2%) received second line chemotherapy. The median overall survival (OS) for these patients was 8.2 months (95% CI, 4.44 to 11.96 months). Multivariate analysis results indicated that female gender and having received second-line or more chemotherapy were independent prognostic factors for increased OS for all 48 patients. Charlson Index was not a significant independent prognostic factor for survival. There were 9 treatment related deaths due to infectious selleck inhibitor causes (18.8%).

Conclusion

Patients

75 years of age or older with advanced NSCLC may obtain clinical benefit from the administration of platinum-based doublet or single agent chemotherapy. However, oncologists must consider the aspect of safety in relation to the clinical benefits when managing this patient group.”
“BackgroundCurrent coronary heart disease (CHD) risk assessments inadequately assess intermediate-risk

patients, leaving many undertreated and vulnerable to heart attacks. A novel CHD risk-assessment (CHDRA) tool was developed for intermediate-risk https://www.selleckchem.com/products/mk-4827-niraparib-tosylate.html stratification using biomarkers and established risk factors to significantly improve CHD risk discrimination.

HypothesisPhysicians will change their treatment plan in response to more information about a patient’s CHD risk level provided by the CHDRA test.

MethodsA Web-based survey of cardiology, internal Vorinostat order medicine, family practice, and obstetrics/gynecology physicians (n=206) was conducted to assess the CHDRA clinical impact. Each physician was shown 3 clinical vignettes representing community-based cohort participants randomly selected from 8 total vignettes. For each, the physicians assessed the individual’s CHD risk and selected preferred therapies based on the individual’s comorbidities,

physical examination, and laboratory results. The individual’s CHDRA score was then provided and the physicians were queried for changes to their initial treatment plans.

ResultsAfter obtaining the CHDRA result, 70% of the physician responses indicated a change to the patient’s treatment plan. The revised lipid-management plans agreed more often (74.6% of the time) with the current Adult Treatment Panel III guidelines than did the original plans (57.6% of the time). Most physicians (71.3%) agreed with the statement that the CHDRA result provided information that would impact their current treatment decisions.

ConclusionsThe CHDRA test provided additional information to which physicians responded by more often applying appropriate therapy and actions aligned with guidelines, thus demonstrating the clinical utility of the test.