Network


Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.

Hotspot


Dive into the research topics where Andrew N. Freedman is active.

Publication


Featured researches published by Andrew N. Freedman.


Journal of the National Cancer Institute | 2012

Risk of Heart Failure in Breast Cancer Patients After Anthracycline and Trastuzumab Treatment: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Erin J. Aiello Bowles; Robert J. Wellman; Heather Spencer Feigelson; Adedayo A. Onitilo; Andrew N. Freedman; Thomas Delate; Larry A. Allen; Larissa Nekhlyudov; Katrina A.B. Goddard; Robert L. Davis; Laurel A. Habel; Marianne Ulcickas Yood; Catherine A. McCarty; David J. Magid; Edward H. Wagner

Background Clinical trials demonstrated that women treated for breast cancer with anthracycline or trastuzumab are at increased risk for heart failure and/or cardiomyopathy (HF/CM), but the generalizability of these findings is unknown. We estimated real-world adjuvant anthracycline and trastuzumab use and their associations with incident HF/CM. Methods We conducted a population-based, retrospective cohort study of 12 500 women diagnosed with incident, invasive breast cancer from January 1, 1999 through December 31, 2007, at eight integrated Cancer Research Network health systems. Using administrative procedure and pharmacy codes, we identified anthracycline, trastuzumab, and other chemotherapy use. We identified incident HF/CM following chemotherapy initiation and assessed risk of HF/CM with time-varying chemotherapy exposures vs no chemotherapy. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) with adjustment for age at diagnosis, stage, Cancer Research Network site, year of diagnosis, radiation therapy, and comorbidities. Results Among 12 500 women (mean age = 60 years, range = 22–99 years), 29.6% received anthracycline alone, 0.9% received trastuzumab alone, 3.5% received anthracycline plus trastuzumab, 19.5% received other chemotherapy, and 46.5% received no chemotherapy. Anthracycline and trastuzumab recipients were younger, with fewer comorbidities than recipients of other chemotherapy or none. Compared with no chemotherapy, the risk of HF/CM was higher in patients treated with anthracycline alone (adjusted HR = 1.40, 95% CI = 1.11 to 1.76), although the increased risk was similar to other chemotherapy (adjusted HR = 1.49, 95% CI = 1.25 to 1.77); the risk was highly increased in patients treated with trastuzumab alone (adjusted HR = 4.12, 95% CI = 2.30 to 7.42) or anthracycline plus trastuzumab (adjusted HR = 7.19, 95% CI = 5.00 to 10.35). Conclusions Anthracycline and trastuzumab were primarily used in younger, healthier women and associated with increased HF/CM risk compared with no chemotherapy. This population-based observational study complements findings from clinical trials on cancer treatment safety.


Journal of Clinical Oncology | 2009

Colorectal Cancer Risk Prediction Tool for White Men and Women Without Known Susceptibility

Andrew N. Freedman; Martha L. Slattery; Rachel Ballard-Barbash; Gordon Willis; Bette J. Cann; David Pee; Mitchell H. Gail; Ruth M. Pfeiffer

PURPOSE Given the high incidence of colorectal cancer (CRC), and the availability of procedures that can detect disease and remove precancerous lesions, there is a need for a model that estimates the probability of developing CRC across various age intervals and risk factor profiles. METHODS The development of separate CRC absolute risk models for men and women included estimating relative risks and attributable risk parameters from population-based case-control data separately for proximal, distal, and rectal cancer and combining these estimates with baseline age-specific cancer hazard rates based on Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) incidence rates and competing mortality risks. RESULTS For men, the model included a cancer-negative sigmoidoscopy/colonoscopy in the last 10 years, polyp history in the last 10 years, history of CRC in first-degree relatives, aspirin and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) use, cigarette smoking, body mass index (BMI), current leisure-time vigorous activity, and vegetable consumption. For women, the model included sigmoidoscopy/colonoscopy, polyp history, history of CRC in first-degree relatives, aspirin and NSAID use, BMI, leisure-time vigorous activity, vegetable consumption, hormone-replacement therapy (HRT), and estrogen exposure on the basis of menopausal status. For men and women, relative risks differed slightly by tumor site. A validation study in independent data indicates that the models for men and women are well calibrated. CONCLUSION We developed absolute risk prediction models for CRC from population-based data, and a simple questionnaire suitable for self-administration. This model is potentially useful for counseling, for designing research intervention studies, and for other applications.


