 71 63 8 36 35

Retroperitoneum 1 1 0 1 0

Peritoneum, Omentum, Mesentery, & Other Digestive Organs 16 16 0 3 13

RESPIRATORY SYSTEM 525 416 109 241 284

Nose, Nasal Cavity, & Middle Ear 6 6 0 4 2

Larynx 34 23 11 22 12

Lung & Bronchus 482 384 98 212 270

Trachea, Mediastinum & Other Respiratory Organs 3 3 0 3 0

BONES & JOINTS 21 17 4 12 9SOFT TISSUE 53 40 13 23 30

SKIN (excludes basal & squamous cell carcinomas) 57 42 15 29 28

Melanoma — Skin 49 35 14 24 25

Other Non-Epithelial Skin 8 7 1 5 3

BREAST 536 431 105 8 528FEMALE GENITAL SYSTEM 294 239 55 0 294

Cervix Uteri (excludes carcinoma in situ) 46 36 10 0 46

Corpus & Uterus, NOS 153 126 27 0 153

Ovary 52 45 7 0 52

Vagina 8 5 3 0 8

Vulva 21 16 5 0 21

Other Female Genital Organs 14 11 3 0 14

MALE GENITAL SYSTEM 202 155 47 202 0

Prostate 181 136 45 181 0

Testis 19 17 2 19 0

Penis 2 2 0 2 0

URINARY SYSTEM 160 142 18 108 52

Urinary Bladder 67 61 6 51 16

Kidney & Renal Pelvis 90 78 12 55 35

Ureter & Other Urinary Organs 3 3 0 2 1

EYE & ORBIT 13 12 1 7 6BRAIN & OTHER NERVOUS SYSTEM 227 199 28 91 136ENDOCRINE SYSTEM 148 123 25 50 98

Thyroid 94 79 15 22 72

Other Endocrine (includes thymus) 54 44 10 28 26

LYMPHOMAS 205 141 64 108 97

Hodgkin Lymphoma 28 18 10 15 13

Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma 177 123 54 93 84

MYELOMA 79 57 22 39 40LEUKEMIAS 190 142 48 117 73MESOTHELIOMA 13 12 1 9 4UNKNOWN PRIMARY 12 8 4 7 5ILL-DEFINED & UNSPECIFIED 10 8 2 5 5

OTHER AND UNSPECIFIED (Kaposi Sarcoma) 4 3 1 4 0

TOTAL 3,302 2,648 654 1,356 1,946

0 -29 30 -39 4 0 - 49 50 -59 60 - 69 70 -79 80 - 89 90+

ANALT Y IC CASE D ISTR IBUT ION BY GENDER AND AGE AT D IAGNOSIS, 2015

500

400

300

200

100

092

280

396

282

99 872103

236

396

499

34 4

12221

MALE FEMALE

42 53

AGE GROUPS

AN

ALY

TIC

CA

SE

S A

T R

US

H

NEW CANCER INCIDENCE BY D IAGNOSIS YEAR, 2011-2015

AN

ALY

TIC

CA

SE

S

AT

RU

SH

UN

IVE

RS

ITY

ME

DIC

AL

CE

NT

ER

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

3500

30422947 2934

3063 30453000

2500

2000

1500

1000

500

0

TOP 10 ANALY T ICAL S ITES IN COMPARISON TO NAT IONAL, 2015

2.59%

0 % 2 % 4 % 6 % 8 % 10 % 12 % 14 % 16 %

RUSH USA

PERCENTAGE OF C ASES

3.77%

2.53% 3.71%

2.92% 5.61%

4.76% 13.31%

4.79% 3.27%

4.60% 4.88%

4.01% 3.31%

6.40% 1.38%

13.96% 14.12%

12.78% 13.34%

THYROID

KIDNEY & RENAL PELVIS

COLON

PROSTATE

LEUKEMIA

LYMPHOMA

CORPUS UTERI

BRAIN & OTHER CNS

BREAST

LUNG

TOP RUSH ANALY T IC S ITES AT DIAGNOSIS, 2015

41 20 3 UNKNOWNSTAGE: N/A

LUNG

NU

MB

ER

OF

A

NA

LYT

IC C

AS

ES

S TAGES

160

140

120

100

80

60

40

20

0

141

45

78

120

311

BREAST

NU

MB

ER

OF

A

NA

LYT

IC C

AS

ES

S TAGES

160

140

120

100

80

60

40

20

0

168

98

28 29

03

99

180

CORPUS UTERI

NU

MB

ER

OF

A

NA

LYT

IC C

AS

ES

S TAGES

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

77

5

19 18

0 3

90

0

COLON

NU

MB

ER

OF

A

NA

LYT

IC C

AS

ES

S TAGES

35

30

25

20

15

10

5

0

1517

29

0

15

0

STAGES

PROSTATE

NU

MB

ER

OF

A

NA

LYT

IC C

AS

ES

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

15

91

23

1 0

90

0

100

15

YEAR

26

Analytic: Cases diagnosed and/or received all or part of first course of care at Rush University Medical Center.

Nonanalytic: Cases diagnosed and all first course treatment completed elsewhere.

This chart represents the Cancer Registry Report by first contact.

STAGES

13

27 28

Adogwa O, Sure DR, LaBagnara M, Shaffrey CI, Fessler RG. Minimally invasive spine surgery and sagittal correction. Neurosurgery. 2016;63(suppl 1):31-36.

Ahmed O, Kuo WT. Laser-assisted venous thrombectomy for treatment of recurrent in-stent restenosis and superior vena cava syndrome. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2016;27(4):603-606.

Ahmed O, Madassery S, Heussner D, Tran P, Masrani A, Arslan B, Turba UC. VenaTech LP filter retrieval for filter-related thrombosis or malpositioning. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2016;27(11):1724-1726.

Ahmed O, Mathevosian S, Arslan B. Biliary interventions: tools and techniques of the trade, access, cholangiography, biopsy, cholangioscopy, cholangioplasty, stenting, stone extraction, and brachytherapy. Semin Intervent Radiol. 2016;33(4):283-290.

Ahmed O, Ward TJ, Lungren MP, Abdelrazek Mohammed MA, Hofmann LV, Sze DY, Kothary N. Assessing the risk of hemorrhagic complication following transjugular liver biopsy in bone marrow transplantation recipients. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2016;27(4):551-557.

Ahn J, Bohl DD, Tabaraee E, Aboushaala K, Elboghdady IM, Singh K. Preoperative narcotic utilization: accuracy of patient self-reporting and its association with postoperative narcotic consumption. J Neurosurg Spine. 2016;24(1):206-214.

AlJaroudi W, Campagnoli T, Fughhi I, Wassouf M, Ali A, Doukky R. Prognostic value of heart rate response during regadenoson stress myocardial perfusion imaging in patients with end stage renal disease. J Nucl Cardiol. 2016;23(3):560-569.

Al-Samadi A, Moossavi S, Salem A, Sotoudeh M, Tuovinen SM, Konttinen YT, Salo T, Bishehsari F. Distinctive expression pattern of interleukin-17 cytokine family members in colorectal cancer. Tumour Biol. 2016;37(2):1609-1615.

