Click here to listen to Dr. Conway

Click here to listen to Dr. Conway

Click here to listen to Dr. Conway

Part-time physicians report higher work satisfaction, less burnout, and greater work control.¹ They also cite more time for family, community, and self-care activities, as well as more research time and ability to focus on career goals.²

Those are attractive benefits, to be sure. But is part time right for you?

“They need to look at all the factors of their whole life,” says Jennifer Owens, director of the Working Mother Research Institute in New York City. “Are they trying to compete to get ahead and do they feel they can’t give up hours at work? Are they taking an assignment that’s so big, they just need to be at work to try to get it going? Are there factors in their life, like their kids are sick or their spouse has an illness? It all comes down to a personal, individual assessment. There are tradeoffs.”

A major tradeoff is income. Part-time physicians earn less money and have fewer benefits, which might not be financially feasible, says Iris Grimm, creator of the Atlanta-based Balanced Physician coaching program.

Some part-time female physicians surveyed in a recent study published in Academic Medicine cited slower promotion trajectory or even demotion, getting overlooked for career opportunities, given less desirable work, or being marginalized within their division.²

Physicians who decide to work part time should set goals for themselves based on their personal definition of work-life balance, says Maria Bailey, founder and CEO of BlueSuitMom.com, a Pompano Beach, Fla.-based company that provides information on work and family balance for professional working mothers and their employers. If they haven’t reached those goals within two to three months, they should re-evaluate their part-time status.

“Some of us just have the personality where we’re going to create work for ourselves. It’s really hard to break the habits that we’ve developed over many, many years,” Bailey says. “Working part-time may be a reality check that what we thought we wanted isn’t what we wanted at all.”

Lisa Ryan is a freelance writer in New Jersey.

References

1. Mechaber FH, Levine RB, Manwell LB, et al. Part-time physicians … prevalent, connected, and satisfied. J Gen Intern Med. 2008;23(3):300-303.

2. Harrison RA, Gregg JL. A time for change: an exploration of attitudes toward part-time work in academia among women internists and their division chiefs. Acad Med. 2009;84(1):80-86.

Part-time physicians report higher work satisfaction, less burnout, and greater work control.¹ They also cite more time for family, community, and self-care activities, as well as more research time and ability to focus on career goals.²

Those are attractive benefits, to be sure. But is part time right for you?

“They need to look at all the factors of their whole life,” says Jennifer Owens, director of the Working Mother Research Institute in New York City. “Are they trying to compete to get ahead and do they feel they can’t give up hours at work? Are they taking an assignment that’s so big, they just need to be at work to try to get it going? Are there factors in their life, like their kids are sick or their spouse has an illness? It all comes down to a personal, individual assessment. There are tradeoffs.”

A major tradeoff is income. Part-time physicians earn less money and have fewer benefits, which might not be financially feasible, says Iris Grimm, creator of the Atlanta-based Balanced Physician coaching program.

Some part-time female physicians surveyed in a recent study published in Academic Medicine cited slower promotion trajectory or even demotion, getting overlooked for career opportunities, given less desirable work, or being marginalized within their division.²

Physicians who decide to work part time should set goals for themselves based on their personal definition of work-life balance, says Maria Bailey, founder and CEO of BlueSuitMom.com, a Pompano Beach, Fla.-based company that provides information on work and family balance for professional working mothers and their employers. If they haven’t reached those goals within two to three months, they should re-evaluate their part-time status.

“Some of us just have the personality where we’re going to create work for ourselves. It’s really hard to break the habits that we’ve developed over many, many years,” Bailey says. “Working part-time may be a reality check that what we thought we wanted isn’t what we wanted at all.”

Lisa Ryan is a freelance writer in New Jersey.

References

1. Mechaber FH, Levine RB, Manwell LB, et al. Part-time physicians … prevalent, connected, and satisfied. J Gen Intern Med. 2008;23(3):300-303.

2. Harrison RA, Gregg JL. A time for change: an exploration of attitudes toward part-time work in academia among women internists and their division chiefs. Acad Med. 2009;84(1):80-86.

Part-time physicians report higher work satisfaction, less burnout, and greater work control.¹ They also cite more time for family, community, and self-care activities, as well as more research time and ability to focus on career goals.²

Those are attractive benefits, to be sure. But is part time right for you?

