Time filter

Source Type

News Article | April 28, 2017
Site: news.yahoo.com

(Reuters Health) - Having a family history of prostate cancer doesn’t make it more risky for men with a new diagnosis of the disease to initially hold off on active treatment in favor of monitoring with periodic lab tests, a research review suggests. It’s becoming more common for doctors to skip aggressive treatments like surgery or radiation for men with low-risk prostate tumors in favor of doing periodic tests to see if tumors grow, a practice known as active surveillance. But research to date has offered a mixed verdict on whether this approach is safe for certain men with a higher risk, including black patients and people with a family history of prostate tumors. For the current study, researchers analyzed data from six previously published studies and found that active surveillance wasn’t linked with an increased risk of prostate cancer progressing for men with a family history. One study did, however, find that family history increased the risk of cancer progression in black men. “The current findings can help doctors reassure patients that having a family history of prostate cancer should not automatically exclude them from being considered for active surveillance, although more research needs to be done for African American men,” said senior study author Dr. James Dupree, a urology researcher at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor. Most men with prostate cancer are diagnosed with low-risk tumors that haven’t spread to other parts of the body. Often, doctors and patients struggle to choose the best course of action because it's hard to tell which tumors will grow fast enough to be life-threatening and which ones might never get big enough to cause problems. “Just because a cancer is found, it does not automatically mean it needs to get treated right away,” Dupree said by email. “In some cases, cancer should be treated, but in other cases it may not need immediate treatment and can be managed with active surveillance.” For example, Dupree and colleagues reviewed one study of 200 patients that didn’t detect a meaningful difference in high-risk tumors based on whether or not men had a family history. In men who did have a family history, this study also didn’t find a difference in risk based on the number of relatives with prostate cancer. Two other studies in the review looked at biomarkers for prostate tumors, including results from prostate specific antigen (PSA) tests that are commonly used to look for these malignancies. Neither study found family history to be a meaningful predictor of aggressive prostate cancer. In another study, family history wasn’t a good predictor of aggressive tumors for most men, but it did signal an increased risk for black men. One limitation of the research review is that it included only six studies, the authors note in BJU International. Still, the findings should reassure men with a family history of prostate cancer that active surveillance may be a reasonable option in some cases, said Dr. Behfar Ehdaie, a urologic surgeon at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York who wasn’t involved in the study. “Screening for prostate cancer saves lives,” Ehdaie said by email. “However, the decisions after prostate cancer is detected may lead to overtreatment.” To strike the right balance, doctors can screen men at a young age with a PSA blood test to help determine a patient’s future risk, then recommend an appropriate treatment after a man is diagnosed with prostate cancer, Ehdaie added. “Incorporating active surveillance to treat men with low risk prostate cancer reduces the harms of overtreatment associated with both surgery and radiation therapy,” Ehdaie said.


