K

Kenneth R. Hess

The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center

ORCID: 0000-0003-1377-6070

Publishes on Glioma Diagnosis and Treatment, Cancer Genomics and Diagnostics, Breast Cancer Treatment Studies. 778 papers and 63.1k citations.

778Publications
63.1kTotal Citations

Is this you? Claim your profile.

Add your photo, update your bio, and get notified when your ranking changes.

Top publicationsby citations

A multivariate analysis of 416 patients with glioblastoma multiforme: prognosis, extent of resection, and survival
Michel Lacroix, Dima Abi-Said, Daryl R. Fourney et al.|Journal of neurosurgery|2001
Cited by 3.1k

OBJECT: The extent of tumor resection that should be undertaken in patients with glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) remains controversial. The purpose of this study was to identify significant independent predictors of survival in these patients and to determine whether the extent of resection was associated with increased survival time. METHODS: The authors retrospectively analyzed 416 consecutive patients with histologically proven GBM who underwent tumor resection at the authors' institution between June 1993 and June 1999. Volumetric data and other tumor characteristics identified on magnetic resonance (MR) imaging were collected prospectively. CONCLUSIONS: Five independent predictors of survival were identified: age, Karnofsky Performance Scale (KPS) score, extent of resection, and the degree of necrosis and enhancement on preoperative MR imaging studies. A significant survival advantage was associated with resection of 98% or more of the tumor volume (median survival 13 months, 95% confidence interval [CI] 11.4-14.6 months), compared with 8.8 months (95% CI 7.4-10.2 months; p < 0.0001) for resections of less than 98%. Using an outcome scale ranging from 0 to 5 based on age, KPS score, and tumor necrosis on MR imaging, we observed significantly longer survival in patients with lower scores (1-3) who underwent aggressive resections, and a trend toward slightly longer survival was found in patients with higher scores (4-5). Gross-total tumor resection is associated with longer survival in patients with GBM, especially when other predictive variables are favorable.

Response to Neoadjuvant Therapy and Long-Term Survival in Patients With Triple-Negative Breast Cancer
Cornelia Liedtke, Chafika Mazouni, Kenneth R. Hess et al.|Journal of Clinical Oncology|2008
Cited by 2.9kOpen Access

PURPOSE: Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) is defined by the lack of estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER-2) expression. In this study, we compared response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy and survival between patients with TNBC and non-TNBC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Analysis of a prospectively collected clinical database was performed. We included 1,118 patients who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy at M.D. Anderson Cancer Center for stage I-III breast cancer from 1985 to 2004 and for whom complete receptor information were available. Clinical and pathologic parameters, pathologic complete response rates (pCR), survival measurements, and organ-specific relapse rates were compared between patients with TNBC and non-TNBC. RESULTS: Two hundred fifty-five patients (23%) had TNBC. Patients with TNBC compared with non-TNBC had significantly higher pCR rates (22% v 11%; P = .034), but decreased 3-year progression-free survival rates (P < .0001) and 3-year overall survival (OS) rates (P < .0001). TNBC was associated with increased risk for visceral metastases (P = .0005), lower risk for bone recurrence (P = .027), and shorter postrecurrence survival (P < .0001). Recurrence and death rates were higher for TNBC only in the first 3 years. If pCR was achieved, patients with TNBC and non-TNBC had similar survival (P = .24). In contrast, patients with residual disease (RD) had worse OS if they had TNBC compared with non-TNBC (P < .0001). CONCLUSION: Patients with TNBC have increased pCR rates compared with non-TNBC, and those with pCR have excellent survival. However, patients with RD after neoadjuvant chemotherapy have significantly worse survival if they have TNBC compared with non-TNBC, particularly in the first 3 years.

Melanoma staging: Evidence‐based changes in the American Joint Committee on Cancer eighth edition cancer staging manual
Jeffrey E. Gershenwald, Richard A. Scolyer, Kenneth R. Hess et al.|CA A Cancer Journal for Clinicians|2017
Cited by 2.3kOpen Access

Answer questions and earn CME/CNE To update the melanoma staging system of the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) a large database was assembled comprising >46,000 patients from 10 centers worldwide with stages I, II, and III melanoma diagnosed since 1998. Based on analyses of this new database, the existing seventh edition AJCC stage IV database, and contemporary clinical trial data, the AJCC Melanoma Expert Panel introduced several important changes to the Tumor, Nodes, Metastasis (TNM) classification and stage grouping criteria. Key changes in the eighth edition AJCC Cancer Staging Manual include: 1) tumor thickness measurements to be recorded to the nearest 0.1 mm, not 0.01 mm; 2) definitions of T1a and T1b are revised (T1a, <0.8 mm without ulceration; T1b, 0.8-1.0 mm with or without ulceration or <0.8 mm with ulceration), with mitotic rate no longer a T category criterion; 3) pathological (but not clinical) stage IA is revised to include T1b N0 M0 (formerly pathologic stage IB); 4) the N category descriptors "microscopic" and "macroscopic" for regional node metastasis are redefined as "clinically occult" and "clinically apparent"; 5) prognostic stage III groupings are based on N category criteria and T category criteria (ie, primary tumor thickness and ulceration) and increased from 3 to 4 subgroups (stages IIIA-IIID); 6) definitions of N subcategories are revised, with the presence of microsatellites, satellites, or in-transit metastases now categorized as N1c, N2c, or N3c based on the number of tumor-involved regional lymph nodes, if any; 7) descriptors are added to each M1 subcategory designation for lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) level (LDH elevation no longer upstages to M1c); and 8) a new M1d designation is added for central nervous system metastases. This evidence-based revision of the AJCC melanoma staging system will guide patient treatment, provide better prognostic estimates, and refine stratification of patients entering clinical trials. CA Cancer J Clin 2017;67:472-492. © 2017 American Cancer Society.