Network


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

Hotspot


Dive into the research topics where Hanjie Shen is active.

Publication


Featured researches published by Hanjie Shen.


Journal of Clinical Oncology | 2016

Improved Method to Stratify Elderly Patients With Cancer at Risk for Competing Events

Ruben Carmona; Kaveh Zakeri; G. Green; Lindsay Hwang; Sachin Gulaya; Beibei Xu; Rohan Verma; C.W. Williamson; Daniel P. Triplett; Brent S. Rose; Hanjie Shen; Florin Vaida; James D. Murphy; Loren K. Mell

PURPOSE To compare a novel generalized competing event (GCE) model versus the standard Cox proportional hazards regression model for stratifying elderly patients with cancer who are at risk for competing events. METHODS We identified 84,319 patients with nonmetastatic prostate, head and neck, and breast cancers from the SEER-Medicare database. Using demographic, tumor, and clinical characteristics, we trained risk scores on the basis of GCE versus Cox models for cancer-specific mortality and all-cause mortality. In test sets, we examined the predictive ability of the risk scores on the different causes of death, including second cancer mortality, noncancer mortality, and cause-specific mortality, using Fine-Gray regression and area under the curve. We compared how well models stratified subpopulations according to the ratio of the cumulative cause-specific hazard for cancer mortality to the cumulative hazard for overall mortality (ω) using the Akaike Information Criterion. RESULTS In each sample, increasing GCE risk scores were associated with increased cancer-specific mortality and decreased competing mortality, whereas risk scores from Cox models were associated with both increased cancer-specific mortality and competing mortality. GCE models created greater separation in the area under the curve for cancer-specific mortality versus noncancer mortality (P < .001), indicating better discriminatory ability between these events. Comparing the GCE model to Cox models of cause-specific mortality or all-cause mortality, the respective Akaike Information Criterion scores were superior (lower) in each sample: prostate cancer, 28.6 versus 35.5 versus 39.4; head and neck cancer, 21.1 versus 29.4 versus 40.2; and breast cancer, 24.6 versus 32.3 versus 50.8. CONCLUSION Compared with standard modeling approaches, GCE models improve stratification of elderly patients with cancer according to their risk of dying from cancer relative to overall mortality.


International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics | 2016

Prospective Validation of a High-Dimensional Shape Model for Organ Motion in Intact Cervical Cancer.

C.W. Williamson; G. Green; S.S. Noticewala; Nan Li; Hanjie Shen; Florin Vaida; Loren K. Mell

PURPOSE Validated models are needed to justify strategies to define planning target volumes (PTVs) for intact cervical cancer used in clinical practice. Our objective was to independently validate a previously published shape model, using data collected prospectively from clinical trials. METHODS AND MATERIALS We analyzed 42 patients with intact cervical cancer treated with daily fractionated pelvic intensity modulated radiation therapy and concurrent chemotherapy in one of 2 prospective clinical trials. We collected online cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans before each fraction. Clinical target volume (CTV) structures from the planning computed tomography scan were cast onto each CBCT scan after rigid registration and manually redrawn to account for organ motion and deformation. We applied the 95% isodose cloud from the planning computed tomography scan to each CBCT scan and computed any CTV outside the 95% isodose cloud. The primary aim was to determine the proportion of CTVs that were encompassed within the 95% isodose volume. A 1-sample t test was used to test the hypothesis that the probability of complete coverage was different from 95%. We used mixed-effects logistic regression to assess effects of time and patient variability. RESULTS The 95% isodose line completely encompassed 92.3% of all CTVs (95% confidence interval, 88.3%-96.4%), not significantly different from the 95% probability anticipated a priori (P=.19). The overall proportion of missed CTVs was small: the grand mean of covered CTVs was 99.9%, and 95.2% of misses were located in the anterior body of the uterus. Time did not affect coverage probability (P=.71). CONCLUSIONS With the clinical implementation of a previously proposed PTV definition strategy based on a shape model for intact cervical cancer, the probability of CTV coverage was high and the volume of CTV missed was low. This PTV expansion strategy is acceptable for clinical trials and practice; however, we recommend daily image guidance to avoid systematic large misses in select patients.