“They need to look at all the factors of their whole life,” says Jennifer Owens, director of the Working Mother Research Institute in New York City. “Are they trying to compete to get ahead and do they feel they can’t give up hours at work? Are they taking an assignment that’s so big, they just need to be at work to try to get it going? Are there factors in their life, like their kids are sick or their spouse has an illness? It all comes down to a personal, individual assessment. There are tradeoffs.”

A major tradeoff is income. Part-time physicians earn less money and have fewer benefits, which might not be financially feasible, says Iris Grimm, creator of the Atlanta-based Balanced Physician coaching program.

Some part-time female physicians surveyed in a recent study published in Academic Medicine cited slower promotion trajectory or even demotion, getting overlooked for career opportunities, given less desirable work, or being marginalized within their division.²

Physicians who decide to work part time should set goals for themselves based on their personal definition of work-life balance, says Maria Bailey, founder and CEO of BlueSuitMom.com, a Pompano Beach, Fla.-based company that provides information on work and family balance for professional working mothers and their employers. If they haven’t reached those goals within two to three months, they should re-evaluate their part-time status.

“Some of us just have the personality where we’re going to create work for ourselves. It’s really hard to break the habits that we’ve developed over many, many years,” Bailey says. “Working part-time may be a reality check that what we thought we wanted isn’t what we wanted at all.”

Lisa Ryan is a freelance writer in New Jersey.

References

1. Mechaber FH, Levine RB, Manwell LB, et al. Part-time physicians … prevalent, connected, and satisfied. J Gen Intern Med. 2008;23(3):300-303.

2. Harrison RA, Gregg JL. A time for change: an exploration of attitudes toward part-time work in academia among women internists and their division chiefs. Acad Med. 2009;84(1):80-86.

Click here to listen to Dr. Nagamine

Click here to listen to Iris Grimm

Click here to listen to Dr. Nagamine

Click here to listen to Iris Grimm

Click here to listen to Dr. Nagamine

Click here to listen to Iris Grimm

Click here to listen to Dr. Cumbler

Click here to listen to Dr. Arora

Click here to listen to Dr. Gard

Click here to listen to Dr. Cumbler

Click here to listen to Dr. Arora

Click here to listen to Dr. Gard

Click here to listen to Dr. Cumbler

Click here to listen to Dr. Arora

Click here to listen to Dr. Gard

New SHM board member Brian Harte, MD, SFHM, traces his passion for leadership in hospital medicine back to his medical residency at the University of California at San Francisco (UCSF) Medical Center, not long after HM pioneer Robert Wachter, MD, MHM, helped coined the term "hospitalist" in a celebrated 1996 New England Journal of Medicine article.

"Scott Flanders was my chief resident and gave me advice about taking my first job," Dr. Harte says. "Andy Auerbach was one of the faculty at UCSF. I worked under Jeff Weise and Steve Pantilat," all of whom are national leaders in the field. Among others, SHM president Shaun Frost, MD, SFHM, FACP, was instrumental in Dr. Harte's career advancement, helping recruit him back to his home state of Ohio, where he was until recently the chief operating officer of Hillcrest Hospital in Mayfield Heights, which is affiliated with Cleveland Clinic.

"I've been fortunate enough to be taken under the wing of a lot of giants in the field—really impressive figures whom I have looked up to as role models," Dr. Harte says.

At Cleveland Clinic, Dr. Harte has worn a number of different hats in a fairly short period of time, quickly advancing from HM department chair to the position he started in April—president of South Pointe Hospital in Warrensville Heights, Ohio, another of the nine community hospitals affiliated with Cleveland Clinic. His experience on that career path, along with a broad range of interests and perspectives, is what he hopes to bring to SHM's board.

"This is a path more hospitalists could be pursuing: physician leadership, hospital and health system leadership, program development. In some cases it means stretching our skills to their capacity and beyond," he says. "At this point, it's not clear what healthcare reform has in store for us. But all of the things we do as hospitalists—leadership, program-building, team—building, clinical care, quality improvement—are very applicable skills that will prepare us for leadership roles."

New SHM board member Brian Harte, MD, SFHM, traces his passion for leadership in hospital medicine back to his medical residency at the University of California at San Francisco (UCSF) Medical Center, not long after HM pioneer Robert Wachter, MD, MHM, helped coined the term "hospitalist" in a celebrated 1996 New England Journal of Medicine article.

"Scott Flanders was my chief resident and gave me advice about taking my first job," Dr. Harte says. "Andy Auerbach was one of the faculty at UCSF. I worked under Jeff Weise and Steve Pantilat," all of whom are national leaders in the field. Among others, SHM president Shaun Frost, MD, SFHM, FACP, was instrumental in Dr. Harte's career advancement, helping recruit him back to his home state of Ohio, where he was until recently the chief operating officer of Hillcrest Hospital in Mayfield Heights, which is affiliated with Cleveland Clinic.

