Search

Your search keyword '"Vissers, P. A. J."' showing total 94 results
Start Over Author "Vissers, P. A. J." Search Limiters Academic (Peer-Reviewed) Journals
94 results on '"Vissers, P. A. J."'

1. Target engagement and immunogenicity of an active immunotherapeutic targeting pathological α-synuclein: a phase 1 placebo-controlled trial

Author

Eijsvogel, Pepijn, Misra, Pinaki, Concha-Marambio, Luis, Boyd, Justin D., Ding, Shuang, Fedor, Lauren, Hsieh, Yueh-Ting, Sun, Yu Shuang, Vroom, Madeline M., Farris, Carly M., Ma, Yihua, de Kam, Marieke L., Radanovic, Igor, Vissers, Maurits F. J. M., Mirski, Dario, Shareghi, Ghazal, Shahnawaz, Mohammad, Singer, Wolfgang, Kremer, Philip, Groeneveld, Geert Jan, Yu, Hui Jing, and Dodart, Jean-Cosme

Published
2024
Full Text
View/download PDF

9. ASO Visual Abstract: Multimodal Therapy Versus Primary Surgery for Gastric and Gastroesophageal Junction Diffuse Type Carcinoma, with a Focus on Signet Ring Cell Carcinoma: A Nationwide Study

Author

Gertsen, Emma C., van der Veen, Arjen, Brenkman, Hylke J. F., Brosens, Lodewijk A. A., van der Post, Rachel S., Verhoeven, Rob H. A., Luijten, Josianne C. H. B. M., Vissers, Pauline A. J., Vegt, Erik, van Hillegersberg, Richard, Siersema, Peter D., and Ruurda, Jelle P.

Published
2024
Full Text
View/download PDF

12. ASO Visual Abstract: Gastrointestinal Symptoms After Resection of Esophagogastric Cancer: A Longitudinal Study on Their Incidence and Impact on Patient-Reported Outcomes

Author

van Erning, Felice N., Nieuwenhuijzen, Grard A. P., van Laarhoven, Hanneke W. M., Rosman, Camiel, Gisbertz, Suzanne S., Heisterkamp, Joos, Lagarde, Sjoerd M., Slingerland, Marije, van den Berg, Jan-Willem, Kouwenhoven, Ewout A., Verhoeven, Rob H. A., and Vissers, Pauline A. J.

Published
2023
Full Text
View/download PDF

35. Clinical variation in the organization of clinical pathways in esophagogastric cancer, a mixed method multiple case study

Author

MS Medische Oncologie, Cancer, Luijten, J C H B M, Vissers, P A J, Brom, L, de Bièvre, M, Buijsen, J, Rozema, T, Mohammad, N Haj, van Duijvendijk, P, Kouwenhoven, E A, Eshuis, W J, Rosman, C, Siersema, P D, van Laarhoven, H W M, Verhoeven, R H A, Nieuwenhuijzen, G A P, Westerman, M J, MS Medische Oncologie, Cancer, Luijten, J C H B M, Vissers, P A J, Brom, L, de Bièvre, M, Buijsen, J, Rozema, T, Mohammad, N Haj, van Duijvendijk, P, Kouwenhoven, E A, Eshuis, W J, Rosman, C, Siersema, P D, van Laarhoven, H W M, Verhoeven, R H A, Nieuwenhuijzen, G A P, and Westerman, M J

Published
2022

36. Team dynamics and clinician's experience influence decision-making during Upper-GI multidisciplinary team meetings: A multiple case study

Author

MS CGO, Cancer, Luijten, J C H B M, Westerman, M J, Nieuwenhuijzen, G A P, Walraven, J E W, Sosef, M N, Beerepoot, L V, van Hillegersberg, R, Muller, K, Hoekstra, R, Bergman, J J G H M, Siersema, P D, van Laarhoven, H W M, Rosman, C, Brom, L, Vissers, P A J, Verhoeven, R H A, MS CGO, Cancer, Luijten, J C H B M, Westerman, M J, Nieuwenhuijzen, G A P, Walraven, J E W, Sosef, M N, Beerepoot, L V, van Hillegersberg, R, Muller, K, Hoekstra, R, Bergman, J J G H M, Siersema, P D, van Laarhoven, H W M, Rosman, C, Brom, L, Vissers, P A J, and Verhoeven, R H A

Published
2022

39. Additional file 1 of Clinical variation in the organization of clinical pathways in esophagogastric cancer, a mixed method multiple case study

Author

Luijten, J. C. H. B. M., Vissers, P. A. J., Brom, L., de Bièvre, M., Buijsen, J., Rozema, T., Mohammad, N. Haj, van Duijvendijk, P., Kouwenhoven, E. A., Eshuis, W. J., Rosman, C., Siersema, P. D., van Laarhoven, H. W. M., Verhoeven, R. H. A., Nieuwenhuijzen, G. A. P., and Westerman, M. J.