News Article | May 4, 2017
Site: www.businesswire.com

SEATTLE--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Juno Therapeutics, Inc. (NASDAQ:JUNO), a biopharmaceutical company developing innovative cellular immunotherapies for the treatment of cancer, today reported financial results and business highlights for the first quarter 2017. “ In the first quarter 2017, we made significant progress with our lead program, JCAR017, and we look forward to presenting updated data in DLBCL at ASCO," said Hans Bishop, Juno’s President and Chief Executive Officer. " We also continue to advance our pipeline more broadly with eleven product candidates now in human testing. Already this year, we have initiated a number of trials, including a BCMA CAR T, a CD19-directed 4-1BBL armored CAR, a fully-human CD19 CAR T, a combination trial with JCAR014 and durvalumab, and a combination trial with JCAR014 and ibrutinib. With up to 20 ongoing trials by year end, we expect to gain additional insights that may lead to product candidates that can deliver long-term durable remissions for patients in need.” A reconciliation of GAAP net loss to non-GAAP net loss and GAAP R&D expense to non-GAAP R&D expense is presented below under “Non-GAAP Financial Measures.” Juno reaffirms 2017 cash burn, excluding cash inflows or outflows from upfront payments related to business development activities, of between $270 million and $300 million. Juno will host a conference call today to review Juno’s financial results for the first quarter 2017 beginning at 2:00 p.m. Pacific Time (PT)/5:00 p.m. Eastern Time (ET). Analysts and investors can participate in the conference call by dialing (855) 780-7198 for domestic callers and (631) 485-4870 for international callers, using the conference ID# 7603931. The webcast can be accessed live on the Investor Relations page of Juno's website, www.JunoTherapeutics.com, and will be available for replay for 30 days following the call. Juno Therapeutics is building a fully integrated biopharmaceutical company focused on developing innovative cellular immunotherapies for the treatment of cancer. Founded on the vision that the use of human cells as therapeutic entities will drive one of the next important phases in medicine, Juno is developing cell-based cancer immunotherapies based on chimeric antigen receptor and high-affinity T cell receptor technologies to genetically engineer T cells to recognize and kill cancer. Juno is developing multiple cell-based product candidates to treat a variety of B-cell malignancies as well as multiple solid tumors. Several product candidates have shown compelling clinical responses in clinical trials in refractory leukemia and lymphoma conducted to date. Juno's long-term aim is to leverage its cell-based platform to develop new product candidates that address a broader range of cancers and human diseases. Juno brings together innovative technologies from some of the world's leading research institutions, including the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, Seattle Children's Research Institute (SCRI), the University of California, San Francisco, and The National Cancer Institute. Juno Therapeutics has an exclusive license to the St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital patented technology for CD19-directed product candidates that use 4-1BB, which was developed by Dario Campana, Chihaya Imai, and St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital. Juno's product candidate JCAR017 was developed in collaboration with SCRI and others. Celgene Corporation and Juno Therapeutics formed a collaboration in June 2015 under which the two companies will leverage T cell therapeutic strategies to develop treatments for patients with cancer and autoimmune diseases with an initial focus on chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) and T cell receptor (TCR) technologies. In April 2016, Celgene exercised its option to develop and commercialize the Juno CD19 program outside North America and China. This press release contains “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, including statements regarding Juno’s mission, progress, and business plans; clinical trial plans and timelines; planned data presentations; the potential of combinations of CAR T cells with checkpoint inhibitors, armored CARs, and CAR T constructs with fully human binding domains; the potential of the Celgene collaboration; the potential of Juno's clinical trials to generate insights that lead to product candidates that deliver long-term durable remissions; and 2017 cash burn forecast. Forward-looking statements are subject to risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from such forward-looking statements, and reported results should not be considered as an indication of future performance. These risks and uncertainties include, but are not limited to, risks associated with: the success, cost, and timing of Juno's product development activities and clinical trials; Juno's ability to obtain regulatory approval for and to commercialize its product candidates; Juno's ability to establish a commercially-viable manufacturing process and manufacturing infrastructure; regulatory requirements and regulatory developments; success of Juno's competitors with respect to competing treatments and technologies; Juno's dependence on third-party collaborators and other contractors in Juno's research and development activities, including for the conduct of clinical trials and the manufacture of Juno's product candidates; Juno's dependence on Celgene for the development and commercialization outside of North America and China of Juno’s CD19 product candidates and any other product candidates for which Celgene exercises an option; Juno’s dependence on JW Therapeutics (Shanghai) Co., Ltd, over which Juno does not exercise complete control, for the development and commercialization of product candidates in China; Juno's ability to obtain, maintain, or protect intellectual property rights related to its product candidates; amongst others. For a further description of the risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ from those expressed in these forward-looking statements, as well as risks relating to Juno's business in general, see Juno's Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 1, 2017 and Juno’s other periodic reports filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission. These forward-looking statements speak only as of the date hereof. Juno disclaims any obligation to update these forward-looking statements. To supplement the financial results presented in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States (GAAP), Juno uses certain non-GAAP financial measures to evaluate its business. Juno’s management believes that these non-GAAP financial measures are helpful in understanding Juno’s financial performance and potential future results. These are not meant to be considered in isolation or as a substitute for comparable GAAP measures and should be read in conjunction with Juno’s financial statements prepared in accordance with GAAP. These non-GAAP measures differ from GAAP measures with the same captions, may be different from non-GAAP financial measures with the same or similar captions that are used by other companies, and do not reflect a comprehensive system of accounting. Juno’s management uses these supplemental non-GAAP financial measures internally to understand, manage, and evaluate Juno’s business and make operating decisions. In addition, Juno’s management believes that the presentation of these non-GAAP financial measures is useful to investors because they enhance the ability of investors to compare Juno’s results from period to period and allows for greater transparency with respect to key financial metrics Juno uses in making operating decisions. Juno endeavors to compensate for the limitation of the non-GAAP measures presented by also providing the most directly comparable GAAP measures and descriptions of the reconciling items and adjustments to derive the non-GAAP measures. The following is a reconciliation of GAAP to non-GAAP financial measures: (1) The success payment expense (gain) represents the change in the estimated fair value of the success payment obligations and the associated elapsed service period. As of March 31, 2017, the estimated fair values of the success payment liabilities to FHCRC and MSK on the condensed consolidated balance sheets, were approximately $17.7 million and $12.5 million, respectively. If success payment thresholds are met in the future, Juno may pay FHCRC and MSK the applicable success payment in cash or publicly-traded equity at Juno’s election. The success payment liabilities are subject to re-measurement each reporting period and may fluctuate from quarter-to-quarter and year-to-year, sometimes significantly, resulting in either an expense or a gain depending on the trading price of Juno common stock, estimated term, expected volatility, risk-free interest rate, estimated number and timing of valuation measurement dates, and estimated indirect costs that are creditable against the success payments to FHCRC and MSK. (2) This relates to a restricted stock grant in 2013 to a former co-founding director who became a consultant upon his departure from Juno’s board of directors in 2014. Unlike other outstanding awards to Juno’s employees, scientific founders, and continuing directors, the value of this restricted stock award is subject to re-measurement each reporting period as the award vests and may result in the associated expense fluctuating from quarter-to-quarter and year-to-year, sometimes significantly, based on changes in the trading price of Juno common stock through the end of the vesting period. (3) This is the change in the estimated fair value of the contingent consideration liabilities recorded in connection with the Stage and X-Body acquisitions.


