Joanne M. Jeter

Factors Associated with Osteonecrosis of the Jaw among Bisphosphonate Users

BACKGROUND Bisphosphonates are medications that impact bone reformation by inhibiting osteoclast function. Osteonecrosis of the jaw has been reported among patients receiving these medications. It is unclear if the risk factors associated with osteonecrosis of the jaw among cancer patients taking bisphosphonates also are possible risk factors among patients receiving these medications for other indications. METHODS A systematic review search strategy was used to identify cases of osteonecrosis of the jaw among patients taking bisphosphonates for an indication other than cancer to identify potential contributing factors. Data were analyzed according to previous models to develop a more expanded model that may explain possible mechanisms for the development of osteonecrosis of the jaw among patients without cancer. RESULTS Ninety-nine cases of osteonecrosis of the jaw were identified among patients who were prescribed a bisphosphonate for an indication other than cancer. These cases included 85 osteoporosis patients, 10 patients with Pagets disease, 2 patients with rheumatoid arthritis, 1 patient with diabetes, and 1 patient with maxillary fibrous dysplasia. The mean age was 69.4 years, 87.3% were female, and 83.3% were receiving oral, but not intravenous, bisphosphonates. Of the 63 patients reporting dental care information, 88.9% had a dental procedure before the onset of osteonecrosis of the jaw. Of all cases providing medical information, 71% were taking at least one medication that affects bone turnover in addition to the bisphosphonate, and 81.3% reported additional underlying health conditions. CONCLUSIONS The case details suggest a multiplicity of factors associated with this condition and provide the foundation for a model outlining the potential mechanism for the development of osteonecrosis of the jaw among patients taking bisphosphonates for an indication other than cancer.

Cost effectiveness of ulcerative colitis surveillance in the setting of 5-aminosalicylates

OBJECTIVES:Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a feared complication of chronic ulcerative colitis (UC). Annual endoscopic surveillance is recommended for the detection of early neoplasia. 5-Aminosalicylates (5-ASAs) may prevent some UC-associated CRC. Therefore, in patients prescribed 5-ASAs for maintenance of remission, annual surveillance might be overly burdensome and inefficient. We aimed to determine the ideal frequency of surveillance in patients with UC maintained on 5-ASAs.METHODS:We performed systematic reviews of the literature, and created a Markov computer model simulating a cohort of 35-year-old men with chronic UC, followed until the age of 90 years. Twenty-two strategies were modeled: natural history (no 5-ASA or surveillance), surveillance without 5-ASA at intervals of 1–10 years, 5-ASA plus surveillance every 1–10 years, and 5-ASA alone. The primary outcome was the ideal interval of surveillance in the setting of 5-ASA maintenance, assuming a third-party payer was willing to pay

Risk of Non-Melanoma Cancers in First-Degree Relatives of CDKN2A Mutation Carriers

100,000 for each quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained.RESULTS:In the natural history strategy, the CRC incidence was 30%. Without 5-ASA, annual surveillance was the ideal strategy, preventing 89% of CRC and costing

Salpingectomy as a Means to Reduce Ovarian Cancer Risk

69,100 per QALY gained compared with surveillance every 2 years. 5-ASA alone prevented 49% of CRC. In the setting of 5-ASA, surveillance every 3 years was ideal, preventing 87% of CRC. 5-ASA with surveillance every 2 years cost an additional

Use of ipilimumab in the treatment of melanoma

147,500 per QALY gained, and 5-ASA with annual surveillance cost nearly

Nonsteroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs and Risk of Melanoma

1 million additional per QALY gained compared with every 2 years. In Monte Carlo simulations, surveillance every 2 years or less often was ideal in 95% of simulations.CONCLUSIONS:If 5-ASA is efficacious chemoprevention for UC-associated CRC, endoscopic surveillance might be safely performed every 2 years or less often. Such practice could decrease burdens to patients and on endoscopic resources with a minimal decrease in quality-adjusted length of life, because 5-ASA with annual surveillance may cost nearly

Skin cancer screening: recommendations for data-driven screening guidelines and a review of the US Preventive Services Task Force controversy

1 million per additional QALY gained.

Difluoromethylornithine: the proof is in the polyamines.

The purpose of this study was to quantify the risk of cancers other than melanoma among family members of CDKN2A mutation carriers using data from the Genes, Environment and Melanoma study. Relative risks (RRs) of all non-melanoma cancers among first-degree relatives (FDRs) of melanoma patients with CDKN2A mutations (n = 65) and FDRs of melanoma patients without mutations (n = 3537) were calculated as the ratio of estimated event rates (number of cancers/total person-years) in FDRs of carriers vs noncarriers with exact Clopper-Pearson-type tests and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). All statistical tests were two-sided. There were 56 (13.1%) non-melanoma cancers reported among 429 FDRs of mutation carriers and 2199 (9.4%) non-melanoma cancers in 23 452 FDRs of noncarriers. The FDRs of carriers had an increased risk of any cancer other than melanoma (56 cancers among 429 FDRs of carrier probands vs 2199 cancers among 23 452 FDRs of noncarrier probands; RR = 1.5, 95% CI = 1.2 to 2.0, P = .005), gastrointestinal cancer (20 cancers among 429 FDRs of carrier probands vs 506 cancers among 23 452 FDRs of noncarrier probands; RR = 2.4, 95% CI = 1.4 to 3.7, P = .001), and pancreatic cancer (five cancers among 429 FDRs of carrier probands vs 41 cancers among 23 452 FDRs of noncarrier probands; RR = 7.4, 95% CI = 2.3 to 18.7, P = .002). Wilms tumor was reported in two FDRs of carrier probands and three FDRs of noncarrier probands (RR = 40.4, 95% CI = 3.4 to 352.7, P = .005). The lifetime risk of any cancer other than melanoma among CDKN2A mutation carriers was estimated as 59.0% by age 85 years (95% CI = 39.0% to 75.4%) by the kin-cohort method, under the standard assumptions of Mendelian genetics on the genotype distribution of FDRs conditional on proband genotype.

Tumor microenvironment changes leading to resistance of immune checkpoint inhibitors in metastatic melanoma and strategies to overcome resistance

Bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (BSO) has become the standard-of-care for risk reduction in women at hereditary risk of ovarian cancer. Although this procedure significantly decreases both the incidence of and mortality from ovarian cancer, it affects quality of life, and the premature cessation of ovarian function may have long-term health hazards. Recent advances in our understanding of the molecular pathways of ovarian cancer point to the fallopian tube epithelium as the origin of most high-grade serous cancers (HGSC). This evolving appreciation of the role of the fallopian tube in HGSC has led to the consideration of salpingectomy alone as an option for risk management, especially in premenopausal women. In addition, it is postulated that bilateral salpingectomy with ovarian retention (BSOR), may have a public health benefit for women undergoing benign gynecologic surgery. In this review, we provide the rationale for salpingectomy as an ovarian cancer risk reduction strategy. Cancer Prev Res; 8(5); 342–8. ©2015 AACR. See related commentary by Mark H. Greene, p. 339

Phase IIB Randomized Study of Topical Difluoromethylornithine and Topical Diclofenac on Sun-Damaged Skin of the Forearm

Ipilimumab is a monoclonal antibody directed against cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen-4 that has been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of metastatic melanoma. Phase III trials have demonstrated an overall survival benefit with its use when compared with standard treatments and other investigational therapies. However, the drug poses a notable challenge, given its propensity for toxicity, and requires close surveillance when administered in clinical practice. This review discusses the mechanism of action for ipilimumab, its preclinical data, and the clinical trials that led to its approval by the Food and Drug Administration in 2011.