"I've been fortunate enough to be taken under the wing of a lot of giants in the field—really impressive figures whom I have looked up to as role models," Dr. Harte says.

At Cleveland Clinic, Dr. Harte has worn a number of different hats in a fairly short period of time, quickly advancing from HM department chair to the position he started in April—president of South Pointe Hospital in Warrensville Heights, Ohio, another of the nine community hospitals affiliated with Cleveland Clinic. His experience on that career path, along with a broad range of interests and perspectives, is what he hopes to bring to SHM's board.

"This is a path more hospitalists could be pursuing: physician leadership, hospital and health system leadership, program development. In some cases it means stretching our skills to their capacity and beyond," he says. "At this point, it's not clear what healthcare reform has in store for us. But all of the things we do as hospitalists—leadership, program-building, team—building, clinical care, quality improvement—are very applicable skills that will prepare us for leadership roles."

New SHM board member Brian Harte, MD, SFHM, traces his passion for leadership in hospital medicine back to his medical residency at the University of California at San Francisco (UCSF) Medical Center, not long after HM pioneer Robert Wachter, MD, MHM, helped coined the term "hospitalist" in a celebrated 1996 New England Journal of Medicine article.

"Scott Flanders was my chief resident and gave me advice about taking my first job," Dr. Harte says. "Andy Auerbach was one of the faculty at UCSF. I worked under Jeff Weise and Steve Pantilat," all of whom are national leaders in the field. Among others, SHM president Shaun Frost, MD, SFHM, FACP, was instrumental in Dr. Harte's career advancement, helping recruit him back to his home state of Ohio, where he was until recently the chief operating officer of Hillcrest Hospital in Mayfield Heights, which is affiliated with Cleveland Clinic.

"I've been fortunate enough to be taken under the wing of a lot of giants in the field—really impressive figures whom I have looked up to as role models," Dr. Harte says.

At Cleveland Clinic, Dr. Harte has worn a number of different hats in a fairly short period of time, quickly advancing from HM department chair to the position he started in April—president of South Pointe Hospital in Warrensville Heights, Ohio, another of the nine community hospitals affiliated with Cleveland Clinic. His experience on that career path, along with a broad range of interests and perspectives, is what he hopes to bring to SHM's board.

"This is a path more hospitalists could be pursuing: physician leadership, hospital and health system leadership, program development. In some cases it means stretching our skills to their capacity and beyond," he says. "At this point, it's not clear what healthcare reform has in store for us. But all of the things we do as hospitalists—leadership, program-building, team—building, clinical care, quality improvement—are very applicable skills that will prepare us for leadership roles."

Background: Patients with advanced cancer and bone metastases frequently experience skeletal-related events (SREs) including pathologic fracture, spinal cord compression, and radiation or surgery to bone. This prospective, observational study characterized health-resource utilization (HRU) associated with each SRE type across tumor types.
Methods: Patients with bone metastases secondary to breast, prostate, or lung cancer as well as patients with multiple myeloma were enrolled within 97 days of experiencing an SRE and were followed prospectively for up to 18 months. Data on hospitalization, length of hospital stay, outpatient visits, emergency department visits, nursing home or long-term care facility stays, home health visits, procedures, and medication usage were collected and attributed to SREs by investigators.
Results: In all, 238 patients were prospectively followed for a median of 9.5 months after enrollment. Bisphosphonates were prescribed in 77% of patients. Of 510 SREs recorded, 442 were included in the HRU analyses. Spinal cord compression and surgery to bone were associated with the highest rates of inpatient stays (mean, 0.6 hospitalizations per SRE), and length of stay was longest for pathologic fracture (mean, 16 days per SRE). Radiation to bone had the most outpatient visits (mean, 10 visits per SRE) and procedures (mean, 12 per SRE).
Limitations: HRU was likely underestimated because patient charts may not have been comprehensive, and the study design did not capture all potential HRU sources. Sample sizes were small for some SRE types.
Conclusions: Each SRE type was associated with substantial HRU, and patterns of HRU were unique across SRE type. The HRU burden of SREs in patients with bone metastases is considerable, even with bisphosphonate treatment.

*For a PDF of the full article, click in the link to the left of this introduction.