News Article | April 29, 2017
Site: co.newswire.com

Interview Infection-Prevention Experts at Pulse CPSEA's Spring Symposium, 'Infection Prevention: It Begins with You!' Healthcare reporters are invited to speak personally with leading national experts in the prevention of healthcare-acquired infections in advance of Pulse Center for Patient Safety Education & Advocacy’s Spring Symposium, Infection Prevention: It Begins with You! in Plainview, N.Y., at 5 p.m. on Monday, May 1. It’s bad enough being in the hospital, but it can be so much worse when a patient contracts an “HAI” — a Healthcare-Acquired Infection — while there. Despite the best efforts of the medical profession, growing numbers of patients still contract infections in health care facilities. This is one of the most critical challenges facing the medical profession today. Pulse’s symposium will focus on the latest findings about HAIs, and three key speakers will discuss the issue and what we can do about it. The formal program starts at 6 p.m., but members of the press are invited to talk one-on-one with our speakers from 5 to 6 p.m. Janet Eagan RN — Manager, Infection Control at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center. She specializes in infection control in the oncology patient population. Bruce E. Hirsch MD, FACP, AAHIVS — Attending Physician, Division of Infectious Diseases, North Shore University Hospital. He is interested in preventive health strategies and the role of healthy bacteria in the human microbiome. Lisa A. Waldowski DNP, PNP, CIC — Infection Control Specialist, Standards Interpretation Group, The Joint Commission Enterprise. She advises surveyors with interpretations and education about infection control findings, and responds to challenging questions, complaints, and potential threat to life/patient safety events. Please take advantage of this unique opportunity to pose your questions to these industry-leading specialists. Here are the details: When: Monday, May 1. The event starts at 5 p.m. with a light buffet, refreshments and networking time; the formal program runs from 6 to 8 p.m. Where: Holiday Inn 215 Sunnyside Blvd, Plainview, NY 11803 Please RSVP to (516) 579-4711 or 516-830-0831 Pulse's Mission: To raise awareness about patient safety through advocacy, education and support.


