Welcome Comparative Effectiveness Research on Cancer in Texas (CERCIT)
The goal of CERCIT is to find evidence that will help patients and their physicians make individualized decisions about the best cancer care options, including screening, treatment and end of life care in cancer.
CERCIT is a multidisciplinary consortium of investigators at the University of Texas Medical Branch (UTMB), MD Anderson Cancer Center (MDACC), UT Health Science Center at Houston (UTHealth), UT Southwestern Medical Center in Dallas (UTSW), and the Texas Department of State Health Services Texas Cancer Registry. CERCIT is funded by the Cancer Prevention Research Institute of Texas (CPRIT).
A special lecture sponsored by Center for Recovery, Physical Activity, and Nutrition (CeRPAN) with the Department of Nutrition & Metabolism as part of the UTMB School of Health Professions 50th Anniversary lecture series on July 25, 2018.
Presented by Kathryn Schmitz, PhD, MPH, Professor of Epidemiology, Penn State College of Medicine, Department of Public Health Sciences; Associate Director of Population Sciences, Penn State Cancer Institute.
The size and diversity of Texas present substantial challenges to the delivery of cancer care throughout the state. The CERCIT Knowledge Translation Core produced the following report and online resources that map population, economic and health care characteristics of diverse geographic areas in Texas that are relevant to the delivery of cancer care.
Read More: Demographic Variations in Texas
A multi-institutional group, led by James S. Goodwin, MD, has been awarded a second five years of funding for "Comparative Effectiveness Research on Cancer in Texas" (CERCIT). The $6 million grant is from the Cancer Prevention Research Institute of Texas. The CERCIT renewal will build on our analyses of administrative data but expand our methods to better measure individual patient characteristics and include information on patient preferences and patient reported outcomes. Our goal is to generate evidence that will help patients and their physicians make individualized decisions about the best cancer care options for each patient. These choices include screening, treatment and end of life care in cancer.
Read More: CERCIT Renewal
by Rice University Press Release
HOUSTON – (July 25, 2016) – Regions in Texas differ widely in adherence to recommended cancer treatment for elderly patients, according to a study by researchers at Rice University and the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center.
These differences are not due to the availability of treatment specialists or the presence of teaching hospitals, the study found. The absence of consistent explanations for these treatment differences suggests that variations like these are likely to occur elsewhere nationwide.
"Texans are no better off in one city versus another in terms of treatment across a broad range of cancers," said Vivian Ho, the chair in health economics at Rice's Baker Institute for Public Policy and director of the institute's Center for Health and Biosciences, who co-authored the study. "One might have expected Houston residents to receive better treatment because of MD Anderson's presence, but any beneficial effects could be offset by a large number of elderly in Houston not being treated there." The research findings were published in the journal BMC Health Services Research.
2018 CERCIT Publications
|Goodwin, J. S., Li, S., Middleton, A., Ottenbacher, K., & Kuo, Y. F. (2018). Differences between skilled nursing facilities in risk of subsequent long-term care placement. J Am Geriatr Soc, 2019. doi:10.1111/jgs.15377||PMID: 29656399|
|Hoover DS, Pappadis MR, Housten AJ, Krishnan S, Weller SC, Giordano SH, Bevers TB, Goodwin JS, Volk RJ. Preferences for communicating about breast cancer screening among racially/ethnically diverse older women. Health Commun, 2018; 1-5. doi:10.1080/10410236.2018.1431026
|Manzano JM, Yang M, Zhao H, Elting LS, George MC, Luo R, Suarez-Almazor ME. Readmission patterns after GI cancer hospitalizations: The medical versus surgical patient. J Oncol Pract, 2018; 14(3), e137-e148. doi:10.1200/JOP.2017.026310.
|Mehta HB, Sura SD, Adhikari D, Andersen CR, Williams SB, Senagore AJ, Kuo YF, Goodwin JS. Adapting the Elixhauser comorbidity index for cancer patients. Cancer, 2018; 124(9), 2018-2025. doi:10.1002/cncr.31269.
|Ost DE, Niu J, Zhao H, Grosu HB Giordano SH. Quality gaps and comparative effectiveness of management strategies for recurrent malignant pleural effusions. Chest, 153(2), 438-452. doi:10.1016/j.chest.2017.08.026.
|Pan HY, Jiang J, Hoffman KE, Tang C, Choi SL, Nguyen QN, Frank SJ, Anscher MS, Shih YT, Smith BD. Comparative toxicities and cost of intensity-modulated radiotherapy, proton radiation, and stereotactic body radiotherapy among younger men with prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol, 2018; JCO2017755371. doi:10.1200/JCO.2017.75.5371.
