Michael W. Method
University of Miami
Network
Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.
Publication
Featured researches published by Michael W. Method.
Cancer | 1996
Bernd-Uwe Sevin; Michael W. Method; Mehrdad Nadji; Ying Lu; Hervy A. Averette
This study was performed to identify pathologic and clinical features that best predict disease free survival of patients with early stage small cell carcinoma of the cervix treated by radical hysterectomy.
Lancet Oncology | 2017
Emma C. Rossi; Lynn D. Kowalski; J.M. Scalici; Leigh A. Cantrell; Kevin Schuler; R.K. Hanna; Michael W. Method; Melissa Ade; Anastasia Ivanova; John F. Boggess
BACKGROUND Sentinel-lymph-node mapping has been advocated as an alternative staging technique for endometrial cancer. The aim of this study was to measure the sensitivity and negative predictive value of sentinel-lymph-node mapping compared with the gold standard of complete lymphadenectomy in detecting metastatic disease for endometrial cancer. METHODS In the FIRES multicentre, prospective, cohort study patients with clinical stage 1 endometrial cancer of all histologies and grades undergoing robotic staging were eligible for study inclusion. Patients received a standardised cervical injection of indocyanine green and sentinel-lymph-node mapping followed by pelvic lymphadenectomy with or without para-aortic lymphadenectomy. 18 surgeons from ten centres (tertiary academic and community non-academic) in the USA participated in the trial. Negative sentinel lymph nodes (by haematoxylin and eosin staining on sections) were ultra-staged with immunohistochemistry for cytokeratin. The primary endpoint, sensitivity of the sentinel-lymph-node-based detection of metastatic disease, was defined as the proportion of patients with node-positive disease with successful sentinel-lymph-node mapping who had metastatic disease correctly identified in the sentinel lymph node. Patients who had mapping of at least one sentinel lymph node were included in the primary analysis (per protocol). All patients who received study intervention (injection of dye), regardless of mapping result, were included as part of the assessment of mapping and in the safety analysis in an intention-to-treat manner. The trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01673022 and is completed and closed. FINDINGS Between Aug 1, 2012, and Oct 20, 2015, 385 patients were enrolled. Sentinel-lymph-node mapping with complete pelvic lymphadenectomy was done in 340 patients and para-aortic lymphadenectomy was done in 196 (58%) of these patients. 293 (86%) patients had successful mapping of at least one sentinel lymph node. 41 (12%) patients had positive nodes, 36 of whom had at least one mapped sentinel lymph node. Nodal metastases were identified in the sentinel lymph nodes of 35 (97%) of these 36 patients, yielding a sensitivity to detect node-positive disease of 97·2% (95% CI 85·0-100), and a negative predictive value of 99·6% (97·9-100). The most common grade 3-4 adverse events or serious adverse events were postoperative neurological disorders (4 patients) and postoperative respiratory distress or failure (4 patients). 22 patients had serious adverse events, with one related to the study intervention: a ureteral injury incurred during sentinel-lymph-node dissection. INTERPRETATION Sentinel lymph nodes identified with indocyanine green have a high degree of diagnostic accuracy in detecting endometrial cancer metastases and can safely replace lymphadenectomy in the staging of endometrial cancer. Sentinel lymph node biopsy will not identify metastases in 3% of patients with node-positive disease, but has the potential to expose fewer patients to the morbidity of a complete lymphadenectomy. FUNDING Indiana University Health, Indiana University Health Simon Cancer Center, and the Indiana University Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology.
