Enrique Soto-Pérez-De-Celis

Dr. Enrique Soto-Pérez-De-Celis


Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

24Years (2003-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 April 2014 in The Lancet Oncology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PGPaul E Goss
Paul E Goss
KSKathrin Strasser-Weippl
Kathrin Strasser-Weippl
BLBrittany L Lee-Bychkovsky
Brittany L Lee-Bychkovsky
LFLei Fan
Lei Fan
JLJunjie Li
Junjie Li
ACArlene Chan
Arlene Chan

10 November 2015 in Journal of Clinical Oncology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
AHArti Hurria
Arti Hurria
LLLaura A. Levit
Laura A. Levit
WDWilliam Dale
William Dale
SMSupriya G. Mohile
Supriya G. Mohile
HMHyman B. Muss
Hyman B. Muss
HCHarvey J. Cohen
Harvey J. Cohen
The American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) convened a subcommittee to develop recommendations on improving the evidence base for treating older adults with cancer in response to a critical need identified by the Institute of Medicine. Older adults experience the majority of cancer diagnoses and deaths and make up the majority of cancer survivors. Older adults are also the fastest growing segment of the US population. However, the evidence base for treating this population is sparse, because older adults are underrepresented in clinical trials, and trials designed specifically for older adults are rare. The result is that clinicians have less evidence on how to treat older adults, who represent the majority of patients with cancer. Clinicians and patients are forced to extrapolate from trials conducted in younger, healthier populations when developing treatment plans. This has created a dearth of knowledge regarding the risk of toxicity in the average older patient and about key end points of importance to older adults. ASCO makes five recommendations to improve evidence generation in this population: (1) Use clinical trials to improve the evidence base for treating older adults with cancer, (2) leverage research designs and infrastructure for generating evidence on older adults with cancer, (3) increase US Food and Drug Administration authority to incentivize and require research involving older adults with cancer, (4) increase clinicians' recruitment of older adults with cancer to clinical trials, and (5) use journal policies to improve researchers' reporting on the age distribution and health risk profiles of research participants.

1 June 2018 in The Lancet Oncology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
ESEnrique Soto-Pérez-De-Celis
Enrique Soto-Pérez-De-Celis
DLDaneng Li
Daneng Li
YYYuan Yuan
Yuan Yuan
YLYat Ming Lau
Yat Ming Lau
AHArti Hurria
Arti Hurria

11 June 2020 in JNCI: Journal of the National Cancer Institute
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
Doris HowellDoris Howell
Doris Howell
DMDeborah K Mayer
Deborah K Mayer
RFRichard Fielding
Richard Fielding
MEManuela Eicher
Manuela Eicher
ILIrma M. Verdonck-de Leeuw
Irma M. Verdonck-de Leeuw
TCthe Global Partners for Self-Management in Cancer
the Global Partners for Self-Management in Cancer
Individuals with cancer and their families assume responsibility for management of cancer as an acute and chronic disease. Yet, cancer lags other chronic diseases in its provision of proactive self-management support in routine, everyday care leaving this population vulnerable to worse health status, long-term disability, and poorer survival. Enabling cancer patients to manage the medical and emotional consequences and lifestyle and work changes due to cancer and treatment is essential to optimizing health and recovery across the continuum of cancer. In this paper, the Global Partners on Self-Management in Cancer puts forth six priority areas for action: Action 1: Prepare patients and survivors for active involvement in care; Action 2: Shift the care culture to support patients as partners in cocreating health and embed self-management support in everyday health-care provider practices and in care pathways; Action 3: Prepare the workforce in the knowledge and skills necessary to enable patients in effective self-management and reach consensus on core curricula; Action 4: Establish and reach consensus on a patient-reported outcome system for measuring the effects of self-management support and performance accountability; Action 5: Advance the evidence and stimulate research on self-management and self-management support in cancer populations; Action 6: Expand reach and access to self-management support programs across care sectors and tailored to diversity of need and stimulation of research to advance knowledge. It is time for a revolution to better integrate self-management support as part of high-quality, person-centered support and precision medicine in cancer care to optimize health outcomes, accelerate recovery, and possibly improve survival.

1 June 2021 in JCO Oncology Practice
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
WDWilliam Dale
William Dale
GWGrant Williams
Grant Williams
AMAmy R. MacKenzie
Amy R. MacKenzie
ESEnrique Soto-Pérez-De-Celis
Enrique Soto-Pérez-De-Celis
RMRonald J. Maggiore
Ronald J. Maggiore
HKHeidi Klepin
Heidi Klepin
PURPOSE: For patients with cancer who are older than 65 years, the 2018 ASCO Guideline recommends geriatric assessment (GA) be performed. However, there are limited data on providers’ practices using GA. Therefore, ASCO’s Geriatric Oncology Task Force conducted a survey of providers to assess practice patterns and barriers to GA. METHODS: Cancer providers treating adult patients including those ≥ 65 years completed an online survey. Questions included those asking about awareness of ASCO’s Geriatric Oncology Guideline (2018), use of validated GA tools, and perceived barriers to using GA. Descriptive statistics and statistical comparisons between those aware of the Guideline and those who were not were conducted. Statistical significance was set at P < .05. RESULTS: Participants (N = 1,277) responded between April 5 and June 5, 2019. Approximately half (53%) reported awareness of the Guideline. The most frequently used GA tools, among those aware of the Guideline and those who were not, assessed functional status (69% v 50%; P < .001) and falls (62% v 45%; P < .001). Remaining tools were used < 50% of the time, including tools assessing weight loss, comorbidities, cognition, life expectancy, chemotherapy toxicity, mood, and noncancer mortality risk. GA use was two to four times higher among those who are aware of the Guideline. The most frequent barriers for those who reported being Guideline aware were lack of resources, specifically time (81.7%) and staff (77.0%). In comparison, those who were unaware of the Guideline most often reported the following barriers: lack of knowledge or training (78.4%), lack of awareness about tools (75.2%), and uncertainty about use of tools (75.0%). CONCLUSION: Among providers caring for older adults, 52% were aware of the ASCO Guideline. Some domains were assessed frequently (eg, function, falls), whereas other domains were assessed rarely (eg, mood, cognition). Guideline awareness was associated with two to four times increased use of GA and differing perceived barriers. Interventions facilitating Guideline-consistent implementation will require various strategies to change behavior.

9 May 2020 in Journal of the American Geriatrics Society
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
MJMaria Renee Jimenez‐Sotomayor
Maria Renee Jimenez‐Sotomayor
CGCarolina Gomez‐Moreno
Carolina Gomez‐Moreno
ESEnrique Soto-Pérez-De-Celis
Enrique Soto-Pérez-De-Celis