Nadia Howlader
Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center
Network
Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.
Publication
Featured researches published by Nadia Howlader.
Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention | 2017
Anne-Michelle Noone; Kathleen A. Cronin; Sean F. Altekruse; Nadia Howlader; Denise Riedel Lewis; Valentina I. Petkov; Lynne Penberthy
Background: Cancers are heterogeneous, comprising distinct tumor subtypes. Therefore, presenting the burden of cancer in the population and trends over time by these tumor subtypes is important to identify patterns and differences in the occurrence of these subtypes, especially to generalize findings to the U.S. general population. Methods: Using SEER Cancer Registry Data, we present incidence rates according to subtypes for diagnosis years (1992–2013) among men and women for five major cancer sites: breast (female only), esophagus, kidney and renal pelvis, lung and bronchus, and thyroid. We also describe estimates of 5-year relative survival according to subtypes and diagnosis year (1992–2008). We used Joinpoint models to identify years when incidence rate trends changed slope. Finally, recent 5-year age-adjusted incidence rates (2009–2013) are presented for each subtype by race and age. Results: Hormone receptor–positive and HER2-negative was the most common subtype (about 74%) of breast cancers. Adenocarcinoma made up about 69% of esophagus cases among men. Adenocarcinoma also is the most common lung subtype (43% in men and 52% in women). Ninety percent of thyroid subtypes were papillary. Distinct incidence and survival patterns emerged by these subtypes over time among men and women. Conclusions: Histologic or molecular subtype revealed different incidence and/or survival trends that are masked when cancer is considered as a single disease on the basis of anatomic site. Impact: Presenting incidence and survival trends by subtype, whenever possible, is critical to provide more detailed and meaningful data to patients, providers, and the public. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 26(4); 632–41. ©2016 AACR.
npj Breast Cancer | 2016
Valentina I. Petkov; Dave P. Miller; Nadia Howlader; Nathan Gliner; Will Howe; Nicola Schussler; Kathleen A. Cronin; Frederick L. Baehner; Rosemary D. Cress; Dennis Deapen; Sally L. Glaser; Brenda Y. Hernandez; Charles F. Lynch; Lloyd Mueller; Ann G. Schwartz; Stephen M. Schwartz; Antoinette M. Stroup; Carol Sweeney; Thomas C. Tucker; Kevin C. Ward; Charles L. Wiggins; Xiao-Cheng Wu; Lynne Penberthy; Steven Shak
The 21-gene Recurrence Score assay is validated to predict recurrence risk and chemotherapy benefit in hormone-receptor-positive (HR+) invasive breast cancer. To determine prospective breast-cancer-specific mortality (BCSM) outcomes by baseline Recurrence Score results and clinical covariates, the National Cancer Institute collaborated with Genomic Health and 14 population-based registries in the the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Program to electronically supplement cancer surveillance data with Recurrence Score results. The prespecified primary analysis cohort was 40–84 years of age, and had node-negative, HR+, HER2-negative, nonmetastatic disease diagnosed between January 2004 and December 2011 in the entire SEER population, and Recurrence Score results (N=38,568). Unadjusted 5-year BCSM were 0.4% (n=21,023; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.3–0.6%), 1.4% (n=14,494; 95% CI, 1.1–1.7%), and 4.4% (n=3,051; 95% CI, 3.4–5.6%) for Recurrence Score <18, 18–30, and ⩾31 groups, respectively (P<0.001). In multivariable analysis adjusted for age, tumor size, grade, and race, the Recurrence Score result predicted BCSM (P<0.001). Among patients with node-positive disease (micrometastases and up to three positive nodes; N=4,691), 5-year BCSM (unadjusted) was 1.0% (n=2,694; 95% CI, 0.5–2.0%), 2.3% (n=1,669; 95% CI, 1.3–4.1%), and 14.3% (n=328; 95% CI, 8.4–23.8%) for Recurrence Score <18, 18–30, ⩾31 groups, respectively (P<0.001). Five-year BCSM by Recurrence Score group are reported for important patient subgroups, including age, race, tumor size, grade, and socioeconomic status. This SEER study represents the largest report of prospective BCSM outcomes based on Recurrence Score results for patients with HR+, HER2-negative, node-negative, or node-positive breast cancer, including subgroups often under-represented in clinical trials.