Subjects
Data_FILES
Abstract

Additional file 1.

Published
2022
Full Text
View/download PDF

42. Team dynamics and clinician's experience influence decisionmaking during Upper-GI multidisciplinary team meetings: A multiple case study.

Author

Luijten, J. C. H. B. M., Westerman, M. J., Nieuwenhuijzen, G. A. P., Walraven, J. E. W., Sosef, M. N., Beerepoot, L. V., van Hillegersberg, R., Muller, K., Hoekstra, R., Bergman, J. J. G. H. M., Siersema, P. D., van Laarhoven, H. W. M., Rosman, C., Brom, L., Vissers, P. A. J., and Verhoeven, R. H. A.

Subjects
MEDICAL personnel, SEMI-structured interviews, THEMATIC analysis, TEAMS
Abstract

Background: The probability of undergoing treatment with curative intent for esophagogastric cancer has been shown to vary considerately between hospitals of diagnosis. Little is known about the factors that attribute to this variation. Since clinical decision making (CDM) partially takes place during an MDTM, the aim of this qualitative study was to assess clinician's perspectives regarding facilitators and barriers associated with CDM during MDTM, and second, to identify factors associated with CDM during an MDTM thatmay potentially explain differences in hospital practice. Methods: A multiple case study design was conducted. The thematic content analysis of this qualitative study, focused on 16 MDTM observations, 30 semistructured interviews with clinicians and seven focus groups with clinicians to complement the collected data. Interviews were transcribed ad verbatim and coded. Results: Factors regarding team dynamics that were raised as aspects attributing to CDM were clinician's personal characteristics such as ambition and the intention to be innovative. Clinician's convictions regarding a certain treatment and its outcomes and previous experiences with treatment outcomes, and team dynamics within the MDTM influenced CDM. In addition, a continuum was illustrated. At one end of the continuum, teams tended to be more conservative, following the guidelines more strictly, versus the opposite in which hospitals tended towards a more invasive approach maximizing the probability of curation. Conclusion: This study contributes to the awareness that variation in team dynamics influences CDM during an MDTM. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Published
2022
Full Text
View/download PDF

46. Inter-hospital variation in resection rates of colon cancer in the Netherlands: A nationwide study

Author

Giesen, L. J. X., Giesen, L. J. X., van Erning, F. N., Vissers, P. A. J., Maas, H. A. A. M., Rutten, H. J. T., Lemmens, V. E. P. P., Dekker, J. W. T., Giesen, L. J. X., Giesen, L. J. X., van Erning, F. N., Vissers, P. A. J., Maas, H. A. A. M., Rutten, H. J. T., Lemmens, V. E. P. P., and Dekker, J. W. T.

Abstract

Introduction: Hospital of diagnosis is shown to have an impact on the probability of undergoing a resection in different types of gastrointestinal cancer. The aim of this study was to investigate the inter-hospital variation in resection rates and its impact on survival among patients with non-metastatic colon cancer.Methods: All patients diagnosed with non-metastatic colon cancer between 2009 and 2014 were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Multilevel logistic regression was used to examine the variation in resection rates among hospitals. The effect of variation in surgical resection on overall survival was assessed using Cox regression analyses. Relative survival was used as an estimate for disease-specific survival.Results: 38164 patients, treated in 95 different hospitals, were included in the analysis. After adjustments, resection rates varied between hospitals from 88 to 99%. This variation increased among patients older than 75 years, from 79 to 98%. Crude overall 5-year survival was 64%. After adjustment, no significant difference in overall or relative survival between hospitals with higher and lower resection rates was observed.Conclusion: Resection rates are important to consider when interpreting hospital outcomes. There is a significant variation in resection rates in patients with non-metastatic colon cancer among hospitals in the Netherlands. This variation increases in the elderly. No significant effect on survival was found. This could imply that undertreatment may play a role as well as that some patients might not benefit from surgery. (C) 2019 Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Published
2019

47. The Risk of Cutaneous Squamous Cell Carcinoma Among Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Receiving Hydrochlorothiazide: A Cohort Study.

Author

Jing de Haan-Du, Landman, Gijs W. D., Groenier, Klaas H., Vissers, Pauline A. J., Louwman, Marieke W. J., Kleefstra, Nanne, and de Bock, Geertruida H.