Background: Patients with advanced cancer and bone metastases frequently experience skeletal-related events (SREs) including pathologic fracture, spinal cord compression, and radiation or surgery to bone. This prospective, observational study characterized health-resource utilization (HRU) associated with each SRE type across tumor types.
Methods: Patients with bone metastases secondary to breast, prostate, or lung cancer as well as patients with multiple myeloma were enrolled within 97 days of experiencing an SRE and were followed prospectively for up to 18 months. Data on hospitalization, length of hospital stay, outpatient visits, emergency department visits, nursing home or long-term care facility stays, home health visits, procedures, and medication usage were collected and attributed to SREs by investigators.
Results: In all, 238 patients were prospectively followed for a median of 9.5 months after enrollment. Bisphosphonates were prescribed in 77% of patients. Of 510 SREs recorded, 442 were included in the HRU analyses. Spinal cord compression and surgery to bone were associated with the highest rates of inpatient stays (mean, 0.6 hospitalizations per SRE), and length of stay was longest for pathologic fracture (mean, 16 days per SRE). Radiation to bone had the most outpatient visits (mean, 10 visits per SRE) and procedures (mean, 12 per SRE).
Limitations: HRU was likely underestimated because patient charts may not have been comprehensive, and the study design did not capture all potential HRU sources. Sample sizes were small for some SRE types.
Conclusions: Each SRE type was associated with substantial HRU, and patterns of HRU were unique across SRE type. The HRU burden of SREs in patients with bone metastases is considerable, even with bisphosphonate treatment.

*For a PDF of the full article, click in the link to the left of this introduction.

Background: Patients with advanced cancer and bone metastases frequently experience skeletal-related events (SREs) including pathologic fracture, spinal cord compression, and radiation or surgery to bone. This prospective, observational study characterized health-resource utilization (HRU) associated with each SRE type across tumor types.
Methods: Patients with bone metastases secondary to breast, prostate, or lung cancer as well as patients with multiple myeloma were enrolled within 97 days of experiencing an SRE and were followed prospectively for up to 18 months. Data on hospitalization, length of hospital stay, outpatient visits, emergency department visits, nursing home or long-term care facility stays, home health visits, procedures, and medication usage were collected and attributed to SREs by investigators.
Results: In all, 238 patients were prospectively followed for a median of 9.5 months after enrollment. Bisphosphonates were prescribed in 77% of patients. Of 510 SREs recorded, 442 were included in the HRU analyses. Spinal cord compression and surgery to bone were associated with the highest rates of inpatient stays (mean, 0.6 hospitalizations per SRE), and length of stay was longest for pathologic fracture (mean, 16 days per SRE). Radiation to bone had the most outpatient visits (mean, 10 visits per SRE) and procedures (mean, 12 per SRE).
Limitations: HRU was likely underestimated because patient charts may not have been comprehensive, and the study design did not capture all potential HRU sources. Sample sizes were small for some SRE types.
Conclusions: Each SRE type was associated with substantial HRU, and patterns of HRU were unique across SRE type. The HRU burden of SREs in patients with bone metastases is considerable, even with bisphosphonate treatment.

*For a PDF of the full article, click in the link to the left of this introduction.

SHM is pushing back against the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services’ (CMS) proposed rule [PDF] to extend to 10 years the "look-back period" for potential Medicare overpayments to providers.

Last month, SHM sent a letter [PDF] to Marilyn Tavenner, acting CMS administrator, calling for the look-back period to be halved to five years. SHM president Shaun Frost, MD, SFHM, FACP, wrote that the extended time frame could be problematic for hospitalists and other physicians.

"SHM was compelled to provide guidance on behalf of its members to protect them from the undue burden proposed in the Reporting and Returning of Overpayments rule," says SHM CEO Larry Wellikson, MD, SFHM. "Though SHM supports the goal of reducing overpayment, asking hospitalists and their hospitals to look back through 10 years of records to identify areas of overpayment is unreasonable."

CMS announced that the 10-year period was chosen to coincide with the statute of limitations of the False Claims Act. But SHM leaders note that most laws governing Medicare overpayments generally don’t exceed six years. Potential problems with the extended audit period include physicians who have moved on from a job and "may no longer have access to the documentation necessary for an adequate 10-year audit," according to the letter.

SHM also is pushing for CMS to include a calculation of "burdens and costs associated" with the extended look-back period in the proposed rule.

"SHM believes a measurement of the cost for all providers to perform a full 10-year audit would more fully illustrate the extent of the burden presented by the proposed look back period," Dr. Frost wrote in the letter.