News Article | May 1, 2017
Site: co.newswire.com

Interview Infection-Prevention Experts at Pulse CPSEA's Spring Symposium, 'Infection Prevention: It Begins with You!' Healthcare reporters are invited to speak personally with leading national experts in the prevention of healthcare-acquired infections in advance of Pulse Center for Patient Safety Education & Advocacy’s Spring Symposium, Infection Prevention: It Begins with You! in Plainview, N.Y., at 5 p.m. on Monday, May 1. It’s bad enough being in the hospital, but it can be so much worse when a patient contracts an “HAI” — a Healthcare-Acquired Infection — while there. Despite the best efforts of the medical profession, growing numbers of patients still contract infections in health care facilities. This is one of the most critical challenges facing the medical profession today. Pulse’s symposium will focus on the latest findings about HAIs, and three key speakers will discuss the issue and what we can do about it. The formal program starts at 6 p.m., but members of the press are invited to talk one-on-one with our speakers from 5 to 6 p.m. Janet Eagan RN — Manager, Infection Control at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center. She specializes in infection control in the oncology patient population. Bruce E. Hirsch MD, FACP, AAHIVS — Attending Physician, Division of Infectious Diseases, North Shore University Hospital. He is interested in preventive health strategies and the role of healthy bacteria in the human microbiome. Lisa A. Waldowski DNP, PNP, CIC — Infection Control Specialist, Standards Interpretation Group, The Joint Commission Enterprise. She advises surveyors with interpretations and education about infection control findings, and responds to challenging questions, complaints, and potential threat to life/patient safety events. Please take advantage of this unique opportunity to pose your questions to these industry-leading specialists. Here are the details: When: Monday, May 1. The event starts at 5 p.m. with a light buffet, refreshments and networking time; the formal program runs from 6 to 8 p.m. Where: Holiday Inn 215 Sunnyside Blvd, Plainview, NY 11803 Please RSVP to (516) 579-4711 or 516-830-0831 Pulse's Mission: To raise awareness about patient safety through advocacy, education and support.


Philadelphia, PA, April 18, 2017 - In the past, all forms of metastatic prostate cancer have been considered incurable. In recent years, the FDA has approved six drugs for men with metastatic disease, all of which can increase survival. In a study published in Urology®, researchers demonstrate for the first time that an aggressive combination of systemic therapy (drug treatment) with local therapy (surgery and radiation) directed at both the primary tumor and metastasis can eliminate all detectable disease in selected patients with metastatic prostate cancer. While the study is only a first step, one-fifth of the patients treated had no detectable disease, with an undetectable prostate-specific-androgen (PSA) and normal blood testosterone, after 20 months. The results suggest that some men who have previously been considered incurable can possibly be cured; investigators also establish a new paradigm for testing various drug combinations in conjunction with local treatment of the prostate to determine which is the best approach (ie, has the highest undetectable disease rate). Such results could not have been achieved with any single therapy alone. According to lead investigator Howard I. Scher, MD, Chief of the Genitourinary Oncology Service at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York City, "The sequential use of the three different modalities helped illustrate the role and importance of each in achieving the undetectable PSA with normal testosterone level end point, which represents a 'no-evidence of disease' status." Longer follow-up is needed to determine whether these patients were in fact cured. Twenty men with metastatic prostate cancer, five with extra-pelvic lymph nodal disease and 15 with bone with or without nodal disease, were treated with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), radical surgery that included a retroperitoneal lymph node dissection as needed, and radiation therapy to visible metastatic lesions in bone. ADT was stopped after a minimum of six months if an undetectable PSA was achieved after combined modality therapy. Other patients were treated continuously. The combined treatment regimen including surgery was well tolerated. Matthew J. O'Shaughnessy, MD, PhD, Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, commented "While the role of local therapy in metastatic prostate cancer is still under investigation, aggressive resection of visible disease performed by experienced surgeons was critical to the outcome." Of the five patients with extra-pelvic lymph node involvement, four achieved an undetectable PSA after ADT and surgery, while the fifth needed radiation to reach this milestone. However, none achieved the primary end point of undetectable PSA with testosterone recovery at 20 months after initiation of therapy with ADT alone, although one patient had a PSA of Of the 15 patients with bone metastases, 14 (93%) reached an undetectable PSA when ADT, surgery, and radiation were used. Ultimately, four (27%) achieved the proposed end point, a PSA of 150 ng/dL at 20 months after the start of ADT, which remained undetectable in two patients for 27 and 46 months, respectively. Commenting on the study, Oliver Sartor, MD, Cancer Research, Department of Medicine and Urology, Tulane University School of Medicine, New Orleans, LA, stated, "The end point deserves special mention, as the end point of undetectable PSA after testosterone recovery has been previously discussed but rarely studied. The authors proposed that this end point may serve as a first step toward establishing a curative paradigm. Many in the field agree, but note that the longevity of effect is essential to prove the point of curability. Regardless, the movement toward a curative paradigm is much needed and the investigators are to be congratulated for setting forth a paradigm that can be used to assess the possibility of cure in a reasonable period of time." "A multimodal treatment strategy for patients who present with disease that is beyond the limits of curability by any single modality enables the evaluation of new approaches in order to prioritize large-scale testing in early stages of advanced disease. The end point also shifts the paradigm from palliation to cure," remarked Dr. Scher. It is expected that an upcoming Phase 2 trial will further test this endpoint and combined modality approach.


The survey was conducted during the period of congressional debate over the American Health Care Act (AHCA), which was withdrawn the afternoon of March 24 when it became clear there were not enough votes to pass the legislation. Responding to the survey were 76 oncology professionals, including physicians, academic and community; nurses; physician assistants; pharmacists; industry professionals; payers and patient advocates. "The American Health Care Act is tabled and the ACA remains in place, but concerns about access to cancer screening, care, and research funding remain. Today, patients are in limbo, not knowing what action the federal and state governments will take," said Robert W. Carlson, MD, Chief Executive Officer of NCCN. "NCCN agrees there are ways to improve the current health care system for Americans with cancer, the clinical professionals who care for them, and payers. However, we are concerned for Americans with cancer that affordability, coverage of products and services in cancer treatment, and overall access will be impeded by allowing health insurers to set their own rates, or by providing states the ability to experiment with Medicaid coverage, without appropriate patient protections." "President Trump included three key elements in his approach to health coverage reform: repairing necessary aspects of the ACA, ensuring greater access, and lowering the total cost of care," Dr. Carlson said. "We are ready to share our Network's expertise with lawmakers to deliver a value-based health policy to ensure that all Americans with cancer have access to high-quality, effective, and efficient cancer care." Below is a link to Dr. Carlson's March 21, 2017 letter to Congress outlining NCCN's concerns about the health policy proposal and patient access to care: https://www.nccn.org/professionals/meetings/oncology_policy_program/pdf/2017_NCCN_AHCA_Letter_Walden_03-22-2017.pdf For more information about NCCN's health care policy initiatives, visit NCCN.org/policy. The National Comprehensive Cancer Network® (NCCN®), a not-for-profit alliance of 27 of the world's leading cancer centers devoted to patient care, research, and education, is dedicated to improving the quality, effectiveness, and efficiency of cancer care so that patients can live better lives. Through the leadership and expertise of clinical professionals at NCCN Member Institutions, NCCN develops resources that present valuable information to the numerous stakeholders in the health care delivery system. As the arbiter of high-quality cancer care, NCCN promotes the importance of continuous quality improvement and recognizes the significance of creating clinical practice guidelines appropriate for use by patients, clinicians, and other health care decision-makers. The NCCN Member Institutions are: Fred & Pamela Buffett Cancer Center, Omaha, NE; Case Comprehensive Cancer Center/University Hospitals Seidman Cancer Center and Cleveland Clinic Taussig Cancer Institute, Cleveland, OH; City of Hope Comprehensive Cancer Center, Los Angeles, CA; Dana-Farber/Brigham and Women's Cancer Center | Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, Boston, MA; Duke Cancer Institute, Durham, NC; Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA; Huntsman Cancer Institute at the University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT; Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center/Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins, Baltimore, MD; Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center of Northwestern University, Chicago, IL; Mayo Clinic Cancer Center, Phoenix/Scottsdale, AZ, Jacksonville, FL, and Rochester, MN; Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY; Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL; The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center - James Cancer Hospital and Solove Research Institute, Columbus, OH; Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, NY; Siteman Cancer Center at Barnes-Jewish Hospital and Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO; St. Jude Children's Research Hospital/The University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, TN; Stanford Cancer Institute, Stanford, CA; University of Alabama at Birmingham Comprehensive Cancer Center, Birmingham, AL; UC San Diego Moores Cancer Center, La Jolla, CA; UCSF Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, San Francisco, CA; University of Colorado Cancer Center, Aurora, CO; University of Michigan Comprehensive Cancer Center, Ann Arbor, MI; The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; University of Wisconsin Carbone Cancer Center, Madison, WI; Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Nashville, TN; and Yale Cancer Center/Smilow Cancer Hospital, New Haven, CT. To view the original version on PR Newswire, visit:http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/nccn-survey-reveals-oncologys-concerns-about-financial-distress-patient-access-to-care-300441795.html