Amblee A, Lious D, Fogelfeld L. Combination of saxagliptin and metformin is effective as initial therapy in new-onset type 2 diabetes mellitus with severe hyperglycemia. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2016;101(6):2528-2535.

Babic B, Keutgen X, Nockel P, Miettinen M, Millo C, Herscovitch P, Patel D, Nilubol N, Cochran C, Gorden P, Kebebew E. Insulinoma due to multiple pancreatic microadenoma localized by multimodal imaging. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2016;101(10):3559-3563.

Bakhsheshian J, Khanna R, Choy W, Lawton CD, Nixon AT, Wong AP, Koski TR, Liu JC, Song JK, Dahdaleh NS, Smith ZA, Fessler RG. Incidence of graft extrusion following minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion. J Clin Neurosci. 2016;24:88-93.

Barry PN, Miller KH, Ziegler C, Hertz R, Hanna N, Dragun AE. Factors affecting gender-based experiences for residents in radiation oncology. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2016;95(3):1009-1016.

Barua A, Edassery SL, McNeal S, Bahr JM, Bitterman P, Basu S, Sharma S, Abramowicz JS. Enhancement of ovarian tumor detection by DR6-targeted ultrasound imaging agents in laying hen model of spontaneous ovarian cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2016;26(8):1375-1385.

Batus M. Marta Batus on the new direct-to-consumer advertising for nivolumab, and its impact on oncology practice. Oncology (Williston Park). 2016;30(6):506, 523.

Belghiti J, Dokmak S, Schadde E. ALPPS: innovation for innovation’s sake. Surgery. 2016;159(5):1287-1288.

Bennett CL, Aziz H, Sparks E, Shah T, Yoder M, MacCarrick G, Dietz HC. Massive hemoptysis in Loeys-Dietz syndrome. Am J Med Genet A. 2016;170(3):725-727.

Berger D, Waheed S, Fattout Y, Kazlauskaite R, Usha L. False increase of estradiol levels in a 36-year-old postmenopausal patient with estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer treated with fulvestrant. Clin Breast Cancer. 2016;16(1):e11-e13.

Bishehsari F, Saadalla A, Khazaie K, Engen PA, Voigt RM, Shetuni BB, Forsyth C, Shaikh M, Vitaterna MH, Turek F, Keshavarzian A. Light/dark shifting promotes alcohol-induced colon carcinogenesis: possible role of intestinal inflammatory milieu and microbiota. Int J Mol Sci. 2016;17(12):E2017.

Blackwood L, Chapman I, Lyon M, Hernandez C. Multifocal eruptive cutaneous epithelioid angiomatous nodules. JAAD Case Rep. 2016;2(6):454-456.

Blasberg JD, Seder CW, Leverson G, Shan Y, Maloney JD, Macke RA. Video-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy for lung cancer: current practice patterns and predictors of adoption. Ann Thorac Surg. 2016;102(6):1854-1862.

Blumenfeld P, Sen N, Abrams R, Wang D. Advances in radiation therapy for primary and metastatic adult soft tissue sarcomas. Curr Oncol Rep. 2016;18(6):36.

Bocco BM, Werneck-de-Castro JP, Oliveira KC, Fernandes GW, Fonseca TL, Nascimento BP, McAninch EA, Ricci E, Kvárta-Papp Z, Fekete C, Bernardi MM, Gereben B, Bianco AC, Ribeiro MO. Type 2 deiodinase disruption in astrocytes results in anxiety-depressive-like behavior in male mice. Endocrinology. 2016;157(9):3682-3695.

Brann AM, Cobleigh MA, Okwuosa TM. Cardiovascular monitoring with trastuzumab therapy: how frequent is too frequent? JAMA Oncol. 2016;2(9):1123-1124.

Buac S, Schadde E, Schnitzbauer AA, Vogt K, Hernandez-Alejandro R. The many faces of ALPPS: surgical indications and techniques among surgeons collaborating in the international registry. HPB (Oxford). 2016;18(5):442-448.

Chalmers AW, Shammo JM. Evaluation of a new tablet formulation of deferasirox to reduce chronic iron overload after long-term blood transfusions. Ther Clin Risk Manag. 2016;12:201-208.

Chan EY, Hertl M. Chest wall mass 5 years after liver transplantation. Am J Transplant. 2016;16(2):722; quiz 721, 723.

Chen H, Liu H, Zou H, Chen R, Dou Y, Sheng S, Dai S, Ai J, Melson J, Kittles RA, Pirooznia M, Liptay MJ, Borgia JA, Deng Y. Evaluation of plasma miR-21 and miR-152 as diagnostic biomarkers for common types of human cancers. J Cancer. 2016;7(5):490-499.

Chen X, Chen H, Dai M, Ai J, Li Y, Mahon B, Dai S, Deng Y. Plasma lipidomics profiling identified lipid biomarkers in distinguishing early-stage breast cancer from benign lesions. Oncotarget. 2016;7(24):36622-36631.

Chowdhary M, Chhabra AM, Kharod S, Marwaha G. Total skin electron beam therapy in the treatment of mycosis fungoides: a review of conventional and low-dose regimens. Clin Lymphoma Myeloma Leuk. 2016;16(12):662-671.

Christensen DK, Armaiz-Pena GN, Ramirez E, Matsuo K, Zimmerman B, Zand B, Shinn E, Goodheart MJ, Bender D, Thaker PH, Ahmed A, Penedo FJ, DeGeest K, Mendez L, Domann F, Sood AK, Lutgendorf SK. SSRI use and clinical outcomes in epithelial ovarian cancer. Oncotarget. 2016;7(22):33179-33191.

Clark PE, Spiess PE, Agarwal N, Bangs R, Boorjian SA, Buyyounouski MK, Efstathiou JA, Flaig TW, Friedlander T, Greenberg RE, Guru KA, Hahn N, Herr HW, Hoimes C, Inman BA, Kader AK, Kibel AS, Kuzel TM, Lele SM, Meeks JJ, Michalski J, Montgomery JS, Pagliaro LC, Pal SK, Patterson A, Petrylak D, Plimack ER, Pohar KS, Porter MP, Sexton WJ, Siefker-Radtke AO, Sonpavde G, Tward J, Wile G, Dwyer MA, Smith C. NCCN guidelines insights: bladder cancer, version 2.2016. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2016;14(10):1213-1224.

Colman MW, Guss A, Bachus KN, Spiker WR, Lawrence BD, Brodke DS. Fixed-angle, posteriorly connected anterior cage reconstruction improves stiffness and decreases cancellous subsidence in a spondylectomy model. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2016;41(9):E519-E523.

Daly SC, Deziel DJ, Li X, Thaqi M, Millikan KW, Myers JA, Bonomo S, Luu MB. Current practices in biliary surgery: do we practice what we teach? Surg Endosc. 2016;30(8):3345-3350.