SHM is pushing back against the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services’ (CMS) proposed rule [PDF] to extend to 10 years the "look-back period" for potential Medicare overpayments to providers.

Last month, SHM sent a letter [PDF] to Marilyn Tavenner, acting CMS administrator, calling for the look-back period to be halved to five years. SHM president Shaun Frost, MD, SFHM, FACP, wrote that the extended time frame could be problematic for hospitalists and other physicians.

"SHM was compelled to provide guidance on behalf of its members to protect them from the undue burden proposed in the Reporting and Returning of Overpayments rule," says SHM CEO Larry Wellikson, MD, SFHM. "Though SHM supports the goal of reducing overpayment, asking hospitalists and their hospitals to look back through 10 years of records to identify areas of overpayment is unreasonable."

CMS announced that the 10-year period was chosen to coincide with the statute of limitations of the False Claims Act. But SHM leaders note that most laws governing Medicare overpayments generally don’t exceed six years. Potential problems with the extended audit period include physicians who have moved on from a job and "may no longer have access to the documentation necessary for an adequate 10-year audit," according to the letter.

SHM also is pushing for CMS to include a calculation of "burdens and costs associated" with the extended look-back period in the proposed rule.

"SHM believes a measurement of the cost for all providers to perform a full 10-year audit would more fully illustrate the extent of the burden presented by the proposed look back period," Dr. Frost wrote in the letter.

SHM is pushing back against the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services’ (CMS) proposed rule [PDF] to extend to 10 years the "look-back period" for potential Medicare overpayments to providers.

Last month, SHM sent a letter [PDF] to Marilyn Tavenner, acting CMS administrator, calling for the look-back period to be halved to five years. SHM president Shaun Frost, MD, SFHM, FACP, wrote that the extended time frame could be problematic for hospitalists and other physicians.

"SHM was compelled to provide guidance on behalf of its members to protect them from the undue burden proposed in the Reporting and Returning of Overpayments rule," says SHM CEO Larry Wellikson, MD, SFHM. "Though SHM supports the goal of reducing overpayment, asking hospitalists and their hospitals to look back through 10 years of records to identify areas of overpayment is unreasonable."

CMS announced that the 10-year period was chosen to coincide with the statute of limitations of the False Claims Act. But SHM leaders note that most laws governing Medicare overpayments generally don’t exceed six years. Potential problems with the extended audit period include physicians who have moved on from a job and "may no longer have access to the documentation necessary for an adequate 10-year audit," according to the letter.

SHM also is pushing for CMS to include a calculation of "burdens and costs associated" with the extended look-back period in the proposed rule.

"SHM believes a measurement of the cost for all providers to perform a full 10-year audit would more fully illustrate the extent of the burden presented by the proposed look back period," Dr. Frost wrote in the letter.

Supplement Editors:
Nathan Pennell, MD, PhD, and Peter Mazzone, MD

Contents

Lung cancer screening: Examining the issues
Peter Mazzone

Treatment implication of the new lung cancer staging system
Cristina P. Rodriguez

Bronchoscopy and endobronchial ultrasound for diagnosis and staging of lung cancer
Francisco Aécio Almeida

Preoperative evaluation of the lung resection candidate
Peter Mazzone

Video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery for the treatment of lung cancer
Sudish Murthy

Stereotactic body radiotherapy for stage I non–small cell lung cancer
Kevin Stephans

Locally advanced non–small cell lung cancer: What is the optimal concurrent chemoradiation regimen?
Gregory M.M. Videtic

The role of surgery for locally advanced non–small cell lung cancer
David P. Mason

The role of adjuvant chemotherapy in early-stage and locally advanced non–small cell lung cancer
Marc Shapiro

Selection of chemotherapy for patients with advanced non–small cell lung cancer
Nathan A. Pennell

The emerging role of palliative medicine in the treatment of lung cancer patients
Mellar P. Davis

Personalized targeted therapy in advanced non–small cell lung cancer
Patrick C. Ma

Supplement Editors:
Nathan Pennell, MD, PhD, and Peter Mazzone, MD

Contents

Lung cancer screening: Examining the issues
Peter Mazzone

Treatment implication of the new lung cancer staging system
Cristina P. Rodriguez

Bronchoscopy and endobronchial ultrasound for diagnosis and staging of lung cancer
Francisco Aécio Almeida

Preoperative evaluation of the lung resection candidate
Peter Mazzone

Video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery for the treatment of lung cancer
Sudish Murthy