News Article | April 19, 2017
Site: www.prnewswire.com

The NCCN Radiation Therapy Compendium™ provides guidance on all RT modalities recommended within the NCCN Guidelines, including Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy (IMRT), Intra-Operative Radiation Therapy (IORT), Stereotactic Radiosurgery (SRS)/Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy (SBRT)/Stereotactic Ablative Radiotherapy (SABR), Image-guided Radiotherapy (IGRT), Low dose-rate brachytherapy (LDR)/High dose-rate brachytherapy (HDR), Radioisotope, and Particle Therapy. Transparency of NCCN Guidelines and Compendia development is central to the philosophy, policies, and procedures of NCCN. NCCN posts the policies and processes for developing and maintaining the NCCN Guidelines. These policies are available to the public on the NCCN website. Identification of newly published research, NCCN Member Institution review, external stakeholder submissions, and panel review occur on an ongoing basis with at least annual review performed for NCCN Guidelines for each disease. The NCCN Guidelines are the recognized standard for clinical policy in cancer care and are the most thorough and most frequently updated clinical practice guidelines available in any area of medicine. Other NCCN Guidelines derivative products include: For more information and to access the NCCN Radiation Therapy Compendium™, visit NCCN.org/RTCompendium. The National Comprehensive Cancer Network® (NCCN®), a not-for-profit alliance of 27 of the world's leading cancer centers devoted to patient care, research, and education, is dedicated to improving the quality, effectiveness, and efficiency of cancer care so that patients can live better lives. Through the leadership and expertise of clinical professionals at NCCN Member Institutions, NCCN develops resources that present valuable information to the numerous stakeholders in the health care delivery system. As the arbiter of high-quality cancer care, NCCN promotes the importance of continuous quality improvement and recognizes the significance of creating clinical practice guidelines appropriate for use by patients, clinicians, and other health care decision-makers. The NCCN Member Institutions are: Fred & Pamela Buffett Cancer Center, Omaha, NE; Case Comprehensive Cancer Center/University Hospitals Seidman Cancer Center and Cleveland Clinic Taussig Cancer Institute, Cleveland, OH; City of Hope Comprehensive Cancer Center, Los Angeles, CA; Dana-Farber/Brigham and Women's Cancer Center | Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, Boston, MA; Duke Cancer Institute, Durham, NC; Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA; Huntsman Cancer Institute at the University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT; Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center/Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins, Baltimore, MD; Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center of Northwestern University, Chicago, IL; Mayo Clinic Cancer Center, Phoenix/Scottsdale, AZ, Jacksonville, FL, and Rochester, MN; Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY; Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL; The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center - James Cancer Hospital and Solove Research Institute, Columbus, OH; Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, NY; Siteman Cancer Center at Barnes-Jewish Hospital and Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO; St. Jude Children's Research Hospital/The University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, TN; Stanford Cancer Institute, Stanford, CA; University of Alabama at Birmingham Comprehensive Cancer Center, Birmingham, AL; UC San Diego Moores Cancer Center, La Jolla, CA; UCSF Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, San Francisco, CA; University of Colorado Cancer Center, Aurora, CO; University of Michigan Comprehensive Cancer Center, Ann Arbor, MI; The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; University of Wisconsin Carbone Cancer Center, Madison, WI; Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Nashville, TN; and Yale Cancer Center/Smilow Cancer Hospital, New Haven, CT. To view the original version on PR Newswire, visit:http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/nine-new-disease-sites-added-to-the-nccn-radiation-therapy-compendium-300441832.html

Loading Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center collaborators
Loading Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center collaborators