Lancet Oncology | 2015
Richard T. Penson; Helen Q. Huang; Lari Wenzel; Bradley J. Monk; Sharon Stockman; Harry J. Long; Lois M. Ramondetta; Lisa Landrum; T.J. Reid; Mario M. Leitao; Michael W. Method; Helen Michael; Krishnansu S. Tewari
BACKGROUND GOG 240 was a practice-changing randomised phase 3 trial that concluded that chemotherapy plus bevacizumab for advanced cervical cancer significantly improves overall and progression-free survival, and the proportion of patients achieving an overall objective response, compared with chemotherapy alone. In this study, we aimed to analyse patient-reported outcomes in GOG 240. METHODS Eligible adult participants (aged ≥18 years) had primary stage IVB or recurrent or persistent carcinoma of the cervix with measurable disease and GOG performance status of 0-1. Participants were randomly assigned by web-based permuted block randomisation (block size 4) in a 1:1:1:1 ratio to the four treatment groups: cisplatin (50 mg/m(2) intravenously on day 1 or 2 of the treatment cycle) and paclitaxel (135 mg/m(2) intravenously over 24 h or 175 mg/m(2) intravenously over 3 h on day 1), with or without bevacizumab (15 mg/kg intravenously on day 1 or 2), or paclitaxel (175 mg/m(2) over 3 h on day 1) and topotecan (0·75 mg/m(2) for 30 min on days 1-3) with or without bevacizumab (15 mg/kg intravenously on day 1). Treatment assignment was concealed at randomisation (everyone was masked to treatment assignment, achieved by the use of a computer encrypted numbering system at the National Cancer Institute) and became open-label when each patient was registered to the trial. Treatment cycles were repeated every 21 days until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity, whichever occurred first. The coprimary endpoints of the trial were overall survival and safety; the primary quality-of-life endpoint was the score on the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Cervix Trial Outcome Index (FACT-Cx TOI). For our analysis of patient-reported outcomes, participants were assessed before treatment cycles 1, 2, and 5, and at 6 and 9 months after the start of cycle 1, with the FACT-Cx TOI, items from the FACT-GOG-Neurotoxicity subscale, and a worst pain item from the Brief Pain Inventory. All patients who completed baseline quality-of-life assessments and at least one further follow-up assessment were evaluable for quality-of-life outcomes. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00803062. FINDINGS Between April 6, 2009, and Jan 3, 2012, a total of 452 patients were enrolled in the trial, of whom 390 completed baseline quality-of-life assessment and at least one further assessment and were therefore evaluable for quality-of-life outcomes. In these patients, patient-reported outcome completion declined from 426 (94%) of 452 (at baseline) to 193 (63%) of 307 (9 months post-cycle 1), but completion rates did not differ significantly between treatment regimens (p=0·78). The baseline FACT-Cx TOI scores did not differ significantly between patients who received bevacizumab versus those who did not (p=0·27). Compared with patients who received chemotherapy alone, patients who received chemotherapy plus bevacizumab reported FACT-Cx TOI scores that were an average of 1·2 points lower (98·75% CI -4·1 to 1·7; p=0·30). INTERPRETATION Improvements in overall survival and progression-free survival attributed to the incorporation of bevacizumab into the treatment of advanced cervical cancer were not accompanied by any significant deterioration in health-related quality of life. Patients responding to anti-angiogenesis therapy who maintain an acceptable quality of life could be suitable at progression for treatment with other novel therapies that might confer additional benefit. FUNDING National Institutes of Health.
Cancer | 1996
Michael W. Method; Aldo N. Serafini; Hervy E. Averette; Michael Rodriguez; Manuel Penalver; Bernd Uwe Sevin
Accurate evaluation of patients with ovarian carcinoma who have completed primary therapy often requires surgical exploration. Radioimmunoscintigraphy (RIS) represents an evolving technique that may allow noninvasive detection and localization of persistent or recurrent disease in these patients.