Daugherty M, Blakely S, Shapiro O, Vourganti S, Mollapour M, Bratslavsky G. Chromophobe renal cell carcinoma is the most common nonclear renal cell carcinoma in young women: results from the SEER database. J Urol. 2016;195(4, pt 1):847-851.

Davaadelger B, Duan L, Perez RE, Gitelis S, Maki CG. Crosstalk between the IGF-1R/AKT/mTORC1 pathway and the tumor suppressors p53 and p27 determines cisplatin sensitivity and limits the effectiveness of an IGF-1R pathway inhibitor. Oncotarget. 2016;7(19):27511-27526.

Desai V, Sussman DA, Greenspan M, Dayanand S, Ollington K, Patel S, Li H, Melson J. Most premature surveillance colonoscopy is not attributable to bowel preparation or new clinical indications. Dig Dis Sci. 2016;61(9):2496-2504.

D’Haese JG, Neumann J, Weniger M, Pratschke S, Björnsson B, Ardiles V, Chapman W, Hernandez-Alejandro R, Soubrane O, Robles-Campos R, Stojanovic M, Dalla Valle R, Chan AC, Coenen M, Guba M, Werner J, Schadde E, Angele MK. Should ALPPS be used for liver resection in intermediate-stage HCC? Ann Surg Oncol. 2016;23(4):1335-1343.

Dolly D, Mihai A, Rimel BJ, Fogg L, Rotmensch J, Guirguis A, Yordan E, Dewdney S. A delay from diagnosis to treatment is associated with a decreased overall survival for patients with endometrial cancer. Front Oncol. 2016;6:31.

Dua SG, Ali A. Bone scintigraphy and CT findings in transverse process apophysitis. Clin Nucl Med. 2016;41(7):574-575.

Dua SG, Jhaveri MD. MR imaging in nelarabine-induced myelopathy. J Clin Neurosci. 2016;29:205-206.

Fernandez FG, Kosinski AS, Burfeind W, Park B, DeCamp MM, Seder C, Marshall B, Magee MJ, Wright CD, Kozower BD. The Society of Thoracic Surgeons lung cancer resection risk model: higher quality data and superior outcomes. Ann Thorac Surg. 2016;102(2):370-377.

Fleetwood VA, Harris JC, Luu MB. Cutaneous angiosarcoma metastatic to small bowel with nodal involvement. Gastroenterol Hepatol Bed Bench. 2016;9(4):340-342.

Fleetwood VA, Kubasiak JC, Janssen I, Myers JA, Millikan KW, Deziel DJ, Luu MB. Primary anastomosis versus ostomy after colon resection during debulking of ovarian carcinomatosis: a NSQIP analysis. Am Surg. 2016;82(4):302-307.

Fleetwood VA, Lusciks J, Poirier J, Hertl M, Chan EY. Utilization of public health service increased risk donors yields equivalent outcomes in liver transplantation. J Transplant. 2016;2016:9658904.

Fleetwood VA, Petersen L, Millikan KW. Gastric adenocarcinoma presenting after revisional Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. Am Surg. 2016;82(8):186-187.

Fokas E, Spezi E, Patel N, Hurt C, Nixon L, Chu KY, Staffurth J, Abrams R, Mukherjee S. Comparison of investigator-delineated gross tumour volumes and quality assurance in pancreatic cancer: analysis of the on-trial cases for the SCALOP trial. Radiother Oncol. 2016;120(2):212-216.

Fontes RB, Wewel JT, O’Toole JE. Perioperative cost analysis of minimally invasive vs open resection of intradural extramedullary spinal cord tumors. Neurosurgery. 2016;78(4):531-539.

Frantzides CT, Daly SC, Frantzides AT, Manelis T, Marcinkevicius A, Luu MB. Laparoscopic transgastric esophageal mucosal resection: a treatment option for patients with high-grade dysplasia in Barrett’s esophagus. Am J Surg. 2016;211(3):534-536.

Fredericks C, Broucek J, Kumar V, Luu M. Laparoscopic gastrectomy for CDH-1 mutation. Am Surg. 2016;82(7):169-170.

Fredericks C, Kubasiak J, Kumar V, Luu M. Splenectomy for primary and secondary splenic neoplasm. Am Surg. 2016;82(8):204-205.

Geissen NM, Medairos R, Davila E, Basu S, Warren WH, Chmielewski GW, Liptay MJ, Arndt AT, Seder CW. Number of ribs resected is associated with respiratory complications following lobectomy with en bloc chest wall resection. Lung. 2016;194(4):619-624.

George S, Motzer RJ, Hammers HJ, Redman BG, Kuzel TM, Tykodi SS, Plimack ER, Jiang J, Waxman IM, Rini BI. Safety and efficacy of nivolumab in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma treated beyond progression: a subgroup analysis of a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Oncol. 2016;2(9):1179-1186.

Gerhart J, Asvat Y, Lattie E, O’Mahony S, Duberstein P, Hoerger M. Distress, delay of gratification and preference for palliative care in men with prostate cancer. Psychooncology. 2016;25(1):91-96.

Gleicher S, Kauffman EC, Kotula L, Bratslavsky G, Vourganti S. Implications of high rates of metastatic prostate cancer in BRCA2 mutation carriers. Prostate. 2016;76(13):1135-1145.

Gonzalez V, Petersen L, Ghai R, Dewdney S, Madrigrano A. Recurrent cervical cancer presenting as inflammatory breast cancer. Am Surg. 2016;82(9):275-277.

Grigalunas AL, Mizen TR. Myeloid sarcoma of the orbit without systemic recurrence of disease in an adult: a clinicopathological case report. Orbit. 2016;35(2):106-108.

Haas NB, Manola J, Uzzo RG, Flaherty KT, Wood CG, Kane C, Jewett M, Dutcher JP, Atkins MB, Pins M, Wilding G, Cella D, Wagner L, Matin S, Kuzel TM, Sexton WJ, Wong YN, Choueiri TK, Pili R, Puzanov I, Kohli M, Stadler W, Carducci M, Coomes R, DiPaola RS. Adjuvant sunitinib or sorafenib for high-risk, non-metastatic renal-cell carcinoma (ECOG-ACRIN E2805): a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised, phase 3 trial [published correction appears in Lancet. 2016;387(10032):1998]. Lancet. 2016;387(10032):2008-2016.

Hamilton AS, Fleming ST, Wang D, Goodman M, Wu XC, Owen JB, Lo M, Ho A, Anderson RT, Thompson T. Clinical and demographic factors associated with receipt of non guideline-concordant initial therapy for nonmetastatic prostate cancer. Am J Clin Oncol. 2016;39(1):55-63.

Hanley M, Ahmed O, Chandra A, Gage KL, Gerhard-Herman MD, Ginsburg M, Gornik HL, Johnson PT, Oliva IB, Ptak T, Steigner ML, Strax R, Rybicki FJ, Dill KE. ACR Appropriateness Criteria clinically suspected pulmonary arteriovenous malformation. J Am Coll Radiol. 2016;13(7):796-800.

