Stephen DeSantis
Harvard University
Network
Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.
Publication
Featured researches published by Stephen DeSantis.
JAMA Surgery | 2015
Yasuaki Sagara; Melissa Anne Mallory; Stephanie M. Wong; Fatih Aydogan; Stephen DeSantis; William T. Barry; Mehra Golshan
IMPORTANCE While the prevalence of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of the breast has increased substantially following the introduction of breast-screening methods, the clinical significance of early detection and treatment for DCIS remains unclear. OBJECTIVE To investigate the survival benefit of breast surgery for low-grade DCIS. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS A retrospective longitudinal cohort study using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database from October 9, 2014, to January 15, 2015, at the Dana-Farber/Brigham Womens Cancer Center. Between 1988 and 2011, 57,222 eligible cases of DCIS with known nuclear grade and surgery status were identified. EXPOSURES Patients were divided into surgery and nonsurgery groups. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Propensity score weighting was used to balance patient backgrounds between groups. A log-rank test and multivariable Cox proportional hazards model was used to assess factors related to overall and breast cancer-specific survival. RESULTS Of 57,222 cases of DCIS identified in this study, 1169 cases (2.0%) were managed without surgery and 56,053 cases (98.0%) were managed with surgery. With a median follow-up of 72 months from diagnosis, there were 576 breast cancer-specific deaths (1.0%). The weighted 10-year breast cancer-specific survival was 93.4% for the nonsurgery group and 98.5% for the surgery group (log-rank test, P < .001). The degree of survival benefit among those managed surgically differed according to nuclear grade (P = .003). For low-grade DCIS, the weighted 10-year breast cancer-specific survival of the nonsurgery group was 98.8% and that of the surgery group was 98.6% (P = .95). Multivariable analysis showed there was no significant difference in the weighted hazard ratios of breast cancer-specific survival between the surgery and nonsurgery groups for low-grade DCIS. The weighted hazard ratios of intermediate- and high-grade DCIS were significantly different (low grade: hazard ratio, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.21-3.52; intermediate grade: hazard ratio, 0.23; 95% CI, 0.14-0.42; and high grade: hazard ratio, 0.15; 95% CI, 0.11-0.23) and similar results were seen for overall survival. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE The survival benefit of performing breast surgery for low-grade DCIS was lower than that for intermediate- or high-grade DCIS. A prospective clinical trial is warranted to investigate the feasibility of active surveillance for the management of low-grade DCIS.
Journal of Clinical Oncology | 2016
Yasuaki Sagara; Rachel A. Freedman; Ines Vaz-Luis; Melissa Anne Mallory; Stephanie M. Wong; Fatih Aydogan; Stephen DeSantis; William T. Barry; Mehra Golshan
PURPOSE Radiotherapy (RT) after breast-conserving surgery (BCS) is a standard treatment option for the management of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). We sought to determine the survival benefit of RT after BCS on the basis of risk factors for local recurrence. PATIENTS AND METHODS A retrospective longitudinal cohort study was performed to identify patients with DCIS diagnosed between 1988 and 2007 and treated with BCS by using SEER data. Patients were divided into the following two groups: BCS+RT (RT group) and BCS alone (non-RT group). We used a patient prognostic scoring model to stratify patients on the basis of risk of local recurrence. We performed a Cox proportional hazards model with propensity score weighting to evaluate breast cancer mortality between the two groups. RESULTS We identified 32,144 eligible patients with DCIS, 20,329 (63%) in the RT group and 11,815 (37%) in the non-RT group. Overall, 304 breast cancer-specific deaths occurred over a median follow-up of 96 months, with a cumulative incidence of breast cancer mortality at 10 years in the weighted cohorts of 1.8% (RT group) and 2.1% (non-RT group; hazard ratio, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.62 to 0.88). Significant improvements in survival in the RT group compared with the non-RT group were only observed in patients with higher nuclear grade, younger age, and larger tumor size. The magnitude of the survival difference with RT was significantly correlated with prognostic score (P < .001). CONCLUSION In this population-based study, the patient prognostic score for DCIS is associated with the magnitude of improvement in survival offered by RT after BCS, suggesting that decisions for RT could be tailored on the basis of patient factors, tumor biology, and the prognostic score.
Cancer | 2015
Stephanie M. Wong; Rachel A. Freedman; Yasuaki Sagara; Emily Stamell; Stephen DeSantis; William T. Barry; Mehra Golshan
The objective of this study was to examine the effect of Paget disease (PD) on axillary lymph node metastases and survival in patients who had concomitant invasive ductal carcinoma (PD‐IDC).
Breast Journal | 2017
Melissa Anne Mallory; Yasuaki Sagara; Fatih Aydogan; Stephen DeSantis; Jagadeesan Jayender; Diana Caragacianu; Eva C. Gombos; Kirby G. Vosburgh; Ferenc A. Jolesz; Mehra Golshan
We assessed the feasibility of supine intraoperative MRI (iMRI) during breast‐conserving surgery (BCS), enrolling 15 patients in our phase I trial between 2012 and 2014. Patients received diagnostic prone MRI, BCS, pre‐excisional supine iMRI, and postexcisional supine iMRI. Feasibility was assessed based on safety, sterility, duration, and image‐quality. Twelve patients completed the study; mean duration = 114 minutes; all images were adequate; no complications, safety, or sterility issues were encountered. Substantial tumor‐associated changes occurred (mean displacement = 67.7 mm, prone–supine metric, n = 7). We have demonstrated iMRI feasibility for BCS and have identified potential limitations of prone breast MRI that may impact surgical planning.
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment | 2013
Kathryn J. Ruddy; Stephen DeSantis; Rebecca Gelman; Alan H.B. Wu; Rinaa S. Punglia; Erica L. Mayer; Sara M. Tolaney; Ann H. Partridge; Harold J. Burstein
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment | 2012
Alan H.B. Wu; Wendy Lorizio; Simone Tchu; Kara L. Lynch; Roy Gerona; Wuyang Ji; Weiming Ruan; Kathryn J. Ruddy; Stephen DeSantis; Harold J. Burstein; Elad Ziv
Clinical Breast Cancer | 2014
Kathryn J. Ruddy; Stephen DeSantis; William H. Barry; Hao Guo; Caroline Block; Virginia F. Borges; Ann H. Partridge
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment | 2013
Nan Lin; Davinia Seah; Rebecca Gelman; Stephen DeSantis; Erica L. Mayer; Steven J. Isakoff; Pamela J. DiPiro; Ian E. Krop; Steven E. Come; Douglas Weckstein; Harold J. Burstein
Annals of Surgical Oncology | 2014
Mehra Golshan; Yasuaki Sagara; Barbara Wexelman; Fatih Aydogan; Stephen DeSantis; H. Elise Min; Kirby G. Vosburgh; Jayender Jagadeesan; Diana Caragacianu; Eva C. Gombos; Ferenc A. Jolesz
Annals of Surgical Oncology | 2015
Stephanie M. Wong; Rachel A. Freedman; Emily Stamell; Yasuaki Sagara; Jane E. Brock; Stephen DeSantis; Mehra Golshan