Gynecologic Oncology | 2015
Lisa M. Hess; Helen Q. Huang; Alexandra L. Hanlon; William R. Robinson; Rhonda Johnson; Setsuko K. Chambers; Robert S. Mannel; Larry E. Puls; Susan A. Davidson; Michael W. Method; Shashikant Lele; Laura J. Havrilesky; Tina Nelson; David S. Alberts
OBJECTIVES Changes in cognitive function have been identified in and reported by many cancer survivors. These changes have the potential to impact patient quality of life and functional ability. This prospective longitudinal study was designed to quantify the incidence of change in cognitive function in newly diagnosed ovarian cancer patients throughout and following primary chemotherapy. METHODS Eligible patients had newly diagnosed, untreated ovarian cancer and had planned to receive chemotherapy. Web-based and patient reported cognitive assessments and quality of life questionnaires were conducted prior to chemotherapy, prior to cycle four, after cycle six, and six months after completion of primary therapy. RESULTS Two-hundred-thirty-one evaluable patients entered this study between May 2010 and October 2011. At the cycle 4 time point, 25.2% (55/218) of patients exhibited cognitive impairment in at least one domain. At the post-cycle 6 and 6-month follow up time points, 21.1% (44/208) and 17.8% (30/169) of patients, respectively, demonstrated impairment in at least one domain of cognitive function. There were statistically significant, but clinically small, improvements in processing speed (p<0.001) and attention (p<0.001) but not in motor response time (p=0.066), from baseline through the six-month follow up time period. CONCLUSIONS This was a large, prospective study designed to measure cognitive function in ovarian cancer. A subset of patients had evidence of cognitive decline from baseline during chemotherapy treatment in this study as measured by the web-based assessment; however, changes were generally limited to no more than one domain.
Gynecologic Cancer#R##N#Controversies in Management | 2004
David S. Alberts; Richard R. Barakat; Mary B. Daly; Michael W. Method; Doris M. Benbrook; John F. Boggess; Molly Brewer; Louise A. Brinton; Philip E. Castle; Zoreh Davanipour; Francisco Garcia; Mark G. Hanly; Lisa M. Hess; Jeffrey F. Hines; Joseph Kelaghan; Joseph A. Lucci; Lori M. Minasian; Carolyn Y. Muller; George L. Mutter; Janet S. Rader; Gustavo C. Rodriguez; Eugene Sobel; Joan L. Walker
describing a small number of patients treated at a single
Gynecologic Oncology | 2012
Lisa M. Hess; Frederick B. Stehman; Michael W. Method; Tess D. Weathers; Paridha Gupta; Jeanne M. Schilder
OBJECTIVES There is a lack of knowledge about the health care events experienced by individual patients that lead to a definitive diagnosis of ovarian cancer (OC). The goal of this study was to describe the various pathways and to identify an optimal path to accurate diagnosis. METHODS Women who were referred to gynecologic oncology for a suspected OC were enrolled to this study. Medical records (MRs) from all health care providers were obtained from the time the patient recalled first suspecting a health issue through the time of diagnosis to build a decision tree model. A Monte Carlo simulation was conducted of 83,000 patients to identify the optimal pathway to reach diagnosis. RESULTS In the Monte Carlo simulation, gynecologic oncologists and gynecologists accounted for the most efficient diagnosis in over 37.9% and 29.2% of suspected OC cases, respectively, in terms of the least amount of time to reach diagnosis. Gynecologic oncologists were further associated with the fewest health care visits needed to reach diagnosis in 37% of the simulation cases; however, 23% of trials were indifferent to any specific provider. CONCLUSIONS The decision tree provides a more comprehensive view of the complexity in reaching an accurate diagnosis of OC. This analysis was able to identify the health care utilization patterns that underlie the events that occur to reach an accurate diagnosis in the setting of a suspected OC, and was able to identify the most efficient pathways that utilize the fewest health care resources in the least amount of time.
Gynecologic Oncology | 2005
Heidi S. Donovan; Ellen M. Hartenbach; Michael W. Method
Gynecologic Oncology | 1996
Michael W. Method; Michelle Hirschfield; Hervy E. Averette
Clinical Ovarian and Other Gynecologic Cancer | 2012
Lisa M. Hess; Michael W. Method; Frederick B. Stehman; Tess D. Weathers; Paridha Gupta; Jeanne M. Schilder