|Pappadis MR, Volk RJ, Krishnan S, Weller SC, Jaramillo E, Hoover DS, Giordano SH, Tan A, Sheffield KM, Housten AJ, Goodwin JS. Perceptions of Overdetection of Breast Cancer among Women 70 Years of Age and Older in the USA: A Mixed-methods Analysis. BMJ Open. 2018;8:e022138. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2018-022138
|Rosenstock AS, Niu J, Giordano SH, Zhao H, Wolff AC, Chavez-MacGregor M. Acute myeloid leukemia and myelodysplastic syndrome after adjuvant chemotherapy: A population-based study among older breast cancer patients. Cancer, 2018; 124(5), 899-906. doi:10.1002/cncr.31144.
|Swanick CW, Lei X, Iu Y, Shen Y, Goodwin NA, Smith GL, Giordano SH, Hunt KK, Jagsi R, Shaitelman SF, Peterson SK, Smith BD. Long-term patient-reported outcomes in older breast cancer survivors: A population-based survey study. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 2018; 100(4), 882-890. doi:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2017.11.047.
|Tamirisa NP, Goodwin JS, Kandalam A, Linder SK, Weller S, Turrubiate S, Silva C, Riall TS. Patient and physician views of shared decision making in cancer. Health Expect 2018;, 20(6), 1248-1253. doi:10.1111/hex.12564
|van la Parra RFD, Liao K, Smith BD, Yang WT, Leung JWT, Giordano SH, Kuerer HM. Incidence and outcome of breast biopsy procedures during follow-up after treatment for breast cancer. JAMA Surg., 2018. doi:10.1001/jamasurg.2017.5572.
|Weiss A, Chavez-MacGregor M, Lichtensztajn DY, Yi M, Tadros A, Hortobagyi GN, Giordano SH, Hunt KK, Mittendorf EA. Validation study of the American Joint Committee on Cancer Eighth Edition Prognostic Stage Compared with the anatomic stage in breast cancer. JAMA Oncol, 2018; 4(2), 203-209.doi:10.1001/jamaoncol.2017.4298
|Zanwar, P., Lin, Y. L., Kuo, Y. F., & Goodwin, J. S. (2016). Downstream tests, treatments, and annual direct payments in older men cared for by primary care providers with high or low prostate-specific antigen screening rates using 100 percent Texas U.S. Medicare public insurance claims data: a retrospective cohort study. BMC Health Serv Res 2016; 16:17. doi:10.1186/s12913-016-1265-1.||PMID: 26772175|
A Workshop Presented by James S. Goodwin, MD and others at UTMB
Fun with Medicare Part D Data
A CERCIT Workshop presented by James S. Goodwin, MD, August 2014
Shared Decision Making in Cancer Care
A CERCIT Workshop presented by Nina Tamirisa, MD, August 2014
The Use of Surgery in the Elderly for Management of Metastatic Epidural Spinal Cord Compression
A CERCIT Workshop presented by Justin E. Bird, MD, June 2014
Population-Based Assessment of Breast Reconstruction
A CERCIT Workshop presented by Ben Smith, MD, June 2014
Reports and Special Publications
Surveillance Patterns Following Lung Cancer Resection [PDF]: This report describes the current population-based trends in surveillance practices and the use of these modalities in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) following curative resection.
Comparative Effectiveness of MRI vs. Mammography Alone in Patients Undergoing Breast-Conserving Therapy for Breast Cancer [PDF]: This report compares the effectiveness of MRI vs. mammography alone in patients undergoing breast-conserving therapy for breast cancer
Hispanic Cancer Report [PDF]: From A quarterly publication of the Texas Public Health Association (TPHA) Supplement, Fall 2013, A Comprehensive Report on Cancer among Hispanics in Texas.
CERCIT Featured in the Texas Public Health Journal Summer 2013
Using research to keep Texans informed about cancer care – that is at the heart of CERCIT (Comparative Effectiveness Research on Cancer in Texas). A description of this project and selected articles from its four research areas are featured in the Spring 2013 issue of the Texas Public Health Journal, a quarterly publication of the Texas Public Health Association (pages 22-55):
Just how much does cancer cost in Texas? [PDF] Texas Public Health Journal, Vol 63, Issue 4, Fall 2011. Findings are reported in the Cost of Cancer in Texas, 2005 [PDF] published by the Texas Cancer Council.
CERCIT Workshop Presentations
In the first five years of CERCIT, we offered clinician-scientist training in Comparative Effectiveness Research on Cancer in Texas.
Trainees attended monthly workshops. A selection of those workshop presentations are now available as resources linked below: