Try a new search

Format these results:

Searched for:

in-biosketch:true

person:loebs01

Total Results:

495


The Urology Care Foundation - trusted online resources in an era of misinformation

Stork, Brian; Loeb, Stacy
PMID: 31300752
ISSN: 1759-4820
CID: 4028052

Latest developments in prostate cancer surgery and active surveillance [Meeting Abstract]

Loeb, S
Active surveillance is now the recommended management option for low-risk prostate cancer. In this lecture we will discuss trends in use of active surveillance worldwide, optimal patient selection and monitoring. For men with intermediate- to high-risk localized prostate cancer, radical prostatectomy remains a gold standard treatment option. We will discuss recent trends in the surgical management of localized prostate cancer
EMBASE:634259050
ISSN: 1743-7563
CID: 4803972

The promise and peril of social media for clinicians, researchers and patients [Meeting Abstract]

Loeb, S
The use of social media in medicine has rapidly increased. Social networks are used by clinicians for many purposes, including clinical case discussions, professional networking, advertising their practice, and patient education. Researchers are using social media for recruitment and dissemination of research, and as a source of data. Patients are also using social media as a source of information on health conditions, although there is a significant amount of misinformation. In this lecture, wewill discuss the pros and cons of social media use by clinicians, researchers and patients
EMBASE:634259158
ISSN: 1743-7563
CID: 4803962

FACTORS THAT INFLUENCE CLINICIANS' DECISIONS TO DECREASE/STOP ACTIVE SURVEILLANCE FOR LOCALIZED PROSTATE CANCER: A QUALITATIVE STUDY [Meeting Abstract]

Lowenstein, L M; Choi, N; Volk, R J; Loeb, S
Introduction: Current guidelines recommend active surveillance (AS) as the preferred strategy for men with low-risk prostate cancer (PCa). AS involves serial testing to monitor the disease, and curative intervention is offered if the disease progresses. Studies show significant heterogeneity regarding testing frequency and when AS is discontinued.
Objective(s): To identify factors clinicians consider when decreasing/stopping AS for PCa.
Method(s): This qualitative study used data from semi-structured interviews with clinicians who monitor men on AS. Purposive sampling was used to ensure geographic variation in the U.S. Data collection continued until thematic saturation was achieved. Audio-recorded interviews with clinicians were transcribed verbatim and imported into Atlas.ti for data management and analysis. Framework analysis guided coding and identification of themes. Two researchers coded all transcripts independently, met to discuss, and reached consensus. Results and
Conclusion(s): Of the 24 clinicians, 83% were urologists representing 11 states, 92% were male, and 62% were white. Clinicians reported their experiences with either decreasing/stopping AS (Fig. 1, overleaf). Life expectancy, considering age and comorbidities, was the dominant theme influencing the decision to decrease/stop AS. Generally, clinicians did not have a specific age for when they would consider decreasing/stopping AS, but one clinician felt that 75 years should be the cut-off. The fear of missing the window of curability or being sued could limit clinicians' willingness to decrease/stop AS. One clinician's patient reported him to the medical board when he refused to do a rectal exam that was not clinically needed. Clinicians also mentioned situations where men stop showing up, due to work or transportation issues, or say they want to stop because of biopsy fatigue. These findings suggest that clinicians make decisions about changing AS in response to both clinical and pragmatic concerns. As AS use increases, additional recommendations are needed to guide decisions about decreasing/stopping AS. Disclosure of interest: None declared
Copyright
EMBASE:2004939470
ISSN: 1879-4068
CID: 4330012

Towards automatic detection of misinformation in online medical videos

Chapter by: Hou, Rui; Loeb, Stacy; Pérez-Rosas, Verónica; Mihalcea, Rada
in: ICMI 2019 - Proceedings of the 2019 International Conference on Multimodal Interaction by
[S.l.] : Association for Computing Machinery, Incacmhelp@acm.org, 2019
pp. 235-243
ISBN: 9781450368605
CID: 4219922

Does Dr Google give good advice about prostate cancer? [Editorial]