Harbhajanka A, Bitterman P, Reddy VB, Park JW, Gattuso P. Cytomorphology and clinicopathologic correlation of the recurrent and metastatic adult granulosa cell tumor of the ovary: a retrospective review. Diagn Cytopathol. 2016;44(12):1058-1063.

Harbhajanka A, Brickman A, Park JW, Reddy VB, Bitterman P, Gattuso P. Cytomorphology, clinicopathologic, and cytogenetics correlation of myelomatous effusion of serous cavities: a retrospective review. Diagn Cytopathol. 2016;44(9):742-747.

Harbhajanka A, Lamzabi I, Jain R, Syed S, Murro D, Gattuso P. Fine needle aspiration cytology of cystic primary adult granulosa cell tumor of the ovary: potential diagnostic pitfalls with other cystic ovarian lesions. Diagn Cytopathol. 2016;44(6):461-465.

Harbhajanka A, Lamzabi I, Syed S, Jain R, Ghai R, Reddy VB, Bitterman P, Gattuso P. Prognostic value of coexisting lobular carcinoma in situ with invasive lobular carcinoma. Appl Immunohistochem Mol Morphol. 2016;24(10):738-743.

Harris J, Blackwood B, Pillai S, Kanard R. Caudal duplication: management of a rare congenital condition. Am Surg. 2016;82(9):227-229.

Harris JC, Chen A, Macias V, Mahon B, Chiu B, Pillai S. Irreversible electroporation as an effective technique for ablating human metastatic osteosarcoma. J Pediatr Hematol Oncol. 2016;38(3):182-186.

Harvey JA, Mahoney MC, Newell MS, Bailey L, Barke LD, D’Orsi C, Hayes MK, Jokich PM, Lee SJ, Lehman CD, Mainiero MB, Mankoff DA, Patel SB, Reynolds HE, Sutherland ML, Haffty BG. ACR Appropriateness Criteria palpable breast masses. J Am Coll Radiol. 2016;13(11S):e31-e42.

Hentz C, Diaz AZ, Borrowdale RW, Emami B, Kase M, Choi M. Establishing a targeted plan for prophylactic dental extractions in patients with laryngeal cancer receiving adjuvant radiotherapy. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol. 2016;122(1):43-49.

Herbst RS, Baas P, Kim DW, Felip E, Pérez-Gracia JL, Han JY, Molina J, Kim JH, Arvis CD, Ahn MJ, Majem M, Fidler MJ, de Castro G Jr, Garrido M, Lubiniecki GM, Shentu Y, Im E, Dolled-Filhart M, Garon EB. Pembrolizumab versus docetaxel for previously treated, PD-L1-positive, advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (KEYNOTE-010): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2016;387(10027):1540-1550.

Herbst RS, Baas P, Perez-Gracia JL, Felip E, Kim DW, Han JY, Molina J, Kim JH, Arvis CD, Ahn MJ, Majem M, Fidler MJ, Surmont V, De Castro G Jr, Garrido M, Shentu Y, Dolled-Filhart M, Im E, Garon EB. P2.41 (also presented as PD1.06): pembrolizumab vs docetaxel for previously treated NSCLC (KEYNOTE-010): archival vs new tumor samples for PD-L1 assessment: track: immunotherapy. J Thorac Oncol. 2016;11(10S):S242-S243.

Huynh PT, Lemeshko SV, Mahoney MC, Newell MS, Bailey L, Barke LD, D’Orsi C, Harvey JA, Hayes MK, Jokich PM, Lee SJ, Lehman CD, Mainiero MB, Mankoff DA, Patel SB, Reynolds HE, Sutherland ML, Haffty BG. ACR Appropriateness Criteria(®) stage I breast carcinoma. J Am Coll Radiol. 2016;13(11S):e53-e57.

Ibrahim I, Haughom BD, Fillingham Y, Gitelis S. Is radiation necessary for treatment of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma of bone? Clinical results with contemporary therapy. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2016;474(3):719-730.

Jeganathan N, Predescu D, Zhang J, Sha F, Bardita C, Patel M, Wood S, Borgia JA, Balk RA, Predescu S. Rac1-mediated cytoskeleton rearrangements induced by intersectin-1s deficiency promotes lung cancer cell proliferation, migration and metastasis. Mol Cancer. 2016;15(1):59.

Jegier BJ, O’Mahony S, Johnson J, Flaska R, Perry A, Runge M, Sommerfeld T. Impact of a centralized inpatient hospice unit in an academic medical center. Am J Hosp Palliat Care. 2016;33(8):755-759.

Jiao J, Ooka K, Fey H, Fiel MI, Rahmman AH, Kojima K, Hoshida Y, Chen X, de Paula T, Vetter D, Sastre D, Lee KH, Lee YA, Bansal M, Friedman SL, Merad M, Aloman C. Interleukin-15 receptor α on hepatic stellate cells regulates hepatic fibrogenesis in mice. J Hepatol. 2016;65(2):344-353.

Kaszuba MC, Kasliwal MK, O’Toole JE. Thoracic paraspinal lesion. J Clin Neurosci. 2016;25:116, 169.

Kauffman EC, Lee MJ, Alarcon SV, Lee S, Hoang AN, Walton Diaz A, Chelluri R, Vourganti S, Trepel JB, Pinto PA. Lack of impact of robotic assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy on intraoperative levels of prostate cancer circulating tumor cells. J Urol. 2016;195(4, pt 1):1136-1142.

Kaufman HL, Amatruda T, Reid T, Gonzalez R, Glaspy J, Whitman E, Harrington K, Nemunaitis J, Zloza A, Wolf M, Senzer NN. Systemic versus local responses in melanoma patients treated with talimogene laherparepvec from a multi-institutional phase II study. J Immunother Cancer. 2016;4:12.

Kerolus MG, Kellogg RG, Novo J, Arvanitis LD, Byrne RW. Pigmented ganglioglioma in a patient with chronic epilepsy and cortical dysplasia. J Clin Neurosci. 2016;24:17-21.

Keutgen XM, Hammel P, Choyke PL, Libutti SK, Jonasch E, Kebebew E. Evaluation and management of pancreatic lesions in patients with von Hippel-Lindau disease. Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2016;13(9):537-549.

Keutgen XM, Nilubol N, Agarwal S, Welch J, Cochran C, Marx SJ, Weinstein LS, Simonds WF, Kebebew E. Reoperative surgery in patients with multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1 associated primary hyperparathyroidism. Ann Surg Oncol. 2016;23(suppl 5):701-707.

Keutgen XM, Nilubol N, Glanville J, Sadowski SM, Liewehr DJ, Venzon DJ, Steinberg SM, Kebebew E. Resection of primary tumor site is associated with prolonged survival in metastatic nonfunctioning pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors. Surgery. 2016;159(1):311-318.

Keutgen XM, Nilubol N, Kebebew E. Malignant-functioning neuroendocrine tumors of the pancreas: a survival analysis. Surgery. 2016;159(5):1382-1389.

Kim BW, Yousman W, Wong WX, Cheng C, McAninch EA. Less is more: comparing the 2015 and 2009 American Thyroid Association guidelines for thyroid nodules and cancer. Thyroid. 2016;26(6):759-764.