Cancer | 2014
Nadia Howlader; Vivien W. Chen; Lynn A. G. Ries; Michelle Marie Loch; Richard K. Lee; Carol DeSantis; Chun Chieh Lin; Jennifer Ruhl; Kathleen A. Cronin
Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Program registries began collecting new data items, known as site‐specific factors (SSFs), related to breast cancer treatment, prediction, and prognosis under the Collaborative Stage version 2 (CSv2) Data Collection System for cases diagnosed in 2010. The objectives of this report are to: 1) assess the completeness of the new SSFs and discuss their limitations and 2) discuss key changes in American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) staging between the 6th and 7th editions.
Medical Care | 2005
Matthew Kerrigan; Nadia Howlader; Margaret T. Mandelson; Robert Harrison; Edward C. Mansley; Scott D. Ramsey
Background:Colorectal cancer is relatively frequent among adults of working age, yet few studies have examined treatment, outcomes, and costs for people under 65 years of age with this disease. Objective:The objective of this study was to compare the initial treatments, survival, cancer-related medical costs, and overall medical costs for working-aged persons with colorectal cancer in 2 large health insurance plans in Washington State, one a preferred provider organization (PPO) and the other a group model health maintenance organization (HMO). Study Population:This study consisted of patients, aged 20–64 years, diagnosed with colorectal cancer in both health plans from 1996 to 1998. For each cancer case, up to 5 control subjects, matched on age and sex, were selected for the analysis. Methods:We calculated unadjusted, attributable, and overall medical costs using the Kaplan-Meier sample average estimator. We calculated relative mortality rates using Cox regression. We used propensity scores to adjust overall costs and survival for potential confounding factors. Results:Two hundred ten persons in the PPO and 136 persons in the HMO, aged 20–64 years, were diagnosed with cancer over the observation period and included in this study. Patients in the PPO were more likely to have local excision of their tumor (16% compared with 11%) and were less likely to receive chemotherapy (48% compared with 60%). The overall medical costs for the cancer cases were
Cancer | 2018
Kathleen A. Cronin; Andrew J. Lake; Susan Scott; Recinda Sherman; Anne-Michelle Noone; Nadia Howlader; S. Jane Henley; Robert N. Anderson; Albert U. Firth; Jiemin Ma; Betsy A. Kohler; Ahmedin Jemal
46,000 in the HMO and
Journal of Clinical Oncology | 2016
Steven Shak; Valentina I. Petkov; Dave P. Miller; Nadia Howlader; Nathan Gliner; Will Howe; Nicola Schussler; Kathleen A. Cronin; Frederick L. Baehner; Lynne Penberthy
46,400 in the PPO (95% confidence interval for the difference: −
Archive | 2010
Nadia Howlader; Sean F. Altekruse; Brenda K. Edwards
19,300 to 20,100). The cancer-attributable medical costs over 2 years were
npj Breast Cancer | 2018
Valentina I. Petkov; Dave P. Miller; Nadia Howlader; Nathan Gliner; Will Howe; Nicola Schussler; Kathleen A. Cronin; Frederick L. Baehner; Rosemary D. Cress; Dennis Deapen; Sally L. Glaser; Brenda Y. Hernandez; Charles F. Lynch; Lloyd Mueller; Ann G. Schwartz; Stephen M. Schwartz; Antoinette M. Stroup; Carol Sweeney; Thomas C. Tucker; Kevin C. Ward; Charles L. Wiggins; Xiao-Cheng Wu; Lynne Penberthy; Steven Shak
40,400 in the HMO and
Journal of Clinical Oncology | 2016
Megan C. Roberts; Valentina I. Petkov; Dave P. Miller; Steven Shak; Nadia Howlader; Kathleen A. Cronin; Lynne Penberthy
44,300 in the PPO (95% confidence interval for the difference: −
Archive | 2006
Lynn A. G. Ries; D. Harkins; Martin Krapcho; Angela B. Mariotto; Barry A. Miller; Eric J. Feuer; Limin X. Clegg; M. P. Eisner; Marie-Josèphe Horner; Nadia Howlader; Matthew J. Hayat; Benjamin F. Hankey; Brenda K. Edwards
17,400 to 25,200). Survival was similar in the 2 health plans: the hazard ratio was 0.89 for those enrolled in the PPO (95% confidence interval: 0.50 to 1.59). Adjustment for potential confounding factors altered the results little. Conclusions:There were differences in the initial treatment of the patients in each health plan, but costs and survival were not significantly different between the 2 plans.