scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Author

Douglas E. Wood

Bio: Douglas E. Wood is an academic researcher from Seattle Cancer Care Alliance. The author has contributed to research in topics: Lung cancer & Sealant. The author has an hindex of 4, co-authored 7 publications receiving 525 citations. Previous affiliations of Douglas E. Wood include Mayo Clinic & Cedars-Sinai Medical Center.

Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) address all aspects of management for NSCLC as mentioned in this paper.
Abstract: The NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) address all aspects of management for NSCLC. These NCCN Guidelines Insights focus on recent updates to the NCCN Guidelines regarding targeted therapies, immunotherapies, and their respective biomarkers.

495 citations

01 Jan 2011
TL;DR: The board of trustees of the American Cancer Society as mentioned in this paper have been active in the field of cancer research for over 50 years and have made significant contributions to the development of the field.
Abstract: Board of Directors President Michael J. Mack, MD First Vice President Jeffrey B. Rich, MD Second Vice President Douglas E. Wood, MD Secretary David A. Fullerton, MD Treasurer Carolyn E. Reed, MD Treasurer-Elect Robert S.D. Higgins, MD Immediate Past President Douglas J. Mathisen, MD Director-at-Large John H. Calhoon, MD Director-at-Large Richard H. Feins, MD Director-at-Large Walter H. Merrill, MD Director-at-Large Richard J. Shemin, MD Director-at-Large Mark S. Allen, MD Director-at-Large Joseph F. Sabik III, MD International Director Friedrich W. Mohr, MD Canadian Director Christopher A. Caldarone, MD Editor L. Henry Edmunds, Jr, MD Historian Nicholas T. Kouchoukos, MD Resident Director Jennifer S. Nelson, MD Executive Director & General Counsel Robert A. Wynbrandt, JD

338 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This study demonstrates the effectiveness of a biodegradable polymer when used as an adjunct to standard closure methods for sealing significant intraoperative air leaks that develop from pulmonary surgery.

97 citations


Cited by
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In patients with severe aortic stenosis who were not suitable candidates for surgery, TAVI, as compared with standard therapy, significantly reduced the rates of death from any cause, the composite end point of deathFrom any cause or repeat hospitalization, and cardiac symptoms, despite the higher incidence of major strokes and major vascular events.
Abstract: Background Many patients with severe aortic stenosis and coexisting conditions are not candi dates for surgical replacement of the aortic valve. Recently, transcatheter aortic-valve implantation (TAVI) has been suggested as a less invasive treatment for high-risk patients with aortic stenosis. Methods We randomly assigned patients with severe aortic stenosis, whom surgeons considered not to be suitable candidates for surgery, to standard therapy (including balloon aortic valvuloplasty) or transfemoral transcatheter implantation of a balloon-expandable bovine pericardial valve. The primary end point was the rate of death from any cause. Results A total of 358 patients with aortic stenosis who were not considered to be suitable candidates for surgery underwent randomization at 21 centers (17 in the United States). At 1 year, the rate of death from any cause (Kaplan–Meier analysis) was 30.7% with TAVI, as compared with 50.7% with standard therapy (hazard ratio with TAVI, 0.55; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.40 to 0.74; P<0.001). The rate of the composite end point of death from any cause or repeat hospitalization was 42.5% with TAVI as com pared with 71.6% with standard therapy (hazard ratio, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.35 to 0.59; P<0.001). Among survivors at 1 year, the rate of cardiac symptoms (New York Heart Association class III or IV) was lower among patients who had undergone TAVI than among those who had received standard therapy (25.2% vs. 58.0%, P<0.001). At 30 days, TAVI, as compared with standard therapy, was associated with a higher incidence of major strokes (5.0% vs. 1.1%, P = 0.06) and major vascular complications (16.2% vs. 1.1%, P<0.001). In the year after TAVI, there was no deterioration in the functioning of the bioprosthetic valve, as assessed by evidence of stenosis or regurgitation on an echocardiogram. Conclusions In patients with severe aortic stenosis who were not suitable candidates for surgery, TAVI, as compared with standard therapy, significantly reduced the rates of death from any cause, the composite end point of death from any cause or repeat hospitalization, and cardiac symptoms, despite the higher incidence of major strokes and major vascular events. (Funded by Edwards Lifesciences; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00530894.)

6,225 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Author(s): Go, Alan S; Mozaffarian, Dariush; Roger, Veronique L; Benjamin, Emelia J; Berry, Jarett D; Borden, William B; Bravata, Dawn M; Dai, Shifan; Ford, Earl S; Fox, Caroline S; Franco, Sheila; Fullerton, Heather J; Gillespie, Cathleen; Hailpern, Susan M; Heit, John A; Howard, Virginia J; Huff
Abstract: Author(s): Go, Alan S; Mozaffarian, Dariush; Roger, Veronique L; Benjamin, Emelia J; Berry, Jarett D; Borden, William B; Bravata, Dawn M; Dai, Shifan; Ford, Earl S; Fox, Caroline S; Franco, Sheila; Fullerton, Heather J; Gillespie, Cathleen; Hailpern, Susan M; Heit, John A; Howard, Virginia J; Huffman, Mark D; Kissela, Brett M; Kittner, Steven J; Lackland, Daniel T; Lichtman, Judith H; Lisabeth, Lynda D; Magid, David; Marcus, Gregory M; Marelli, Ariane; Matchar, David B; McGuire, Darren K; Mohler, Emile R; Moy, Claudia S; Mussolino, Michael E; Nichol, Graham; Paynter, Nina P; Schreiner, Pamela J; Sorlie, Paul D; Stein, Joel; Turan, Tanya N; Virani, Salim S; Wong, Nathan D; Woo, Daniel; Turner, Melanie B; American Heart Association Statistics Committee and Stroke Statistics Subcommittee