Abstract

Background: Because of continuous hyperglycemia and hyperinsulinemia and the use of photosensitizing drug, hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ), the risk of cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC) might be increased among patients with diabetes. This study aimed to estimate the risk of cSCC among HCTZ users with type 2 diabetes, and to determine whether thiazide-like diuretics, another drug in the same class with HCTZ, would be safer. Methods: We linked the benchmarking database in Dutch primary care, the Netherlands Cancer Registry, and the Dutch Personal Records Database (1998-2019). All 71,648 patients were included, except for those who had a history of skin cancer prior to cohort entry. We used Cox modeling to estimate the HRs and 95% confidence intervals for cSCC. The model was adjusted by cumulative exposure to each antihypertensive, age, sex, smoking, body mass index, blood pressure, serum creatinine, other confounding drug use at cohort entry, and cohort entry year. Results: There were 1,409 cSCC events (23 among thiazide-like diuretics users), during a follow-up of 679,789 person-years. Compared with no HCTZ use, the adjusted HRs for HCTZ use were 1.18 (1.00-1.40) for ≤2 years, 1.57 (1.32-1.88) for 2 to 4 years, and 2.09 (1.73-2.52) for >4 years. The HR was 0.90 (0.79-1.03) for an additional year of thiazide-like diuretic use. Conclusions: In patients with diabetes, exposure to HCTZ for >2 years is associated with an increased risk of cSCC, whereas no increased risk associated with thiazide-like diuretics was observed. Impact: The potential increased risk of cSCC should be a consideration when prescribing HCTZ, with thiazide-like diuretics offering a safer alternative. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Published
2021
Full Text
View/download PDF

48. Effect of centralization and regionalization of pancreatic surgery on resection rates and survival.

Author

Latenstein, A. E. J., Mackay, T. M., van der Geest, L. G. M., van Eijck, C. H. J., de Meijer, V. E., Stommel, M. W. J., Vissers, P. A. J., Besselink, M. G., and de Hingh, I. H. J. T.

Subjects
PANCREATIC surgery, SURVIVAL rate, SURGICAL excision, PANCREATIC cancer, OVERALL survival, CANCER diagnosis
Abstract

Background: Centralization of pancreatic surgery in the Netherlands has been ongoing since 2011. The aim of this study was to assess how centralization has affected the likelihood of resection and survival of patients with non-metastatic pancreatic head and periampullary cancer, diagnosed in hospitals with and without pancreatic surgery services. Methods: An observational cohort study was performed on nationwide data from the Netherlands Cancer Registry (2009-2017), including patients diagnosed with non-metastatic pancreatic head or periampullary cancer. The period of diagnosis was divided into three time intervals: 2009-2011, 2012-2014 and 2015-2017. Hospital of diagnosis was classified as a pancreatic or non-pancreatic surgery centre. Analyses were performed using multivariable logistic and Cox regression models. Results: In total, 10 079 patients were included, of whom 3114 (30.9 per cent) were diagnosed in pancreatic surgery centres. Between 2009-2011 and 2015-2017, the number of patients undergoing resection increased from 1267 of 3169 (40.0 per cent) to 1705 of 3566 (47.8 per cent) (P for trend < 0.001). In multivariable analysis, in 2015-2017, unlike the previous periods, patients diagnosed in pancreatic and non-pancreatic surgery centres had a similar likelihood of resection (odds ratio 1.08, 95 per cent c.i. 0.90 to 1.28; P = 0.422). In this period, however, overall survival was higher in patients diagnosed in pancreatic surgery than in those diagnosed in non-pancreatic surgery centres (hazard ratio 0.92, 95 per cent c.i. 0.85 to 0.99; P = 0.047). Conclusion: Aftercentralization of pancreatic surgery, the resection rate forpatients with pancreatic head and periampullary cancer diagnosed in non-pancreatic surgery centres increased and became similar to that in pancreatic surgery centres. Overall survival remained higherin patients diagnosed in pancreatic surgery centres. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Published
2021
Full Text
View/download PDF

49. Impact of detection bias on the risk of gastrointestinal cancer and its subsites in type 2 diabetes mellitus

Author

de Jong, R G P J, Burden, A M, de Kort, S, van Herk-Sukel, M P P, Vissers, P A J, Janssen, P.K.C., Haak, H R, Masclee, A A M, de Vries, F, Janssen-Heijnen, M L G, Afd Pharmacoepi & Clinical Pharmacology, Pharmacoepidemiology and Clinical Pharmacology, Afd Pharmacoepi & Clinical Pharmacology, Pharmacoepidemiology and Clinical Pharmacology, RS: GROW - R3 - Innovative Cancer Diagnostics & Therapy, Promovendi ODB, Interne Geneeskunde, RS: CAPHRI - R5 - Optimising Patient Care, Epidemiologie, MUMC+: MA Med Staf Artsass Interne Geneeskunde (9), RS: CAPHRI - R1 - Ageing and Long-Term Care, MUMC+: MA Maag Darm Lever (9), RS: NUTRIM - R2 - Liver and digestive health, RS: NUTRIM - R2 - Gut-liver homeostasis, MUMC+: DA KFT Medische Staf (9), Farmacologie en Toxicologie, and RS: GROW - R1 - Prevention