Knott PD, Seth R, Waters HH, Revenaugh PC, Alam D, Scharpf J, Meltzer NE, Fritz MA. Short-term donor site morbidity: a comparison of the anterolateral thigh and radial forearm fasciocutaneous free flaps. Head Neck. 2016;38(suppl 1):E945-E948.

Kochanski RB, Byrne N, Arvanitis L, Bhabad S, Byrne RW. A rare intracranial tumor consisting of malignant anaplastic and papillary meningioma subtypes [published correction appears in Surg Neurol Int. 2016;7:58]. Surg Neurol Int. 2016;7:21.

Kohlhapp FJ, Huelsmann EJ, Lacek AT, Schenkel JM, Lusciks J, Broucek JR, Goldufsky JW, Hughes T, Zayas JP, Dolubizno H, Sowell RT, Kühner R, Burd S, Kubasiak JC, Nabatiyan A, Marshall S, Bommareddy PK, Li S, Newman JH, Monken CE, Shafikhani SH, Marzo AL, Guevara-Patino JA, Lasfar A, Thomas PG, Lattime EC, Kaufman HL, Zloza A. Non-oncogenic acute viral infections disrupt anti-cancer responses and lead to accelerated cancer-specific host death. Cell Rep. 2016;17(4):957-965.

Kouri BE, Abrams RA, Al-Refaie WB, Azad N, Farrell J, Gaba RC, Gervais DA, Gipson MG, Kolbeck KJ, Marshalleck FE, Pinchot JW, Small W Jr, Ray CE Jr, Hohenwalter EJ. ACR Appropriateness Criteria radiologic management of hepatic malignancy. J Am Coll Radiol. 2016;13(3):265-273.

Kuan EC, Arshi A, Mallen-St Clair J, Tajudeen BA, Abemayor E, St John MA. Significance of tumor stage in sinonasal undifferentiated carcinoma survival: a population-based analysis. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2016;154(4):667-673.

Kuan EC, Mallen-St Clair J, Frederick JW, Tajudeen BA, Wang MB, Harvey RJ, Suh JD. Significance of undissected retromaxillary air cells as a risk factor for revision endoscopic sinus surgery. Am J Rhinol Allergy. 2016;30(6):448-452.

Kuan EC, Tajudeen BA, Bhuta SM, Palma Diaz MF, Kedeshian PA, Suh JD. Incidental finding of lymphoma after septoplasty. Allergy Rhinol (Providence). 2016;7(2):90-95.

Langer CJ, Obasaju C, Bunn P, Bonomi P, Gandara D, Hirsch FR, Kim ES, Natale RB, Novello S, Paz-Ares L, Pérol M, Reck M, Ramalingam SS, Reynolds CH, Socinski MA, Spigel DR, Wakelee H, Mayo C, Thatcher N. Incremental innovation and progress in advanced squamous cell lung cancer: current status and future impact of treatment. J Thorac Oncol. 2016;11(12):2066-2081.

Lasfar A, de laTorre A, Abushahba W, Cohen-Solal KA, Castaneda I, Yuan Y, Reuhl K, Zloza A, Raveche E, Laskin DL, Kotenko SV. Concerted action of IFN-α and IFN-α induces local NK cell immunity and halts cancer growth. Oncotarget. 2016;7(31):49259-49267.

Lasfar A, Gogas H, Zloza A, Kaufman HL, Kirkwood JM. IFN-α cancer immunotherapy: new kid on the block. Immunotherapy. 2016;8(8):877-888.

Lasfar A, Zloza A, de la Torre A, Cohen-Solal KA. IFN-α: a new inducer of local immunity against cancer and infections. Front Immunol. 2016;7:598.

Lattie EG, Asvat Y, Shivpuri S, Gerhart J, O’Mahony S, Duberstein P, Hoerger M. Associations between personality and end-of-life care preferences among men with prostate cancer: a clustering approach. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2016;51(1):52-59.

Li D, Moughan J, Crane C, Hoffman JP, Regine WF, Abrams RA, Safran H, Liu C, Chang P, Freedman GM, Winter KA, Guha C, Abbruzzese JL. RECQ1 A159C polymorphism is associated with overall survival of patients with resected pancreatic cancer: a replication study in NRG Oncology Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 9704. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2016;94(3):554-560.

Representative Publications

29 30

Li N, Pasricha S, Bulsiewicz WJ, Pruitt RE, Komanduri S, Wolfsen HC, Chmielewski GW, Corbett FS, Chang KJ, Shaheen NJ. Effects of preceding endoscopic mucosal resection on the efficacy and safety of radiofrequency ablation for treatment of Barrett’s esophagus: results from the United States Radiofrequency Ablation Registry. Dis Esophagus. 2016;29(6):537-543.

Li XA, Chen X, Zhang Q, Kirsch DG, Petersen I, DeLaney TF, Freeman CR, Trotti A, Hitchcock Y, Bedi M, Haddock M, Salerno K, Dundas G, Wang D. Margin reduction from image guided radiation therapy for soft tissue sarcoma: secondary analysis of Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 0630 results. Pract Radiat Oncol. 2016;6(4):e135-e140.

Lin DM, Barkan GA, Chatt G, Park JW, Gattuso P. Vaginal fine-needle aspiration: a useful alternative to biopsy. Diagn Cytopathol. 2016;44(8):665-669.

Luo HC, Lei Y, Cheng HH, Fu ZC, Liao SG, Feng J, Yin Q, Chen QH, Lin GS, Zhu JF, Xu JF, Wang D. Long-term cancer-related fatigue outcomes in patients with locally advanced prostate cancer after intensity-modulated radiotherapy combined with hormonal therapy. Medicine (Baltimore). 2016;95(25):e3948.

Machado MA, Surjan RC, Basseres T, Schadde E, Costa FP, Makdissi FF. The laparoscopic Glissonian approach is safe and efficient when compared with standard laparoscopic liver resection: results of an observational study over 7 years. Surgery. 2016;160(3):643-651.

Mahoney KM, Jacobus S, Bhatt RS, Song J, Carvo I, Cheng SC, Simpson M, Fay AP, Puzanov I, Michaelson MD, Atkins MB, McDermott DF, Signoretti S, Choueiri TK. Phase 2 study of bevacizumab and temsirolimus after VEGFR TKI in metastatic renal cell carcinoma. Clin Genitourin Cancer. 2016;14(4):304-313.e6.

Mainiero MB, Lourenco A, Mahoney MC, Newell MS, Bailey L, Barke LD, D’Orsi C, Harvey JA, Hayes MK, Huynh PT, Jokich PM, Lee SJ, Lehman CD, Mankoff DA, Nepute JA, Patel SB, Reynolds HE, Sutherland ML, Haffty BG. ACR Appropriateness criteria breast cancer screening. J Am Coll Radiol. 2016;13(11S):R45-R49.

Makinde HM, Lurain N, Bitterman P, Martinson J, Plants J, Landay AL, Spear GT. Characterization of IL-22 and IL-17 expressing leukocytes in the cervix. Am J Reprod Immunol. 2016;75(1):42-50.

Manthuruthil C, Lewis J, McLean C, Batra PS, Barnett SL. Endoscopic endonasal management of olfactory neuroblastoma: a retrospective analysis of 10 patients with quality-of-life measures. World Neurosurg. 2016;90:1-5.

Martinez-Escala ME, Kuzel TM, Kaplan JB, Petrich A, Nardone B, Rosen ST, Guitart J. Durable responses with maintenance dose-sparing regimens of romidepsin in cutaneous T-cell lymphoma. JAMA Oncol. 2016;2(6):790-793.

Marwaha G, Blumenfeld P, Walker A, Sayidine S, Fhied C, Borgia JA. MINI01.12: angiogenesis biomarkers are associated with progression free survival in non-small cell lung cancer treated with SBRT: topic: radiation oncology. J Thorac Oncol. 2016;11(11S):S263-S264.

Mayahara M, Wilbur J, O’Mahony S, Breitenstein S. E-pain reporter: a digital pain and analgesic diary for home hospice care. West J Nurs Res. 2016;38(10):1390.

McNeal S, Bitterman P, Bahr JM, Edassery SL, Abramowicz JS, Basu S, Barua A. Association of immunosuppression with DR6 expression during the development and progression of spontaneous ovarian cancer in laying hen model. J Immunol Res. 2016;2016:6729379.

Medairos RA, Clark J, Holoubek S, Kubasiak JC, Pithadia R, Hamid F, Chmielewski GW, Warren WH, Basu S, Borgia JA, Liptay MJ, Seder CW. Metformin exposure is associated with improved progression-free survival in diabetic patients after resection for early-stage non-small cell lung cancer. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2016;152(1):55-61.e1.

Melson J, Ma K, Arshad S, Greenspan M, Kaminsky T, Melvani V, Bishehsari F, Mahon B, Jakate S. Presence of small sessile serrated polyps increases rate of advanced neoplasia upon surveillance compared with isolated low-risk tubular adenomas. Gastrointest Endosc. 2016;84(2):307-314.

Michiels S, Pugliano L, Marguet S, Grun D, Barinoff J, Cameron D, Cobleigh M, Di Leo A, Johnston S, Gasparini G, Kaufman B, Marty M, Nekljudova V, Paluch-Shimon S, Penault-Llorca F, Slamon D, Vogel C, von Minckwitz G, Buyse M, Piccart M. Progression-free survival as surrogate end point for overall survival in clinical trials of HER2-targeted agents in HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer. Ann Oncol. 2016;27(6):1029-1034.

Minami CA, Wayne JD, Yang AD, Martini MC, Gerami P, Chandra S, Kuzel TM, Winchester DP, Palis BE, Bilimoria KY. National evaluation of hospital performance on the new Commission on Cancer melanoma quality measures. Ann Surg Oncol. 2016;23(11):3548-3557.

Mittal N, Aakalu V, Mehendele S, Setabutr P, Michals E, Schmidt ML. Primary orbital histiocytic sarcoma in a child successfully treated with multiagent chemotherapy. J Pediatr Hematol Oncol. 2016;38(8):653-657.

Moy L, Newell MS, Mahoney MC, Bailey L, Barke LD, Carkaci S, D’Orsi C, Goyal S, Haffty BG, Harvey JA, Hayes MK, Jokich PM, Lee SJ, Mainiero MB, Mankoff DA, Patel SB, Yepes MM. ACR Appropriateness Criteria stage I breast cancer: initial workup and surveillance for local recurrence and distant metastases in asymptomatic women. J Am Coll Radiol. 2016;13(11S):e43-e52.

Olson D, Bhalla S, Yang X, Martone B, Kuzel TM. Novel use of targeted therapy via PARP-inhibition in a rare form of papillary renal cell carcinoma: a case report and literature review. Clin Genitourin Cancer. 2016;14(4):e445-e448.

O’Mahony S, Gerhart JI, Grosse J, Abrams I, Levy MM. Posttraumatic stress symptoms in palliative care professionals seeking mindfulness training: prevalence and vulnerability. Palliat Med. 2016;30(2):189-192.

O’Mahony S, Nathan S, Mohajer R, Bonomi P, Batus M, Fidler MJ, Wells K, Kern N, Sims S, Amin D. Survival prediction in ambulatory patients with stage III/IV non-small cell lung cancer using the Palliative Performance Scale, ECOG, and Lung Cancer Symptom Scale. Am J Hosp Palliat Care. 2016;33(4):374-380.

Ozden O, Bishehsari F, Bauer J, Park SH, Jana A, Baik SH, Sporn JC, Staudacher JJ, Yazici C, Krett N, Jung B. Expression of an oncogenic BARD1 splice variant impairs homologous recombination and predicts response to PARP-1 inhibitor therapy in colon cancer. Sci Rep. 2016;6:26273.

Patel JD, Pereira JR, Chen J, Liu J, Guba SC, John WJ, Orlando M, Scagliotti G, Bonomi PD. Relationship between efficacy outcomes and weight gain during treatment of advanced, non-squamous, non-small-cell lung cancer patients. Ann Oncol. 2016;27(8):1612-1619.

Patel S, Slade J, Jakate S. An unusual case of noninvasive adenocarcinoma arising in a localized adenomyoma of the gallbladder and review of literature. Int J Surg Pathol. 2016;24(4):341-346.

Principe DR, DeCant B, Diaz AM, Mangan RJ, Hwang R, Lowy A, Shetuni BB, Sreekumar BK, Chung C, Bentrem DJ, Munshi HG, Jung B, Grippo PJ, Bishehsari F. PEDF inhibits pancreatic tumorigenesis by attenuating the fibro-inflammatory reaction. Oncotarget. 2016;7(19):28218-28234.

Qin L, Dominguez D, Chen S, Fan J, Long A, Zhang M, Fang D, Zhang Y, Kuzel TM, Zhang B. Exogenous IL-33 overcomes T cell tolerance in murine acute myeloid leukemia. Oncotarget. 2016;7(38):61069-61080.

Quon D, Chitlur M, Rajpurkar M, Simpson M, O’Brien S, Flood V, Hsieh L, Acharya S, Kruse-Jarres R, Sood S, Maahs J. Women leaders in hematology: inspirations & insights. Am J Hematol. 2016;91(suppl 1):S6-S34.

Qureshi T, Chaus F, Fogg L, Dasgupta M, Straus D, Byrne RW. Learning curve for the transsphenoidal endoscopic endonasal approach to pituitary tumors. Br J Neurosurg. 2016;30(6):637-642.

Raymond DP, Seder CW, Wright CD, Magee MJ, Kosinski AS, Cassivi SD, Grogan EL, Blackmon SH, Allen MS, Park BJ, Burfeind WR, Chang AC, DeCamp MM, Wormuth DW, Fernandez FG, Kozower BD. Predictors of major morbidity or mortality after resection for esophageal cancer: a Society of Thoracic Surgeons general thoracic surgery database risk adjustment model. Ann Thorac Surg. 2016;102(1):207-214.