Journal of Medical Genetics | 2005

Hereditary breast/ovarian and colorectal cancer genetics knowledge in a national sample of US physicians

Louise Wideroff; Susan T. Vadaparampil; Mark H. Greene; Stephen Taplin; Lorayn Olson; Andrew N. Freedman

Background: Clinically relevant genetics knowledge is essential for appropriate assessment and management of inherited cancer risk, and for effective communication with patients. This national physician survey assessed knowledge regarding basic cancer genetics concepts early in the process of introduction of predictive genetic testing for breast/ovarian and hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer (HNPCC) syndromes. Methods: A stratified random sample was selected from the American Medical Association Masterfile of all licensed physicians. In total, 1251 physicians (820 in primary care, 431 in selected subspecialties) responded to a 15 minute questionnaire (response rate 71%) in 1999–2000. Multivariate logistic regression analyses were conducted to identify demographic and practice characteristics associated with accurate response to three knowledge questions. Results: Of the study population, 37.5% was aware of paternal inheritance of BRCA1/2 mutations, and 33.8% recognised that these mutations occur in <10% of breast cancer patients. Only 13.1% accurately identified HNPCC gene penetrance as ⩾50%. Obstetrics/gynaecology physicians, oncologists, and general surgeons were significantly more likely than general and family practitioners to respond accurately to the breast/ovarian questions, as were gastroenterologists to the HNPCC question. Conclusions: These nationally representative data indicate limited physician knowledge about key cancer genetics concepts in 1999–2000, particularly among general primary care physicians. Specialists were more knowledgeable about syndromes they might treat or refer elsewhere. Recent dissemination of practice guidelines and continued expansion of relevant clinical literature may enhance knowledge over time. In addition to educational efforts to assist physicians with the growing knowledge base, more research is needed to characterise the organisational changes required within the healthcare system to provide effective cancer genetics services.


Journal of Clinical Oncology | 2011

Benefit/Risk Assessment for Breast Cancer Chemoprevention With Raloxifene or Tamoxifen for Women Age 50 Years or Older

Andrew N. Freedman; Binbing Yu; Mitchell H. Gail; Joseph P. Costantino; Barry I. Graubard; Victor G. Vogel; Garnet L. Anderson; Worta McCaskill-Stevens

PURPOSE The Study of Tamoxifen and Raloxifene (STAR) demonstrated that raloxifene was as effective as tamoxifen in reducing the risk of invasive breast cancer (IBC) in postmenopausal women and had lower risks of thromboembolic events, endometrial cancer, and cataracts but had a nonstatistically significant higher risk of noninvasive breast cancer. There is a need to summarize the risks and benefits of these agents. PATIENTS AND METHODS Baseline incidence rates of IBC and other health outcomes, absent raloxifene and tamoxifen, were estimated from breast cancer chemoprevention trials; the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results Program; and the Womens Health Initiative. Effects of raloxifene and tamoxifen were estimated from STAR and the Breast Cancer Prevention Trial. We assigned weights to health outcomes to calculate the net benefit from raloxifene compared with placebo and tamoxifen compared with placebo. RESULTS Risks and benefits of treatment with raloxifene or tamoxifen depend on age, race, breast cancer risk, and history of hysterectomy. Over a 5-year period, postmenopausal women with an intact uterus had a better benefit/risk index for raloxifene than for tamoxifen. For postmenopausal women without a uterus, the benefit/risk ratio was similar. The benefits and risks of raloxifene and tamoxifen are described in tables that can help identify groups of women for whom the benefits outweigh the risks. CONCLUSION We developed a benefit/risk index to quantify benefits from chemoprevention with tamoxifen or raloxifene. This index can complement clinical evaluation in deciding whether to initiate chemoprevention and in comparing the benefits and risks of raloxifene versus tamoxifen.


Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety | 2014

Trends in the use of aspirin and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in the general U.S. population.