Stereotactic body radiotherapy for stage I non–small cell lung cancer
Kevin Stephans

Locally advanced non–small cell lung cancer: What is the optimal concurrent chemoradiation regimen?
Gregory M.M. Videtic

The role of surgery for locally advanced non–small cell lung cancer
David P. Mason

The role of adjuvant chemotherapy in early-stage and locally advanced non–small cell lung cancer
Marc Shapiro

Selection of chemotherapy for patients with advanced non–small cell lung cancer
Nathan A. Pennell

The emerging role of palliative medicine in the treatment of lung cancer patients
Mellar P. Davis

Personalized targeted therapy in advanced non–small cell lung cancer
Patrick C. Ma

Supplement Editors:
Nathan Pennell, MD, PhD, and Peter Mazzone, MD

Contents

Lung cancer screening: Examining the issues
Peter Mazzone

Treatment implication of the new lung cancer staging system
Cristina P. Rodriguez

Bronchoscopy and endobronchial ultrasound for diagnosis and staging of lung cancer
Francisco Aécio Almeida

Preoperative evaluation of the lung resection candidate
Peter Mazzone

Video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery for the treatment of lung cancer
Sudish Murthy

Stereotactic body radiotherapy for stage I non–small cell lung cancer
Kevin Stephans

Locally advanced non–small cell lung cancer: What is the optimal concurrent chemoradiation regimen?
Gregory M.M. Videtic

The role of surgery for locally advanced non–small cell lung cancer
David P. Mason

The role of adjuvant chemotherapy in early-stage and locally advanced non–small cell lung cancer
Marc Shapiro

Selection of chemotherapy for patients with advanced non–small cell lung cancer
Nathan A. Pennell

The emerging role of palliative medicine in the treatment of lung cancer patients
Mellar P. Davis

Personalized targeted therapy in advanced non–small cell lung cancer
Patrick C. Ma

Series Editor: Eric D. Jacobsen, MD

Chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) is the most common hematologic malignancy in the Western world, representing 30% of leukemias. The median age at diagnosis is 72 years, and fewer than 10% of patients are under 60. CLL occurs more frequently in Caucasians than in other ethnic groups and more often in men than in women. The age-adjusted incidence rate is 4.2 per 100,000 population. Although CLL is generally considered indolent, it is a heterogeneous disease, and while many patients have slowly progressive disease, a proportion of patients have disease that will have a more aggressive course, requiring treatment soon after diagnosis. Over the past 3 decades, increasing knowledge about the mechanism of CLL and the introduction of new chemotherapeutic and biologic agents has led to better treatments, improved risk stratification, and more durable remissions. Despite these advances in treatment, CLL remains incurable outside the setting of hematopoietic stem cell transplant.

To read the full article in PDF:

Click here

Series Editor: Eric D. Jacobsen, MD

Chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) is the most common hematologic malignancy in the Western world, representing 30% of leukemias. The median age at diagnosis is 72 years, and fewer than 10% of patients are under 60. CLL occurs more frequently in Caucasians than in other ethnic groups and more often in men than in women. The age-adjusted incidence rate is 4.2 per 100,000 population. Although CLL is generally considered indolent, it is a heterogeneous disease, and while many patients have slowly progressive disease, a proportion of patients have disease that will have a more aggressive course, requiring treatment soon after diagnosis. Over the past 3 decades, increasing knowledge about the mechanism of CLL and the introduction of new chemotherapeutic and biologic agents has led to better treatments, improved risk stratification, and more durable remissions. Despite these advances in treatment, CLL remains incurable outside the setting of hematopoietic stem cell transplant.

To read the full article in PDF:

Click here

Series Editor: Eric D. Jacobsen, MD

Chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) is the most common hematologic malignancy in the Western world, representing 30% of leukemias. The median age at diagnosis is 72 years, and fewer than 10% of patients are under 60. CLL occurs more frequently in Caucasians than in other ethnic groups and more often in men than in women. The age-adjusted incidence rate is 4.2 per 100,000 population. Although CLL is generally considered indolent, it is a heterogeneous disease, and while many patients have slowly progressive disease, a proportion of patients have disease that will have a more aggressive course, requiring treatment soon after diagnosis. Over the past 3 decades, increasing knowledge about the mechanism of CLL and the introduction of new chemotherapeutic and biologic agents has led to better treatments, improved risk stratification, and more durable remissions. Despite these advances in treatment, CLL remains incurable outside the setting of hematopoietic stem cell transplant.

To read the full article in PDF:

Click here