Reck M, Socinski MA, Luft A, Szczαsna A, Dediu M, Ramlau R, Losonczy G, Molinier O, Schumann C, Gralla RJ, Bonomi P, Brown J, Soldatenkova V, Chouaki N, Obasaju C, Peterson P, Thatcher N. The effect of necitumumab in combination with gemcitabine plus cisplatin on tolerability and on quality of life: results from the phase 3 SQUIRE trial. J Thorac Oncol. 2016;11(6):808-818.

Rimar KJ, Meeks JJ, Kuzel TM. Anti-programmed death receptor 1 blockade induces clinical response in a patient with metastatic collecting duct carcinoma. Clin Genitourin Cancer. 2016;14(4):e431-4.

Rodby KA, Danielson KK, Shay E, Robinson E, Benjamin M, Antony AK. Trends in breast reconstruction by ethnicity: an institutional review centered on the treatment of an urban population. Am Surg. 2016;82(6):497-504.

Rodby KA, Robinson E, Danielson KK, Quinn KP, Antony AK. Age-dependent characteristics in women with breast cancer: mastectomy and reconstructive trends at an urban academic institution. Am Surg. 2016;82(3):227-235.

Rozenshtein A, Heitkamp DE, Muhammed TL, Sclamberg JS, Paladin AM, Smith SE, Nguyen JB, Robbin M. “What program directors think” III: results of the 2014/2015 annual surveys of the Association of Program Directors in Radiology (APDR). Acad Radiol. 2016;23(7):861-869.

Salimzadeh H, Bishehsari F, Amani M, Ansari R, Sotoudeh M, Delavari A, Malekzadeh R. Advanced colonic neoplasia in the first degree relatives of colon cancer patients: a colonoscopy-based study. Int J Cancer. 2016;139(10):2243-2251.

Salimzadeh H, Bishehsari F, Delavari A, Barzin G, Amani M, Majidi A, Sadjadi A, Malekzadeh R. Cancer risk awareness and screening uptake in individuals at higher risk for colon cancer: a cross-sectional study. BMJ Open. 2016;6(12):e013833.

Samartzis D, Gillis CC, Shih P, O’Toole JE, Fessler RG. Intramedullary spinal cord tumors, II: management options and outcomes. Global Spine J. 2016;6(2):176-185.

Schwartz JS, Brooks SG, Stubbs V, Ghosh A, Tajudeen BA, Khalili S, Palmer JN, Lee JY, Nabavizadeh SA, Learned KO, Adappa ND. Temporal patterns of (18) F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography sinonasal uptake after treatment of sinonasal malignancy. Int Forum Allergy Rhinol. 2016;6(12):1301-1307.

Seder CW, Rocco G. Chest wall reconstruction after extended resection. J Thorac Dis. 2016;8(suppl 11):S863-S871.

Seder CW, Salati M, Kozower BD, Wright CD, Falcoz PE, Brunelli A, Fernandez FG. Variation in pulmonary resection practices between the Society of Thoracic Surgeons and the European Society of Thoracic Surgeons general thoracic surgery databases. Ann Thorac Surg. 2016;101(6):2077-2084.

Seiwert TY, Melotek JM, Blair EA, Stenson KM, Salama JK, Witt ME, Brisson RJ, Chawla A, Dekker A, Lingen MW, Kocherginsky M, Villaflor VM, Cohen EE, Haraf DJ, Vokes EE. Final results of a randomized phase 2 trial investigating the addition of cetuximab to induction chemotherapy and accelerated or hyperfractionated chemoradiation for locoregionally advanced head and neck cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2016;96(1):21-29.

Serenari M, Zanello M, Schadde E, Toschi E, Ratti F, Gringeri E, Masetti M, Cillo U, Aldrighetti L, Jovine E; ALPPS Italian Registry Group. Importance of primary indication and liver function between stages: results of a multicenter Italian audit of ALPPS 2012-2014. HPB (Oxford). 2016;18(5):419-427.

Sethi S, Miller I. Plasma cell myeloma with anaplastic transformation. Blood. 2016;128(16):2106.

Shammo JM, Stein BL. Mutations in MPNs: prognostic implications, window to biology, and impact on treatment decisions. Hematology Am Soc Hematol Educ Program. 2016;2016(1):552-560.

Sher DJ, Fidler MJ, Tishler RB, Stenson K, Al-Khudari S. Cost-effectiveness analysis of chemoradiation therapy versus transoral robotic surgery for human papillomavirus-associated, clinical N2 oropharyngeal cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2016;94(3):512-522.

Sher DJ, Schwartz DL, Nedzi L, Khan S, Hughes R, Fidler MJ, Koshy M. Comparative effectiveness of induction chemotherapy for oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma: a population-based analysis. Oral Oncol. 2016;54:58-67.

Shin JY, Diaz AZ. Anaplastic astrocytoma: prognostic factors and survival in 4807 patients with emphasis on receipt and impact of adjuvant therapy. J Neurooncol. 2016;129(3):557-565.

Shin JY, Diaz AZ. Utilization and impact of adjuvant therapy in anaplastic oligodendroglioma: an analysis on 1692 patients. J Neurooncol. 2016;129(3):567-575.

Singh C, Gupta M, Singh J, Ali A. Isolated calcaneal metastasis: an unusual presentation of lung carcinoma as heel pain. Clin Nucl Med. 2016;41(3):214-216.

Singh K, Nandyala SV, Marquez-Lara A, Fineberg SJ, Pelton M. To the editor. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2016;41(17):E1069-E1070.

Small W Jr, Hayes JP, Suh WW, Abdel-Wahab M, Abrams RA, Azad N, Das P, Dragovic J, Goodman KA, Jabbour SK, Jones WE III, Konski AA, Koong AC, Kumar R, Lee P, Pawlik TM, Herman JM; Expert Panel on Radiation Oncology-Gastrointestinal. ACR Appropriateness Criteria® borderline and unresectable pancreas cancer. Oncology (Williston Park). 2016;30(7):619-624, 627, 632.

Socik A, Burnes A, Rhodes AR. Prevalence and gross morphologic features of perianal melanocytic nevi. JAMA Dermatol. 2016;152(11):1209-1217.

Socinski MA, Obasaju C, Gandara D, Hirsch FR, Bonomi P, Bunn P, Kim ES, Langer CJ, Natale RB, Novello S, Paz-Ares L, Pérol M, Reck M, Ramalingam SS, Reynolds CH, Spigel DR, Stinchcombe TE, Wakelee H, Mayo C, Thatcher N. Clinicopathologic features of advanced squamous NSCLC. J Thorac Oncol. 2016;11(9):1411-1422.

Solka KA, Schmid TM, Miller IJ. Abundant lubricin expression suggests a link between synoviocytes, synovial tumors, and myxomas. Histol Histopathol. 2016;31(10):1131-1141.

