Jeana L. Garris
University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center
Network
Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.
Publication
Featured researches published by Jeana L. Garris.
Pancreas | 2013
April E. Boyd; Linda L. DeFord; Jeannette E. Mares; Colleen Leary; Jeana L. Garris; Cecile G. Dagohoy; Valentine G. Boving; James P. Brook; Alexandria T. Phan; James C. Yao
Objectives This study aimed to improve the success rate of gluteal intramuscular (IM) injection. Methods The outcomes of 328 intended gluteal IM injections in 115 patients receiving depot octreotide were evaluated using computed tomography performed in routine clinical practice. Patient-, nursing-, and technique-dependent factors were correlated with successful delivery of medication. Techniques associated with successful injection were taught to center nurses. Results At baseline, 52% of injections were successfully delivered (66% men, 36% women; P = 0.001). Factors associated with successful delivery included nurses’ frequency of injections (P = 0.008), landmarks use to select injection site (P < 0.001), quick needle insertion (P < 0.001), and use of nonsyringe hand to compress injection site (P < 0.001). Patient-related factors included male sex (P < 0.001), lower body mass index (P < 0.001), and lower skin-to-muscle depth at injection site (P < 0.001). Techniques associated with successful injections were then taught to center nurses. After instruction, the success rate increased from 52% to 75% (P = 0.001). Importantly, improvements were observed in both men (66%–75%; P = 0.43) and women (38%–75%; P < 0.001). Successful injection was associated with better control of flushing among those with carcinoid syndrome (P = 0.005). Conclusions Intended gluteal IM injections often are given into the subcutaneous space. Education in techniques associated with successful injections improves IM delivery rates.
Oncology | 2015
Nastaran Neishaboori; Roopma Wadhwa; Graciela M. Nogueras-Gonzalez; Elena Elimova; Hironori Shiozaki; Kazuki Sudo; Nikolaos Charalampakis; Adarsh Hiremath; Jeffrey H. Lee; Manoop S. Bhutani; Brian Weston; Mariela A. Blum; Jane E. Rogers; Jeana L. Garris; David C. Rice; Ritsuko Komaki; Stephen G. Swisher; Heath D. Skinner; Wayne L. Hofstetter; Jaffer A. Ajani
Background: We have limited knowledge of the geographic distribution of resistant esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) in resected specimens, but its clinical importance can be enormous. Method: We selected patients with baseline stage III EAC who had had chemoradiation followed by surgery and had residual EAC (resistant cases only). Outcomes were correlated with various endpoints (percentage of resistant EAC and anatomic distribution). Results: A total of 100 clinical stage III patients were studied; 90% had an R0 resection, and 99% had either moderate or poorly differentiated EAC. Twelve percent had >50% residual cancer, 31% had 11-50% residual cancer, 53% had 1-10% residual cancer, and 3% had positive nodes only. Each compartment was frequently involved: mucosa/submucosa (66%), muscularis propria (76%), and serosa (62%); all compartments were involved in 35% of the cases. Lack of EAC (meaning response) was observed in the mucosa/submucosa (34%), muscularis propria (24%), serosa (38%), and nodes (42%). Although the endoscopic biopsies prior to surgery showed no EAC in 79% of the patients, in the surgical specimens, resistant EAC was frequently occurring in the mucosa/submucosa (66%). Conclusion: Contrary to our hypothesis that resistant EAC would be frequent in the nodes, our data show that its distribution is heterogeneous and unpredictable. Most importantly, the postchemoradiation biopsies are misleading, and a decision to delay/avoid surgery based on negative biopsies can be detrimental for the patients.
Oncology | 2015
Elena Elimova; Hironori Shiozaki; Rebecca S. Slack; Hsiang Chun Chen; Roopma Wadhwa; Kazuki Sudo; Nikolaos Charalampakis; Adarsh Hiremath; Jeannelyn S. Estrella; Aurelio Matamoros; Tara Sagebiel; Prajnan Das; Jane E. Rogers; Jeana L. Garris; Mariela A. Blum; Brian D. Badgwell; Jaffer A. Ajani
Background: Nearly 50% of gastric cancer patients are diagnosed with advanced gastric cancer (AGC). Therapy is palliative but results in ill effects. The median overall survival (OS) of AGC patients is often <12 months. It is unclear if the early initiation of therapy in all AGC patients is beneficial. Methods: A retrospective analysis of AGC patients in our database was carried out. The patients were divided into two groups: asymptomatic or symptomatic. We sought to assess whether the delay of systemic therapy was harmful in asymptomatic patients. Results: A total of 135 patients were analyzed. Most patients were symptomatic (68%), males (67%), and had low ECOG scores (0-1; 85%). In univariate analyses, ECOG performance status 0 (p = 0.005), delayed initiation of therapy (p = 0.03), and lack of symptoms (p = 0.03) were associated with a longer OS. The multivariate model for OS identified only ECOG performance status as an independent prognosticator of longer OS (p = 0.02). Asymptomatic patients who had delayed (≥4 weeks) systemic therapy had an OS rate of 77% at 1 year compared to 58% for patients treated within 4 weeks (p = 0.47). Conclusion: Symptomatic AGC patients had a poor outcome compared to asymptomatic AGC patients. Treatment delay in asymptomatic patients had no detrimental effect on OS, suggesting that the timing of therapy can be based on patient selection.
