scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Author

Nicole M. Kuderer

Bio: Nicole M. Kuderer is an academic researcher from University of Washington. The author has contributed to research in topics: Cancer & Febrile neutropenia. The author has an hindex of 43, co-authored 142 publications receiving 13099 citations. Previous affiliations of Nicole M. Kuderer include Baylor University Medical Center & Durham University.


Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
15 May 2008-Blood
TL;DR: A simple model for predicting chemotherapy-associated venous thromboembolism using baseline clinical and laboratory variables can identify patients with a nearly 7% short-term risk of symptomatic VTE and may be used to select cancer outpatients for studies of thromboprophylaxis.

1,626 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
Nicole M. Kuderer, Toni K. Choueiri1, Dimpy P. Shah2, Yu Shyr3  +236 moreInstitutions (26)
TL;DR: The outcomes of a cohort of patients with cancer and COVID-19 are characterised and potential prognostic factors for mortality and severe illness are identified and race and ethnicity, obesity status, cancer type, type of anticancer therapy, and recent surgery were not associated with mortality.

1,344 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This study showed no significant differences in baseline CEC counts or VWF levels between the AR, CS and RFV, however, PCI was associated with a significant increase in CECs, but not VWF, across all three sampling sites, and this study cannot presume that the increased CEC numbers represent specific coronary artery endothelial shedding.

1,286 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Current recommendations about the prophylaxis and treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in patients with cancer and oncology professionals should educate patients about the signs and symptoms of VTE.
Abstract: Purpose To provide current recommendations about the prophylaxis and treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in patients with cancer.

1,201 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Recommendations were developed on the prevention of VTE in hospitalized, ambulatory, and surgical cancer patients as well as patients with established VTE, and for use of anticoagulants in cancer patients without VTE to improve survival.
Abstract: Purpose To develop guideline recommendations for the use of anticoagulation in the prevention and treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in patients with cancer. Methods A comprehensive systematic review of the medical literature on the prevention and treatment of VTE in cancer patients was conducted and reviewed by a panel of content and methodology experts. Following discussion of the results, the panel drafted recommendations for the use of anticoagulation in patients with malignant disease. Results The results of randomized controlled trials of primary and secondary VTE medical prophylaxis, surgical prophylaxis, VTE treatment, and the impact of anticoagulation on survival of patients with cancer were reviewed. Recommendations were developed on the prevention of VTE in hospitalized, ambulatory, and surgical cancer patients as well as patients with established VTE, and for use of anticoagulants in cancer patients without VTE to improve survival. Conclusion Recommendations of the American Society of Clinical Oncology VTE Guideline Panel include (1) all hospitalized cancer patients should be considered for VTE prophylaxis with anticoagulants in the absence of bleeding or other contraindications; (2) routine prophylaxis of ambulatory cancer patients with anticoagulation is not recommended, with the exception of patients receiving thalidomide or lenalidomide; (3) patients undergoing major surgery for malignant disease should be considered for pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis; (4) low molecular weight heparin represents the preferred agent for both the initial and continuing treatment of cancer patients with established VTE; and (5) the impact of anticoagulants on cancer patient survival requires additional study and cannot be recommended at present. J Clin Oncol 25:5490-5505. © 2007 by American Society of Clinical Oncology

910 citations


Cited by
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
24 Mar 2010-BMJ
TL;DR: This update of the CONSORT statement improves the wording and clarity of the previous checklist and incorporates recommendations related to topics that have only recently received recognition, such as selective outcome reporting bias.
Abstract: Overwhelming evidence shows the quality of reporting of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) is not optimal. Without transparent reporting, readers cannot judge the reliability and validity of trial findings nor extract information for systematic reviews. Recent methodological analyses indicate that inadequate reporting and design are associated with biased estimates of treatment effects. Such systematic error is seriously damaging to RCTs, which are considered the gold standard for evaluating interventions because of their ability to minimise or avoid bias. A group of scientists and editors developed the CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) statement to improve the quality of reporting of RCTs. It was first published in 1996 and updated in 2001. The statement consists of a checklist and flow diagram that authors can use for reporting an RCT. Many leading medical journals and major international editorial groups have endorsed the CONSORT statement. The statement facilitates critical appraisal and interpretation of RCTs. During the 2001 CONSORT revision, it became clear that explanation and elaboration of the principles underlying the CONSORT statement would help investigators and others to write or appraise trial reports. A CONSORT explanation and elaboration article was published in 2001 alongside the 2001 version of the CONSORT statement. After an expert meeting in January 2007, the CONSORT statement has been further revised and is published as the CONSORT 2010 Statement. This update improves the wording and clarity of the previous checklist and incorporates recommendations related to topics that have only recently received recognition, such as selective outcome reporting bias. This explanatory and elaboration document-intended to enhance the use, understanding, and dissemination of the CONSORT statement-has also been extensively revised. It presents the meaning and rationale for each new and updated checklist item providing examples of good reporting and, where possible, references to relevant empirical studies. Several examples of flow diagrams are included. The CONSORT 2010 Statement, this revised explanatory and elaboration document, and the associated website (www.consort-statement.org) should be helpful resources to improve reporting of randomised trials.

5,957 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Hydroxychloroquine treatment is significantly associated with viral load reduction/disappearance in COVID-19 patients and its effect is reinforced by azithromycin, which was significantly more efficient for virus elimination.

4,213 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
01 Jun 2008-Chest
TL;DR: This article discusses the prevention of venous thromboembolism (VTE) and is part of the Antithrombotic and Thrombolytic Therapy: American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines (8th Edition).

3,944 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This document updates and expands the initial Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) Fever and Neutropenia Guideline that was published in 1997 and first updated in 2002 and developed a clearer definition of which populations of patients with cancer may benefit most from antibiotic, antifungal, and antiviral prophylaxis.
Abstract: This document updates and expands the initial Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) Fever and Neutropenia Guideline that was published in 1997 and first updated in 2002. It is intended as a guide for the use of antimicrobial agents in managing patients with cancer who experience chemotherapy-induced fever and neutropenia. Recent advances in antimicrobial drug development and technology, clinical trial results, and extensive clinical experience have informed the approaches and recommendations herein. Because the previous iteration of this guideline in 2002, we have a developed a clearer definition of which populations of patients with cancer may benefit most from antibiotic, antifungal, and antiviral prophylaxis. Furthermore, categorizing neutropenic patients as being at high risk or low risk for infection according to presenting signs and symptoms, underlying cancer, type of therapy, and medical comorbidities has become essential to the treatment algorithm. Risk stratification is a recommended starting point for managing patients with fever and neutropenia. In addition, earlier detection of invasive fungal infections has led to debate regarding optimal use of empirical or preemptive antifungal therapy, although algorithms are still evolving. What has not changed is the indication for immediate empirical antibiotic therapy. It remains true that all patients who present with fever and neutropenia should be treated swiftly and broadly with antibiotics to treat both gram-positive and gram-negative pathogens. Finally, we note that all Panel members are from institutions in the United States or Canada; thus, these guidelines were developed in the context of North American practices. Some recommendations may not be as applicable outside of North America, in areas where differences in available antibiotics, in the predominant pathogens, and/or in health care-associated economic conditions exist. Regardless of venue, clinical vigilance and immediate treatment are the universal keys to managing neutropenic patients with fever and/or infection.

2,664 citations