Materials Map

Discover the materials research landscape. Find experts, partners, networks.

  • About
  • Privacy Policy
  • Legal Notice
  • Contact

The Materials Map is an open tool for improving networking and interdisciplinary exchange within materials research. It enables cross-database search for cooperation and network partners and discovering of the research landscape.

The dashboard provides detailed information about the selected scientist, e.g. publications. The dashboard can be filtered and shows the relationship to co-authors in different diagrams. In addition, a link is provided to find contact information.

×

Materials Map under construction

The Materials Map is still under development. In its current state, it is only based on one single data source and, thus, incomplete and contains duplicates. We are working on incorporating new open data sources like ORCID to improve the quality and the timeliness of our data. We will update Materials Map as soon as possible and kindly ask for your patience.

To Graph

1.080 Topics available

To Map

977 Locations available

693.932 PEOPLE
693.932 People People

693.932 People

Show results for 693.932 people that are selected by your search filters.

←

Page 1 of 27758

→
←

Page 1 of 0

→
PeopleLocationsStatistics
Naji, M.
  • 2
  • 13
  • 3
  • 2025
Motta, Antonella
  • 8
  • 52
  • 159
  • 2025
Aletan, Dirar
  • 1
  • 1
  • 0
  • 2025
Mohamed, Tarek
  • 1
  • 7
  • 2
  • 2025
Ertürk, Emre
  • 2
  • 3
  • 0
  • 2025
Taccardi, Nicola
  • 9
  • 81
  • 75
  • 2025
Kononenko, Denys
  • 1
  • 8
  • 2
  • 2025
Petrov, R. H.Madrid
  • 46
  • 125
  • 1k
  • 2025
Alshaaer, MazenBrussels
  • 17
  • 31
  • 172
  • 2025
Bih, L.
  • 15
  • 44
  • 145
  • 2025
Casati, R.
  • 31
  • 86
  • 661
  • 2025
Muller, Hermance
  • 1
  • 11
  • 0
  • 2025
Kočí, JanPrague
  • 28
  • 34
  • 209
  • 2025
Šuljagić, Marija
  • 10
  • 33
  • 43
  • 2025
Kalteremidou, Kalliopi-ArtemiBrussels
  • 14
  • 22
  • 158
  • 2025
Azam, Siraj
  • 1
  • 3
  • 2
  • 2025
Ospanova, Alyiya
  • 1
  • 6
  • 0
  • 2025
Blanpain, Bart
  • 568
  • 653
  • 13k
  • 2025
Ali, M. A.
  • 7
  • 75
  • 187
  • 2025
Popa, V.
  • 5
  • 12
  • 45
  • 2025
Rančić, M.
  • 2
  • 13
  • 0
  • 2025
Ollier, Nadège
  • 28
  • 75
  • 239
  • 2025
Azevedo, Nuno Monteiro
  • 4
  • 8
  • 25
  • 2025
Landes, Michael
  • 1
  • 9
  • 2
  • 2025
Rignanese, Gian-Marco
  • 15
  • 98
  • 805
  • 2025

Bagai, Rajesh

  • Google
  • 1
  • 9
  • 0

in Cooperation with on an Cooperation-Score of 37%

Topics

Publications (1/1 displayed)

  • 2022Impact of gene expression profile testing for lymph node positive (LN+) , hormone receptor positive (HR+), HER2 negative (HER2-) breast cancer (BC) patients on the use of adjuvant chemotherapy in a large community cancer centercitations

Places of action

Chart of shared publication
Kalmadi, Sujith
1 / 1 shared
Rifkind, Joshua
1 / 1 shared
Ho, Emily
1 / 1 shared
Kellogg, Christopher
1 / 1 shared
Clark, Patricia
1 / 1 shared
Khanuja, Parvinderjit
1 / 1 shared
Shtivelband, Mikhail
1 / 1 shared
Sharma, Manas
1 / 1 shared
Brown, Andrew
1 / 6 shared
Chart of publication period
2022

Co-Authors (by relevance)

  • Kalmadi, Sujith
  • Rifkind, Joshua
  • Ho, Emily
  • Kellogg, Christopher
  • Clark, Patricia
  • Khanuja, Parvinderjit
  • Shtivelband, Mikhail
  • Sharma, Manas
  • Brown, Andrew
OrganizationsLocationPeople

article

Impact of gene expression profile testing for lymph node positive (LN+) , hormone receptor positive (HR+), HER2 negative (HER2-) breast cancer (BC) patients on the use of adjuvant chemotherapy in a large community cancer center