Oncology | 2016
Rastislav Bahleda; Jackie Baker; Christophe Massard; Sirish M. Gadgeel; Jane E. Rogers; Hassan Izzedine; Eric Deutsch; Jeana L. Garris; Akbar Khan; Emmanuelle Boelle; Sylvie Assadourian; Jaffer A. Ajani
Purpose: This phase I study (EudraCT No. 2006-001177-25) investigated aflibercept, a vascular endothelial growth factor decoy receptor protein (VEGF Trap), in combination with docetaxel, cisplatin, and 5-fluorouracil in patients with advanced solid tumors. Patients and Methods: Patients received 2, 4, or 6 mg/kg of intravenous aflibercept with docetaxel 75 mg/m2, cisplatin 75 mg/m2, and 5-fluorouracil 750 mg/m2 in 3-week cycles until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Primary objectives were to evaluate dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) during cycle 1 and to determine the recommended phase II dose. Pharmacokinetics, tolerability, and antitumor activity were also investigated. Results: Forty-four patients were enrolled and treated (29 patients in a dose-escalation phase and 15 patients in an expansion cohort). Following three cases of febrile neutropenia in patients receiving aflibercept at 4 mg/kg, the protocol was amended to allow earlier granulocyte colony-stimulating factor support (from day 6) and prophylactic use of ciprofloxacin. Subsequently, there were two DLTs: febrile neutropenia (2 mg/kg) and grade 4 pulmonary embolism (6 mg/kg). An excess of free over VEGF-bound aflibercept was observed at 6 mg/kg. The most frequent grade 3/4 adverse events (AEs) were neutropenia (54.5%), lymphopenia (47.7%), and stomatitis (38.6%). AEs associated with VEGF blockade (any grade) included epistaxis (61.4%), dysphonia (40.9%), hypertension (38.6%), and proteinuria (11.4%). There were 15 partial responses, including 9 in patients with gastroesophageal cancers. Thirteen patients had stable disease. Conclusion: Aflibercept 6 mg/kg administered every 3 weeks in combination with docetaxel, cisplatin, and 5- fluorouracil is the recommended dose for further clinical development based on tolerability, pharmacokinetics, and antitumor activity.
Journal of The National Comprehensive Cancer Network | 2016
Kazuki Sudo; Xuemei Wang; Lianchun Xiao; Roopma Wadhwa; Hironori Shiozaki; Elena Elimova; David C. Rice; Jeffrey H. Lee; Brian Weston; Manoop S. Bhutani; Adarsh Hiremath; Nikolaos Charalampakis; Ritsuko Komaki; Mariela A. Blum; Stephen G. Swisher; Dipen M. Maru; Heath D. Skinner; Jeana L. Garris; Jane E. Rogers; Wayne L. Hofstetter; Jaffer A. Ajani
Pancreas | 2010
Jeana L. Garris; Linda L. DeFord; Cecile G. Dagohoy; Colleen Leary; Valentine G. Boving; James P. Brook; Jeannette E. Mares; April E. Boyd; Alexandria T. Phan; James C. Yao
Journal of Clinical Oncology | 2017
Nikolaos Charalampakis; Graciela M. Nogueras-Gonzalez; Elena Elimova; Roopma Wadhwa; Hironori Shiozaki; Yusuke Shimodaira; Mariela A. Blum; Jane E. Rogers; Jeana L. Garris; Aurelio Matamoros; Tara Sagebiel; Prajnan Das; Jeannelyn S. Estrella; Brian D. Badgwell; Jaffer A. Ajani
Oncology | 2015
Dmitry Bichev; Christoph Treese; Moritz von Winterfeld; Kirstin Breithaupt; Yasemin Dogan; Sven C. Schmidt; Severin Daum; Peter C. Thuss-Patience; Friedemann Honecker; Peter Albers; Günter Niegisch; Margitta Retz; Mark Thalgott; Stefan Balabanov; Carsten Henning Ohlmann; Christian Ohmann; Michael Stöckle; Martin Bögemann; Frank vom Dorp; Jürgen Gschwend; Arndt Hartmann; Thomas Bruckner; Maria-Katharina Ganten; Max Schuessler; Tom M. Ganten; Ronald Koschny; Kazuki Sudo; Manoop S. Bhutani; Jane E. Rogers; Ritsuko Komaki
Journal of Clinical Oncology | 2015
Nikolaos Charalampakis; Graciela M. Nogueras-Gonzalez; Xuemei Wang; Elena Elimova; Hironori Shiozaki; Roopma Wadhwa; Venkatram Planjery; Jeana L. Garris; Jane E. Rogers; Adarsh Hiremath; Mariela A. Blum; Jeffrey H. Lee; Manoop S. Bhutani; Brian Weston; Jeannelyn S. Estrella; Aurelio Matamoros; Prajnan Das; Brian D. Badgwell; Jaffer A. Ajani
Archive | 2012
Jeana L. Garris; James C. Yao