Journal of the National Cancer Institute | 2018

Prognostic Role of p16 in Nonoropharyngeal Head and Neck Cancer

Alex K. Bryant; E. Sojourner; Lucas K. Vitzthum; Kaveh Zakeri; Hanjie Shen; Cammie Nguyen; James D. Murphy; Joseph A. Califano; Ezra E.W. Cohen; Loren K. Mell

Background Previous studies have reported conflicting information regarding the prognostic role of p16 in nonoropharyngeal head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC). Methods Using the US Veterans Affairs database, we analyzed 1448 patients with locoregionally advanced HNSCC and known p16 status diagnosed between 2005 and 2015 and treated with surgery, radiotherapy, or chemoradiotherapy. Tumor p16 status was determined through manual review of pathology reports of primary tumor specimens. Oropharyngeal (n = 1061) or nonoropharyngeal (n = 387; hypopharyngeal, laryngeal, or oral cavity) tumor site was determined from tumor registry data and manually reviewed for accuracy. We used multivariable Cox regression to analyze the effect of p16 status on overall survival (OS), cancer-specific survival (CSS), and competing mortality (CM) for oropharyngeal or nonoropharyngeal tumor sites. All statistical tests were two-sided. Results In multivariable models adjusting for treatment, stage, age, comorbidity, and body mass index, patients with p16-positive tumors had improved OS, CSS, and CM compared with patients with p16-negative tumors in both oropharyngeal (OS: hazard ratio [HR] = 0.53, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.40 to 0.71, P < .001; CSS: HR = 0.50, 95% CI = 0.35 to 0.73, P < .001; CM: HR = 0.59, 95% CI = 0.38 to 0.93, P = .02) and nonoropharyngeal primary sites (OS: HR = 0.41, 95% CI = 0.25 to 0.69, P < .001; CSS: HR = 0.37, 95% CI = 0.18 to 0.77, P = .008; CM: HR = 0.46, 95% CI = 0.23 to 0.95, P = .04). The prognostic impact of p16 status did not statistically significantly differ by primary tumor site for OS, CSS, or CM (Pinteraction > .05). Conclusions Our findings support the hypothesis that p16 has a similar prognostic role in both nonoropharyngeal and oropharyngeal cancer. Consideration should be given to increased testing for p16 in laryngeal, hypopharyngeal, and oral cavity primaries.


JCO Clinical Cancer Informatics | 2018

Generalized Competing Event Models Can Reduce Cost and Duration of Cancer Clinical Trials

Kaveh Zakeri; Neil Panjwani; Ruben Carmona; Hanjie Shen; Lucas K. Vitzthum; Qiang E. Zhang; James D. Murphy; Loren K. Mell

PURPOSE Generalized competing event (GCE) models improve stratification of patients according to their risk of cancer events relative to competing causes of mortality. The potential impact of such methods on clinical trial power and cost, however, is uncertain. We sought to test the hypothesis that GCE models can reduce estimated clinical trial cost in elderly patients with cancer. METHODS Patients with nonmetastatic head and neck (n = 9,677), breast (n = 22,929), or prostate cancer (n = 51,713) were sampled from the SEER-Medicare database. Using multivariable Cox proportional hazards models, we compared risk scores for all-cause mortality (ACM) and cancer-specific mortality (CSM) with GCE-based risk scores for each disease. We applied a cost function to estimate the cost and duration of clinical trials with a primary end point of overall survival in each population and in high-risk subpopulations. We conducted sensitivity analyses to examine model uncertainty. RESULTS For the purpose of enriching subpopulations, GCE models reduced estimated clinical trial cost compared with Cox models of ACM and CSM in all disease sites. The relative cost reductions with GCE models compared with ACM and CSM models, respectively, were -68.4% and -14.4% in prostate cancer, -38.8% and -18.3% in breast cancer, and -17.1% and -4.1% in head and neck cancer. Cost savings in breast and prostate cancers were on the order of millions of dollars. The GCE model also reduced relative clinical trial duration compared with CSM and ACM models for all disease sites. The optimal risk score cutoff for clinical trial enrollment occurred near the top tertile for all disease sites. CONCLUSION GCE models have significant potential to improve clinical trial efficiency and reduce cost, with a potentially large impact in prostate and breast cancers.


Frontiers in Oncology | 2018

Incidence of Long-Term Esophageal Dilation With Various Treatment Approaches in the Older Head and Neck Cancer Population