  • Kalmadi, Sujith
  • Rifkind, Joshua
  • Ho, Emily
  • Bagai, Rajesh
  • Kellogg, Christopher
  • Clark, Patricia
  • Khanuja, Parvinderjit
  • Shtivelband, Mikhail
  • Sharma, Manas
  • Brown, Andrew
Abstract

<jats:title>Abstract</jats:title><jats:p>Background: Use of gene expression profiling (GEP) is considered standard of care, in deciding use of adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with LN negative breast cancer. However, there are limited data for the use of GEP in LN+ disease. Both Mammaprint™ and Oncotype Dx 21 gene recurrence score™ (RS) have been evaluated in LN+ disease, the data are not as robust as in the LN- population. Based on data from the RXPONDER trial and the MINDACT trial, the NCCN has recently recommended the use of Oncotype Dx to help decide the utility and benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy after resection in LN- , Hormone receptor Positive (HR+), HER2 negative (HER2-) breast cancer patients. Because of the potential major impact of these data on patient management and healthcare utilization, we decided to explore the uptake and implementation of this testing at a large community cancer center in order to assess and report real world data pertaining to this novel standard of care. Methods: Database search of the Electronic Medical Records used at Ironwood Cancer Center, revealed 2455 newly diagnosed patients with early stage breast cancer during the period from 1/1/2018 till 6/1/2021. HIPAA deidentified data was extracted with inclusion criteria of newly diagnosed women with LN+ (1-3 nodes), HR+, and Her2- which yielded 403 patients. Demographics &amp; treatment data: Characteristics included menopausal status (Premenopausal 23%, Post Menopausal 77%), Surgery type (mastectomy 44%, breast conservation surgery 56%), size of primary tumor (0-1 cm 16 %, 1-2 cm 28%, 2-5 cm 43%, and &amp;gt; 5 cm 13%), LNs resected (Range 0-37, Median 4), # of LNs +(1-60%, 2-25%, 3-15%), and Tumor Grade (Grade 1-23%, 2-56%, 3-21%). GEP was performed in 62% of the patients. 49% received adjuvant chemotherapy (61% anthracycline based, 39% non anthracycline based). Of the patients tested, 41% received adjuvant chemotherapy. Adjuvant antihormonal therapy included aromatase inhibitors in 86% and Tamoxifen in 14%. 81% of the pre-menopausal patients received complete ovarian suppression. Results: Logistical Regression analysis in a non linear fashion, R2 data and Chi-square analysis was used to test the statistical significance of the observed relationship with respect to the expected relationship. The data was divided into 6 monthly intervals to allow comparison of the uptake of the test and impact on adjuvant chemotherapy decision making. There was a significant increase in GEP profile testing percentages when these intervals were compared across the years (R2 =0.69). Increase in GEP profiling was associated with lower utilization of adjuvant chemotherapy (R2= 0.84). There was a non-significant decline in the use of adjuvant chemotherapy (Chi2 NS, p value 0.22). Menopausal status, grade/size of tumor did not meet the statistical significance for the likelihood of utilization of the test. Currently multivariate analysis is being performed to examine the interplay between the numerous clinical factors on which the data was collected. This analysis will allow us to decide if we can longitudinally explore recurrence rates in each of these subsets. Conclusion: GEP has seen a significant uptake to help with adjuvant chemotherapy decision making in LN + (1-3) patients in the community cancer center setting over the last 4 years. These real world data also showed that increased testing was associated with decreased chemotherapy use which has translated to lowering health care resources and minimizing patient morbidity. Recommendations from the expert guidelines and clinical trial data have helped accelerate the use of this technology in the decision making to undergo adjuvant chemotherapy in the LN+, HR+, HER2- patients with breast cancer.</jats:p><jats:p>Citation Format: Nisha Rao Kalmadi, Andrew Brown, Manas Sharma, Mikhail Shtivelband, Joshua Rifkind, Sujith Kalmadi, Rajesh Bagai, Emily Ho, Patricia Clark, Christopher Kellogg, Parvinderjit Khanuja. Impact of gene expression profile testing for lymph node positive (LN+) , hormone receptor positive (HR+), HER2 negative (HER2-) breast cancer (BC) patients on the use of adjuvant chemotherapy in a large community cancer center [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2021 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2021 Dec 7-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2022;82(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P1-08-18.</jats:p>

Topics
  • impedance spectroscopy
  • inclusion