Yingjun Zhou; Denise M. Boudreau; Andrew N. Freedman

The objective of this study was to describe trends in the prevalence of regular aspirin and nonsteroidal anti‐inflammatory drug (NSAID) use among adults in the United States during 2005 and 2010, and to identify characteristics of regular users.


Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention | 2010

Prevalence of Tamoxifen Use for Breast Cancer Chemoprevention Among U.S. Women

Erika A. Waters; Kathleen A. Cronin; Barry I. Graubard; Paul K. J. Han; Andrew N. Freedman

Background: Tamoxifen can reduce the risk of developing invasive estrogen receptor–positive breast cancer by 49%, but it is unknown how many women in the United States are taking tamoxifen for primary prevention of breast cancer. Methods: Data from the years 2000 and 2005 National Health Interview Surveys were analyzed to estimate the prevalence of tamoxifen use among U.S. women for primary chemoprevention of breast cancer. Results: In 2000, ∼0.2% of U.S. women ages 40 to 79 years without a personal history of breast cancer took tamoxifen for chemoprevention (95% confidence interval, 0.13-0.31). In 2005, the prevalence was ∼0.08% (95% confidence interval, 0.03-0.17). Conclusion: The prevalence of tamoxifen use for primary prevention of breast cancer was very low in the years 2000 and 2005. Possible explanations for the low uptake are explored. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 19(2); 443–6


Journal of Clinical Oncology | 2009

Validation of a colorectal cancer risk prediction model among white patients age 50 years and older.

Yikyung Park; Andrew N. Freedman; Mitchell H. Gail; David Pee; Albert R. Hollenbeck; Arthur Schatzkin; Ruth M. Pfeiffer

PURPOSE Validation of an absolute risk prediction model for colorectal cancer (CRC) by using a large, population-based cohort. PATIENTS AND METHODS The National Institutes of Health (NIH) -American Association of Retired Persons (AARP) diet and health study, a prospective cohort study, was used to validate the model. Men and women age 50 to 71 years at baseline answered self-administered questionnaires that asked about demographic characteristics, diet, lifestyle, and medical histories. We compared expected numbers of CRC patient cases predicted by the model to the observed numbers of CRC patient cases identified in the NIH-AARP study overall and in subgroups defined by risk factor combinations. The discriminatory power was measured by the area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUC). RESULTS During an average of 6.9 years of follow-up, we identified 2,092 and 832 incident CRC patient cases in men and women, respectively. The overall expected/observed ratio was 0.99 (95% CI, 0.95 to 1.04) in men and 1.05 (95% CI, 0.98 to 1.11) in women. Agreement between the expected and the observed number of cases was good in most risk factor categories, except for in subgroups defined by CRC screening and polyp history. This discrepancy may be caused by differences in the question on screening and polyp history between two studies. The AUC was 0.61 (95% CI, 0.60 to 0.62) for men and 0.61 (95% CI, 0.59 to 0.62) for women, which was similar to other risk prediction models. CONCLUSION The absolute risk model for CRC was well calibrated in a large prospective cohort study. This prediction model, which estimates an individuals risk of CRC given age and risk factors, may be a useful tool for physicians, researchers, and policy makers.


Public Health Genomics | 2003

Awareness of genetic testing for increased cancer risk in the year 2000 National Health Interview Survey.

Louise Wideroff; Susan T. Vadaparampil; Nancy Breen; Robert T. Croyle; Andrew N. Freedman

Objectives: This study explores factors associated with differential awareness of genetic tests for increased cancer risk in the US. Methods: 27,405 respondents from the 2000 National Health Interview Survey, ages 25+, were asked if they had heard of these tests. Results: 44.4% said ‘yes’, including 49.9% of whites, 32.9% of African-Americans, 32.3% of American Indians/Alaskan Natives, 28.0% of Asian/Pacific Islanders, and 20.6% of Hispanics. In multivariate analysis, test awareness was significantly associated with higher education, white race, age <60 years, female gender, private health insurance, personal or parent’s history of certain cancers, physical activity, and vitamin/supplement use, among other factors. Conclusions: The survey showed which population subgroups may lack access to cancer genetics information and may therefore benefit from targeted strategies to ensure risk-appropriate utilization of genetic counseling and testing.