G. Green; Ellen Kim; Ruben Carmona; Hanjie Shen; James D. Murphy; Loren K. Mell

Purpose: Treatments for locoregionally advanced head and neck cancer (LAHNC) negatively impact swallowing function, but the long-term incidence of severe toxicity requiring esophageal dilation is not well-documented in the population. The aim of this study was to compare the incidence of long-term esophageal dilation across varying treatments for LAHNC. Methods and Materials: We identified 5,223 patients with LAHNC diagnosed from 2000 to 2009 in the SEER-Medicare database. We compared the incidence of esophageal dilation for surgery alone vs. surgery plus adjuvant radiotherapy (RT) and chemoradiotherapy (CRT) vs. definitive RT or CRT. Results: The cumulative incidence of esophageal dilation for all sites at 10 years, according to treatment group were as follows: CRT, 14% (95% confidence interval (CI), 12–17%); definitive RT, 13% (95% CI, 10–16%); surgery alone, 5% (95% CI, 3–7%); surgery and CRT, 15% (95% CI, 11–19%); surgery and adjuvant RT: 10% (95% CI, 8–13%). There was no significant difference in the incidence of esophageal dilation between surgery plus adjuvant RT/CRT or definitive RT/CRT (p = 0.37), but the incidence was significantly increased in both groups compared to surgery alone (p = 0.003). On multivariable analysis, chemotherapy was associated with significantly increased incidence of esophageal dilation (HR 2.9, 95% CI 1.5–5.5, p < 0.001) in oropharyngeal cancers. Conclusions: The incidence of esophageal dilation is similar in LAHNC patients undergoing RT with or without surgery. Chemoradiotherapy increases the long-term risk of esophageal dilation events over surgery alone.


Radiotherapy and Oncology | 2017

Feasibility of atlas-based active bone marrow sparing intensity modulated radiation therapy for cervical cancer

Nan Li; S.S. Noticewala; C.W. Williamson; Hanjie Shen; Igor Sirák; Rafal Tarnawski; Umesh Mahantshetty; Carl K. Hoh; K Moore; Loren K. Mell

BACKGROUND To test the hypothesis that atlas-based active bone marrow (ABM)-sparing intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) yields similar dosimetric results compared to custom ABM-sparing IMRT for cervical cancer patients. METHODS We sampled 62 cervical cancer patients with pre-treatment FDG-PET/CT in training (n=32) or test (n=30) sets. ABM was defined as the subvolume of the pelvic bone marrow (PBM) with standardized uptake value (SUV) above the mean on the average FDG-PET image (ABMAtlas) vs. the individuals PET (ABMCustom). Both were deformed to the planning CT. Overlap between the two subvolumes was measured using the Dice coefficient. Three IMRT plans designed to spare PBM, ABMAtlas, or ABMCustom were compared for 30 test patients. Dosimetric parameters were used to evaluate plan quality. RESULTS ABMAtlas and ABMCustom volumes were not significantly different (p=0.90), with a mean Dice coefficient of 0.75, indicating good agreement. Compared to IMRT plans designed to spare PBM and ABMCustom, ABMAtlas-sparing IMRT plans achieved excellent target coverage and normal tissue sparing, without reducing dose to ABMCustom (mean ABMCustom dose 29.4Gy vs. 27.1Gyvs. 26.9Gy, respectively; p=0.10); however, PTV coverage and bowel sparing were slightly reduced. CONCLUSIONS Atlas-based ABM sparing IMRT is clinically feasible and may obviate the need for customized ABM-sparing as a strategy to reduce hematologic toxicity.


International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics | 2016

Longitudinal Changes in Active Bone Marrow for Cervical Cancer Patients Treated With Concurrent Chemoradiation Therapy.

S.S. Noticewala; Nan Li; C.W. Williamson; Carl K. Hoh; Hanjie Shen; Michael T. McHale; Cheryl C. Saenz; John Einck; Steven C. Plaxe; Catheryn M. Yashar; Loren K. Mell


Journal of Clinical Oncology | 2018

Are women with head and neck cancer undertreated

Annie Park; Amy Albaster; Hanjie Shen; Loren K. Mell; Jed A. Katzel


JCO Clinical Cancer Informatics | 2018

Comparison of Comorbidity and Frailty Indices in Patients With Head and Neck Cancer Using an Online Tool

Lucas K. Vitzthum; Christine H. Feng; S.S. Noticewala; Paul J. Hines; Cammie Nguyen; Kaveh Zakeri; E. Sojourner; Hanjie Shen; Loren K. Mell


International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics | 2018

Prognostic Role of p16 in Non-oropharyngeal Head and Neck Cancer

Alex K. Bryant; E. Sojourner; Lucas K. Vitzthum; Kaveh Zakeri; Hanjie Shen; Cammie Nguyen; James D. Murphy; Joseph A. Califano; Ezra E.W. Cohen; Loren K. Mell

Collaboration


Dive into the Hanjie Shen's collaboration.

Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Loren K. Mell

University of California

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Kaveh Zakeri

University of California

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Nan Li

University of California

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

G. Green

University of California

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Ruben Carmona

University of California

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Alex K. Bryant

University of California

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Carl K. Hoh

University of California

View shared research outputs
Researchain Logo
Decentralizing Knowledge