5,449 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In high-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis, transcatheter and surgical procedures for aorti-valve replacement were associated with similar rates of survival at 1 year, although there were important differences in periprocedural risks.
Abstract: A b s t r ac t Background The use of transcatheter aortic-valve replacement has been shown to reduce mortality among high-risk patients with aortic stenosis who are not candidates for surgical replacement. However, the two procedures have not been compared in a randomized trial involving high-risk patients who are still candidates for surgical replacement. Methods At 25 centers, we randomly assigned 699 high-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis to undergo either transcatheter aortic-valve replacement with a balloon-expandable bovine pericardial valve (either a transfemoral or a transapical approach) or surgical replacement. The primary end point was death from any cause at 1 year. The primary hypothesis was that transcatheter replacement is not inferior to surgical replacement. Results The rates of death from any cause were 3.4% in the transcatheter group and 6.5% in the surgical group at 30 days (P = 0.07) and 24.2% and 26.8%, respectively, at 1 year (P = 0.44), a reduction of 2.6 percentage points in the transcatheter group (upper limit of the 95% confidence interval, 3.0 percentage points; predefined margin, 7.5 percentage points; P = 0.001 for noninferiority). The rates of major stroke were 3.8% in the transcatheter group and 2.1% in the surgical group at 30 days (P = 0.20) and 5.1% and 2.4%, respectively, at 1 year (P = 0.07). At 30 days, major vascular compli- cations were significantly more frequent with transcatheter replacement (11.0% vs. 3.2%, P<0.001); adverse events that were more frequent after surgical replacement included major bleeding (9.3% vs. 19.5%, P<0.001) and new-onset atrial fibrillation (8.6% vs. 16.0%, P = 0.006). More patients undergoing transcatheter replacement had an improvement in symptoms at 30 days, but by 1 year, there was not a significant between-group difference. Conclusions In high-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis, transcatheter and surgical proce- dures for aortic-valve replacement were associated with similar rates of survival at 1 year, although there were important differences in periprocedural risks. (Funded by Edwards Lifesciences; Clinical Trials.gov number, NCT00530894.)

5,272 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: A Report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/AmericanHeart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines, and the AmericanCollege of Physicians, American Association for Thoracic Surgery, Preventive Cardiovascular Nurses Association, Society for CardiovascularAngiography and Interventions, and Society of ThorACic Surgeons
Abstract: Jeffrey L. Anderson, MD, FACC, FAHA, Chair Jonathan L. Halperin, MD, FACC, FAHA, Chair-Elect Alice K. Jacobs, MD, FACC, FAHA, Immediate Past Chair 2009–2011 [§§][1] Sidney C. Smith, Jr, MD, FACC, FAHA, Past Chair 2006–2008 [§§][1] Cynthia D. Adams, MSN, APRN-BC, FAHA[§§][1] Nancy M

2,469 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In patients with severe aortic stenosis who are at increased surgical risk, TAVR with a self-expanding transcatheter aorti-valve bioprosthesis was associated with a significantly higher rate of survival at 1 year than surgical aorticsvalve replacement.
Abstract: BACKGROUND We compared transcatheter aortic-valve replacement (TAVR), using a self-expanding transcatheter aortic-valve bioprosthesis, with surgical aortic-valve replacement in patients with severe aortic stenosis and an increased risk of death during surgery. METHODS We recruited patients with severe aortic stenosis who were at increased surgical risk as determined by the heart team at each study center. Risk assessment included the Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predictor Risk of Mortality estimate and consideration of other key risk factors. Eligible patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to TAVR with the self-expanding transcatheter valve (TAVR group) or to surgical aortic-valve replacement (surgical group). The primary end point was the rate of death from any cause at 1 year, evaluated with the use of both noninferiority and superiority testing. RESULTS A total of 795 patients underwent randomization at 45 centers in the United States. In the as-treated analysis, the rate of death from any cause at 1 year was significantly lower in the TAVR group than in the surgical group (14.2% vs. 19.1%), with an absolute reduction in risk of 4.9 percentage points (upper boundary of the 95% confidence interval, −0.4; P<0.001 for noninferiority; P = 0.04 for superiority). The results were similar in the intention-to-treat analysis. In a hierarchical testing procedure, TAVR was noninferior with respect to echocardiographic indexes of valve stenosis, functional status, and quality of life. Exploratory analyses suggested a reduction in the rate of major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events and no increase in the risk of stroke. CONCLUSIONS In patients with severe aortic stenosis who are at increased surgical risk, TAVR with a self-expanding transcatheter aortic-valve bioprosthesis was associated with a significantly higher rate of survival at 1 year than surgical aortic-valve replacement. (Funded by Medtronic; U.S. CoreValve High Risk Study ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01240902.)

2,432 citations