A major goal of Huntsman Cancer Institute (HCI) is to conduct a vibrant clinical research program, providing a portfolio of scientifically excellent clinical trials for our patients, support for the clinical research efforts of our faculty, and improved strategies for cancer detection, diagnosis, treatment, and prevention through our clinical research activities. As an NCI-designated Cancer Center with a strong foundation in cancer-focused research, we have both an opportunity and a responsibility to translate our discoveries to impact patient care. To achieve this objective, we must have in place a robust Protocol Review and Monitoring System (PRMS) to review the scientific merit of proposed clinical studies, evaluate the contribution of proposed protocols to the strategic aims of our Cancer Center, and assess the scientific progress of ongoing studies. When Dr. Beckerie was appointed Executive Director of HCI in August 2006, our PRMS faced significant challenges. The HCI PRMS had been disapproved at the time of our 2003 competing review. Although reevaluations in 2004 and 2005 recognized evidence of improvement, the review teams noted ongoing deficiencies. Dr. Beckerie highlighted the critical need for excellence in our institutional PRMS, developed a step-wise approach to analyze and improve the PRMS with internal analysis, multiple external Cancer Center consultants, HCI site-visits to other Cancer Centers, and input from our External Advisory Board. By integrating these recommendations, substantial changes to our PRMS were made. HCI's PRMS was formally reviewed and unconditionally approved by NCI in December 2008. PRMS functions at HCI are fulfilled by the Clinical Cancer Investigations Committee (CCIC). The CCIC: 1) conducts thorough scientific review of all cancer-related studies performed at HCI, 2) prioritizes research protocols and prevents protocol competition, 3) prioritizes protocols for access to HCI Clinical Trials Office support, 4) evaluates ongoing protocols for continued progress toward accrual goals, 5) reviews and approves protocol amendments, and 6) closes under-accruing trials. Before a study can be presented to the CCIC, it must be submitted to the appropriate multidisciplinary disease group for review, approval, and priority rating. CCIC protocol review follows a standardized format in which reviewers are tasked to respond to a set of review criteria;an electronic management and notification system aids in the PRMS process. The CCIC has broad and extensive expertise in oncology to ensure that clinical protocols and assessment of progress are reviewed at a high scientific level, including representatives from Medical Oncology, Surgical Oncology, Pediatric Hematology-Oncology, Radiation Oncology, Nuclear Medicine, Biostatistics, Pharmacology, Pathology, Basic Science, and Population Science, Research Nursing, and a Patient Advocate, as well as HCI's Executive Director Mary Beckerie, PhD, and Scott Lloyd, MBA, Senior Director of Administration and Finance, as ex-officio members.

Agency
National Institute of Health (NIH)
Institute
National Cancer Institute (NCI)
Type
Center Core Grants (P30)
Project #
5P30CA042014-24
Application #
8465129
Study Section
Subcommittee G - Education (NCI)
Project Start
Project End
Budget Start
2013-05-01
Budget End
2014-04-30
Support Year
24
Fiscal Year
2013
Total Cost
$57,338
Indirect Cost
$21,826
Name
University of Utah
Department
Type
DUNS #
009095365
City
Salt Lake City
State
UT
Country
United States
Zip Code
84112
Flores, Kristina G; Steffen, Laurie E; McLouth, Christopher J et al. (2016) Factors Associated with Interest in Gene-Panel Testing and Risk Communication Preferences in Women from BRCA1/2 Negative Families. J Genet Couns :
Khorashad, J S; Tantravahi, S K; Yan, D et al. (2016) Rapid conversion of chronic myeloid leukemia to chronic myelomonocytic leukemia in a patient on imatinib therapy. Leukemia 30:2275-2279
(2016) PALB2, CHEK2 and ATM rare variants and cancer risk: data from COGS. J Med Genet 53:800-811
Neklason, Deborah W; VanDerslice, James; Curtin, Karen et al. (2016) Evidence for a heritable contribution to neuroendocrine tumors of the small intestine. Endocr Relat Cancer 23:93-100
Piccolo, Stephen R; Hoffman, Laura M; Conner, Thomas et al. (2016) Integrative analyses reveal signaling pathways underlying familial breast cancer susceptibility. Mol Syst Biol 12:860
Norton, Maria C; Fauth, Elizabeth; Clark, Christine J et al. (2016) Family member deaths across adulthood predict Alzheimer's disease risk: The Cache County Study. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry 31:256-63
Riedl, Jan; Fleming, Aaron M; Burrows, Cynthia J (2016) Sequencing of DNA Lesions Facilitated by Site-Specific Excision via Base Excision Repair DNA Glycosylases Yielding Ligatable Gaps. J Am Chem Soc 138:491-4
Zhu, Judy; Fleming, Aaron M; Orendt, Anita M et al. (2016) pH-Dependent Equilibrium between 5-Guanidinohydantoin and Iminoallantoin Affects Nucleotide Insertion Opposite the DNA Lesion. J Org Chem 81:351-9
Camp, Nicola J; Lin, Wei-Yu; Bigelow, Alex et al. (2016) Discordant Haplotype Sequencing Identifies Functional Variants at the 2q33 Breast Cancer Risk Locus. Cancer Res 76:1916-25
Serpico, Victoria; Liepert, Amy E; Boucher, Kenneth et al. (2016) The Effect of Previsit Education in Breast Cancer Patients: A Study of a Shared-decision-making Tool. Am Surg 82:259-65

Showing the most recent 10 out of 1049 publications