Subjects
Male, Cancer Research, medicine.medical_specialty, CARCINOMA, Epidemiology, Gastroenterology, COLORECTAL-CANCER, 03 medical and health sciences, Gastrointestinal cancer, Age Distribution, 0302 clinical medicine, STAGE, Internal medicine, Type 2 diabetes mellitus, Taverne, medicine, Humans, COHORT, Registries, Sex Distribution, Risk factor, METAANALYSIS, Gastrointestinal Neoplasms, ASSOCIATIONS, Population based, ESOPHAGEAL, Proportional hazards model, business.industry, MORTALITY, Hazard ratio, Cancer, Middle Aged, Cancer registry, medicine.disease, Confidence interval, Endocrinology, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2, Oncology, Risk factors, 030220 oncology & carcinogenesis, Female, 030211 gastroenterology & hepatology, business, Cohort study, GASTRIC-CANCER
Abstract

Background: Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) may be a risk factor for gastrointestinal (GI) cancers, but variations in study designs of observational studies may have yielded biased results due to detection bias. Furthermore, differences in risk for GI cancer subsites have not been extensively evaluated. We aimed to determine the risk of GI cancer and its subsites in patients with T2DM and how it is affected by detection bias.Methods: A matched cohort study was performed using the NCR-PHARMO database. Newusers of >= 1 non-insulin anti-diabetic drug during 1998-2011 were matched with non-diabetic controls by year of birth, sex, and time between database entry and index. Cox regression analyses were performed with and without lag-period to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) for GI cancer and its subsites. Covariables included age, sex, use of other drugs and history of hospitalisation.Results: An increased risk of GI cancer was observed in T2DM patients (HR 1.5, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.3-1.7) compared with controls, which was attenuated in the 1-year lagged analysis (HR 1.4, 95% CI 1.2-1.7). Stratified by subsite, statistically significant increased risks of pancreatic (HR 4.7, 95% CI 3.1-7.2), extrahepatic bile duct (HR 4.2, 95% CI 1.5-11.8) and distal colon cancer (HR 1.5, 95% CI 1.1-2.1) were found, which remained statistically significantly increased in the lagged analysis.Conclusions: T2DM patients had a 40% increased risk of GI cancer. Increased GI cancer risks tended to be weaker when reducing detection bias by applying a 1-year lag-period. Future observational studies should therefore include sensitivity analyses in which this bias is minimised. (C) 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Published
2017

50. Impact of detection bias on the risk of gastrointestinal cancer and its subsites in type 2 diabetes mellitus

Author

de Jong, R. G. P. J., de Jong, R. G. P. J., Burden, A. M., de Kort, S., van Herk-Sukel, M. P. P., Vissers, P. A. J., Janssen, P. K. C., Haak, H. R., Masclee, A. A. M., de Vries, F., Janssen-Heijnen, M. L. G., de Jong, R. G. P. J., de Jong, R. G. P. J., Burden, A. M., de Kort, S., van Herk-Sukel, M. P. P., Vissers, P. A. J., Janssen, P. K. C., Haak, H. R., Masclee, A. A. M., de Vries, F., and Janssen-Heijnen, M. L. G.

Abstract

Background: Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) may be a risk factor for gastrointestinal (GI) cancers, but variations in study designs of observational studies may have yielded biased results due to detection bias. Furthermore, differences in risk for GI cancer subsites have not been extensively evaluated. We aimed to determine the risk of GI cancer and its subsites in patients with T2DM and how it is affected by detection bias.Methods: A matched cohort study was performed using the NCR-PHARMO database. Newusers of >= 1 non-insulin anti-diabetic drug during 1998-2011 were matched with non-diabetic controls by year of birth, sex, and time between database entry and index. Cox regression analyses were performed with and without lag-period to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) for GI cancer and its subsites. Covariables included age, sex, use of other drugs and history of hospitalisation.Results: An increased risk of GI cancer was observed in T2DM patients (HR 1.5, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.3-1.7) compared with controls, which was attenuated in the 1-year lagged analysis (HR 1.4, 95% CI 1.2-1.7). Stratified by subsite, statistically significant increased risks of pancreatic (HR 4.7, 95% CI 3.1-7.2), extrahepatic bile duct (HR 4.2, 95% CI 1.5-11.8) and distal colon cancer (HR 1.5, 95% CI 1.1-2.1) were found, which remained statistically significantly increased in the lagged analysis.Conclusions: T2DM patients had a 40% increased risk of GI cancer. Increased GI cancer risks tended to be weaker when reducing detection bias by applying a 1-year lag-period. Future observational studies should therefore include sensitivity analyses in which this bias is minimised. (C) 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Published
2017

Catalog

Books, media, physical & digital resources
See catalog results