Stanca CM, Aloman C, Fiel MI, Raja K, Uskudar O, Florman S, Schiano TD. The dynamic and clinical significance of autoantibodies and immunoglobulins in liver transplant recipients. Clin Transplant. 2016;30(3):241-246.

Steinbrecher K, Arslan B, Nassin ML, Kent P. Irreversible electroporation in the curative treatment of Ewing’s sarcoma. BMJ Case Rep. 2016;2016:bcr2016216585.

Surjan RC, Makdissi FF, Basseres T, Leite D, Charles LF, Bezerra RO, Schadde E, Machado MA. First totally laparoscopic ALPPS procedure with selective hepatic artery clamping: case report of a new technique. Medicine (Baltimore). 2016;95(29):e4236.

Tajudeen BA, Adappa ND, Kuan EC, Schwartz JS, Suh JD, Wang MB, Palmer JN. Smell preservation following endoscopic unilateral resection of esthesioneuroblastoma: a multi-institutional experience. Int Forum Allergy Rhinol. 2016;6(10):1047-1050.

Tan LA, Chen M, Muñoz LF. Letter to the editor: utility of dual-energy CT in differentiating contrast extravasation from intracranial hematoma. J Neurosurg. 2016;124(1):279-280.

Tan LA, Harbhajanka A, Kasliwal MK, Nag S, Munoz LF. Giant trichilemmal cyst of the scalp. Neurol India. 2016;64(2):357-358.

Tan LA, Syed S, Arvanitis LD, Munoz LF. Calcifying pseudoneoplasm of the superior medullary velum: an unusual location for a rare lesion. Neurol India. 2016;64(1):185-186.

Tan WP, Lin C, Chen M, Deane LA. Periprostatic fat: a risk factor for prostate cancer? Urology. 2016;98:107-112.

Tan WP, Sherer BA, Hoeksema J. Ecthyma gangrenosum of the scrotum: a case report. Front Med. 2016;10(1):101-103.

Tan WP, Tecle N, Whelan P, Strong A, Deane LA. Upper tract urothelial carcinoma in the genetically predisposed patient: role of urinary markers in predicting recurrence. J Endourol Case Rep. 2016;2(1):235-237.

Tarhoni I, Fhied C, Pithadia R, Seder CW, Basu S, Liptay M, Borgia JA. MINI01.06: circulating angiogenesis biomarkers are predictive for early stage non-small cell lung cancer progression and clinical outcome: topic: pathology. J Thorac Oncol. 2016;11(11S):S259-S260.

Temkin SM, Tanner EJ, Dewdney SB, Minasian LM. Reducing overtreatment in gynecologic oncology: the case for less in endometrial and ovarian cancer. Front Oncol. 2016;6:118.

Tiwari S, Raman J, Reddy V, Ghetler A, Tella RP, Han Y, Moon CR, Hoke CD, Bhargava R. Towards translation of discrete frequency infrared spectroscopic imaging for digital histopathology of clinical biopsy samples. Anal Chem. 2016;88(20):10183-10190.

Turturro SB, Najor MS, Ruby CE, Cobleigh MA, Abukhdeir AM. Mutations in PIK3CA sensitize breast cancer cells to physiologic levels of aspirin. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2016;156(1):33-43.

Usha L, Dewdney SB, Buckingham LE. Tumor screening and DNA testing in the diagnosis of Lynch syndrome. JAMA. 2016;316(1):93-94.

Vasnani R, Ginsburg M, Ahmed O, Doshi T, Hart J, Te H, Van Ha TG. Radiofrequency and microwave ablation in combination with transarterial chemoembolization induce equivalent histopathologic coagulation necrosis in hepatocellular carcinoma patients bridged to liver transplantation. Hepatobiliary Surg Nutr. 2016;5(3):225-233.

Villaflor VM, Melotek JM, Karrison TG, Brisson RJ, Blair EA, Portugal L, De Souza JA, Ginat DT, Stenson KM, Langerman A, Kocherginsky M, Spiotto MT, Hannigan N, Seiwert TY, Cohen EE, Vokes EE, Haraf DJ. Response-adapted volume de-escalation (RAVD) in locally advanced head and neck cancer. Ann Oncol. 2016;27(5):908-913.

Waqar SN, Bonomi PD, Govindan R, Hirsch FR, Riely GJ, Papadimitrakopoulou V, Kazandjian D, Khozin S, Larkins E, Dickson DJ, Malik S, Horn L, Ferris A, Shaw AT, Jänne PA, Mok TS, Herbst R, Keegan P, Pazdur R, Blumenthal GM. Clinician perspectives on current issues in lung cancer drug development. J Thorac Oncol. 2016;11(9):1387-1396.

Ward MC, Oh SC, Pham YD, Woody NM, Marwaha G, Videtic GM, Stephans KL. Isolated nodal failure after stereotactic body radiotherapy for lung cancer: the role for salvage mediastinal radiotherapy. J Thorac Oncol. 2016;11(9):1558-1564.

Wewel JT, Nunna RS, Tan LA, Kasliwal MK, O’Toole JE. Novel reconstruction of the anterior craniocervical junction using an expandable cage with integrated fixation after total C2 spondylectomy for chordoma. J Clin Neurosci. 2016;30:157-160.

Williamson AJ, Doscas ME, Ye J, Heiden KB, Xing M, Li Y, Prinz RA, Xu X. The sonic hedgehog signaling pathway stimulates anaplastic thyroid cancer cell motility and invasiveness by activating Akt and c-Met. Oncotarget. 2016;7(9):10472-10485.

Wong SJ, Heron DE, Stenson K, Ling DC, Vargo JA. Locoregional recurrent or second primary head and neck cancer: management strategies and challenges. Am Soc Clin Oncol Educ Book. 2016;35:e284-92.

Ye C, Geng Z, Dominguez D, Chen S, Fan J, Qin L, Long A, Zhang Y, Kuzel TM, Zhang B. Targeting ornithine decarboxylase by α-difluoromethylornithine inhibits tumor growth by impairing myeloid-derived suppressor cells. J Immunol. 2016;196(2):915-923.

Zhou R, Orkin BA. Repair of a colonoscopic perforation of the rectum with transanal endoscopic microsurgery. Tech Coloproctol. 2016;20(10):721-723.

Rush is an academic health system comprising Rush University Medical Center, Rush Copley Medical Center and Rush Oak Park Hospital.

PLEASE NOTE: All physicians featured in this publication are on the medical faculty of Rush University Medical Center. Some of the physicians featured are in private practice and, as independent practioners, are not agents or employees of Rush University Medical Center.

Photography by the Rush Photo Group and Eric Herzog.

The Rush University Cancer Center comprises all of the cancer-related clinical, research and educational efforts at Rush, crossing 20 departments, divisions and sections; inpatient and outpatient areas; professional clinical activities; and the colleges of Rush University.

For more information about cancer programs at Rush or to refer a patient for an init ial visit or a second opinion, please call (312) CANCER-1 (226-2371).

Visit rush.edu/cancer to learn more.

Rush has received four consecutive outstanding achievement awards from the Commission on Cancer of the American College of Surgeons.

M-4

518

6/17