Loeb, S; Byrne, N; Teoh, J
EMBASE:2003192729
ISSN: 1464-4096
CID: 4176122

Genomic Classifiers for Treatment Selection in Newly Diagnosed Prostate Cancer

Fine, Noam David; LaPolla, Fred; Epstein, Matthew; Loeb, Stacy; Dani, Hasan
OBJECTIVE:To systematically review the literature on genomic tests for prostate cancer (PCa) and evaluate the current state of the evidence on their use in patients with newly diagnosed PCa. METHODS:We conducted a systematic review by searching PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central, and conference abstracts from the American Urological Association published between 2010 and 2018. Studies evaluating Prolaris, Oncotype Dx, and Decipher assays were assessed for inclusion by two authors. Studies were excluded if the results were derived from surgical specimens rather than biopsy specimens. Meta-analysis was not performed owing to significant variations in methodologies, definitions and outcome measures. RESULTS:A total of 729 articles were retrieved in our initial search. After removing duplicates (270) and excluding articles deemed not relevant (432), 21 full-text articles were deemed suitable for inclusion in our analysis. The full-text articles comprised 8 studies on Prolaris, 8 studies on Oncotype Dx, and 5 studies on Decipher. For each genomic test we extracted data regarding the risk of adverse pathology, biochemical recurrence, metastasis, and prostate cancer mortality. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:The results of genomic tests that use biomarkers derived from prostate biopsy can be used in conjunction with clinicopathologic variables to improve our ability to risk stratify patients with newly diagnosed prostate cancer. Additional data are needed on the impact of using these tests on long-term patient outcomes and their cost-effectiveness. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
PMID: 31055874
ISSN: 1464-410x
CID: 4115662

Overactive Surveillance: Is "Conservative" Management for Low-risk Prostate Cancer Too Aggressive? [Editorial]

Loeb, Stacy
PMID: 31060823
ISSN: 1873-7560
CID: 4103412

Focal laser ablation as clinical treatment of prostate cancer: report from a Delphi consensus project

van Luijtelaar, A; Greenwood, B M; Ahmed, H U; Barqawi, A B; Barret, E; Bomers, J G R; Brausi, M A; Choyke, P L; Cooperberg, M R; Eggener, S; Feller, J F; Frauscher, F; George, A K; Hindley, R G; Jenniskens, S F M; Klotz, L; Kovacs, G; Lindner, U; Loeb, S; Margolis, D J; Marks, L S; May, S; Mcclure, T D; Montironi, R; Nour, S G; Oto, A; Polascik, T J; Rastinehad, A R; De Reyke, T M; Reijnen, J S; de la Rosette, J J M C H; Sedelaar, J P M; Sperling, D S; Walser, E M; Ward, J F; Villers, A; Ghai, S; Fütterer, J J
PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:To define the role of focal laser ablation (FLA) as clinical treatment of prostate cancer (PCa) using the Delphi consensus method. METHODS:A panel of international experts in the field of focal therapy (FT) in PCa conducted a collaborative consensus project using the Delphi method. Experts were invited to online questionnaires focusing on patient selection and treatment of PCa with FLA during four subsequent rounds. After each round, outcomes were displayed, and questionnaires were modified based on the comments provided by panelists. Results were finalized and discussed during face-to-face meetings. RESULTS:Thirty-seven experts agreed to participate, and consensus was achieved on 39/43 topics. Clinically significant PCa (csPCa) was defined as any volume Grade Group 2 [Gleason score (GS) 3+4]. Focal therapy was specified as treatment of all csPCa and can be considered primary treatment as an alternative to radical treatment in carefully selected patients. In patients with intermediate-risk PCa (GS 3+4) as well as patients with MRI-visible and biopsy-confirmed local recurrence, FLA is optimal for targeted ablation of a specific magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-visible focus. However, FLA should not be applied to candidates for active surveillance and close follow-up is required. Suitability for FLA is based on tumor volume, location to vital structures, GS, MRI-visibility, and biopsy confirmation. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Focal laser ablation is a promising technique for treatment of clinically localized PCa and should ideally be performed within approved clinical trials. So far, only few studies have reported on FLA and further validation with longer follow-up is mandatory before widespread clinical implementation is justified.
PMCID:6763411
PMID: 30671638
ISSN: 1433-8726
CID: 4312862

Twitter Response to the 2018 United States Preventive Services Task Force Guidelines on Prostate Cancer Screening [Letter]

Ke, Yaohan; Taylor, Jacob; Gao, Lynn Lingshan; Wang, Hezhi; Zhao, Han; Byrne, Nataliya; Modgil, Vaibhav; Butaney, Mohit; Makarov, Danil V; Prabhu, Vinay; Loeb, Stacy
Prostate cancer screening reduces advanced disease and prostate cancer death but is controversial due to downstream harms including unnecessary biopsies and overtreatment. In 2012 the United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommended against screening men for prostate cancer, a practice common since the early 1990's. This dramatic policy change was opposed by many physicians and patient groups. Our group reported on the Twitter response within 24 hours of these guidelines, showing a missed opportunity for greater advocacy since the majority of tweets did not express an opinion.
PMID: 30811805
ISSN: 1464-410x
CID: 3703732