Medical Decision Making | 2011

Communication of Uncertainty Regarding Individualized Cancer Risk Estimates Effects and Influential Factors

Paul K. J. Han; William M. P. Klein; Tom Lehman; Bill Killam; Holly Massett; Andrew N. Freedman

Objective. To examine the effects of communicating uncertainty regarding individualized colorectal cancer risk estimates and to identify factors that influence these effects. Methods. Two Web-based experiments were conducted, in which adults aged 40 years and older were provided with hypothetical individualized colorectal cancer risk estimates differing in the extent and representation of expressed uncertainty. The uncertainty consisted of imprecision (otherwise known as “ambiguity”) of the risk estimates and was communicated using different representations of confidence intervals. Experiment 1 (n = 240) tested the effects of ambiguity (confidence interval v. point estimate) and representational format (textual v. visual) on cancer risk perceptions and worry. Potential effect modifiers, including personality type (optimism), numeracy, and the information’s perceived credibility, were examined, along with the influence of communicating uncertainty on responses to comparative risk information. Experiment 2 (n = 135) tested enhanced representations of ambiguity that incorporated supplemental textual and visual depictions. Results. Communicating uncertainty led to heightened cancer-related worry in participants, exemplifying the phenomenon of “ambiguity aversion.” This effect was moderated by representational format and dispositional optimism; textual (v. visual) format and low (v. high) optimism were associated with greater ambiguity aversion. However, when enhanced representations were used to communicate uncertainty, textual and visual formats showed similar effects. Both the communication of uncertainty and use of the visual format diminished the influence of comparative risk information on risk perceptions. Conclusions. The communication of uncertainty regarding cancer risk estimates has complex effects, which include heightening cancer-related worry—consistent with ambiguity aversion—and diminishing the influence of comparative risk information on risk perceptions. These responses are influenced by representational format and personality type, and the influence of format appears to be modifiable and content dependent.


Genetics in Medicine | 2009

The Genomic Applications in Practice and Prevention Network

Muin J. Khoury; W. Gregory Feero; Michele Reyes; Toby Citrin; Andrew N. Freedman; Debra G. B. Leonard; Wylie Burke; Ralph J. Coates; Robert T Croyle; Karen L. Edwards; Sharon L.R. Kardia; Colleen M. McBride; Teri A. Manolio; Gurvaneet Randhawa; Rebekah S. Rasooly; Jeannette St. Pierre; Sharon F. Terry

The authors describe the rationale and initial development of a new collaborative initiative, the Genomic Applications in Practice and Prevention Network. The network convened by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the National Institutes of Health includes multiple stakeholders from academia, government, health care, public health, industry and consumers. The premise of Genomic Applications in Practice and Prevention Network is that there is an unaddressed chasm between gene discoveries and demonstration of their clinical validity and utility. This chasm is due to the lack of readily accessible information about the utility of most genomic applications and the lack of necessary knowledge by consumers and providers to implement what is known. The mission of Genomic Applications in Practice and Prevention Network is to accelerate and streamline the effective integration of validated genomic knowledge into the practice of medicine and public health, by empowering and sponsoring research, evaluating research findings, and disseminating high quality information on candidate genomic applications in practice and prevention. Genomic Applications in Practice and Prevention Network will develop a process that links ongoing collection of information on candidate genomic applications to four crucial domains: (1) knowledge synthesis and dissemination for new and existing technologies, and the identification of knowledge gaps, (2) a robust evidence-based recommendation development process, (3) translation research to evaluate validity, utility and impact in the real world and how to disseminate and implement recommended genomic applications, and (4) programs to enhance practice, education, and surveillance.

Collaboration


Dive into the Andrew N. Freedman's collaboration.

Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Muin J. Khoury

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Sheri D. Schully

National Institutes of Health

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Scott D. Ramsey

Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Mark A. Hlatky

American Heart Association

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Daniela Seminara

National Institutes of Health

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

William M. P. Klein

National Institutes of Health

View shared research outputs
Researchain Logo
Decentralizing Knowledge