About

Dr. Cindy Anderson is a Distinguished Professor of Maternal Infant Health at The Ohio State University College of Nursing. Her research focuses on the study of hypertension in pregnancy and the influence of the maternal pregnant environment on the future development of hypertension in offspring. Her recent investigations are targeted towards gene-environment interactions that increase heritable risk for preeclampsia, including the study of disrupted gene function due to changes in DNA methylation. Her work aims to improve health outcomes for women and their children through early screening and identification of individuals at risk for preeclampsia across the lifespan. Dr. Anderson has contributed significantly to the field through her research, publications, and leadership roles. She is involved in various funded research projects, including those supported by NIH and HRSA, focusing on DNA methylation markers, pregnancy outcomes, and epigenomic patterns. She has also co-authored books on pathophysiology and chapters on pregnancy physiology. Her professional affiliations include fellowships with the American Academy of Nursing, the National League for Nursing, and the American Heart Association, among others. Dr. Anderson's work integrates genetics, epigenetics, and social determinants to advance understanding and management of maternal and infant health.

Research topics

• Medicine
• Internal medicine
• Surgery
• Radiology

Selected publications

• The edge visualization metric: Quantifying the improvement of lung SBRT target definition with 4D CBCT

  Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics · 2025-06-05 · 1 citations

  articleOpen access

  PURPOSE: Four-dimensional cone-beam CT (4D CBCT) incorporates oversampling of 3D data to reconstruct multi-phase CBCT data sets representing distinct phases of the breathing cycle based on a diaphragmatic correlate of respiratory motion. Motion artifacts and blurring can be reduced relative to three-dimensional cone-beam (3D CBCT), allowing clinicians to better visualize motion of targets. To quantitatively understand the degree to which target visualization is improved by 4D CBCT, an edge visualization metric (EVM) has been developed to describe the change in voxel intensities at the edge of targets in 4D CBCT maximum intensity projection images relative to 3D CBCT images. METHODS: The EVM describes the median distance where voxel intensities drop from 80% to 20% of target voxel values. The EVM was evaluated in a phantom study with a CIRS dynamic thorax phantom and with eleven on-treatment lung SBRT patients. RESULTS: In the phantom study, the EVM was improved for 4D CBCT relative to 3D CBCT for one-cm targets (2.43 ± 0.22 mm vs. 2.67 ± 0.31 mm, p = 0.04) and for 2-cm targets (2.60 ± 0.35 mm vs. 3.46 ± 1.03 mm, p = 0.02). In patients, the EVM was 3.59 ± 1.01 mm vs. 4.25 ± 1.24 mm (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: When evaluating an imaging acquisition's degree of motion blurring and ability to delineate target edges, EVM may provide a less biased way to evaluate edge detection in the presence of motion when compared to traditional methods.

  PublisherOA PDFDOI

• Sociodemographic Barriers to Successful Implementation of Optune in Glioblastoma Multiforme Patients

  American Journal of Clinical Oncology · 2025-03-26

  article

  OBJECTIVES: Tumor-treating fields (TTFields), or Optune, is a therapy that utilizes electrical fields to stagnate tumor growth in patients with glioblastoma multiforme (GBM). This retrospective review of a single institution's experience identifies sociodemographic hurdles to patient compliance, initiation, and continuation with TTFields. We aimed to isolate patients who were not offered TTFields and those who terminated treatment so that we could hypothesize ways to overcome common barriers for our future patients. METHODS: Socioeconomic and demographic information between 2015 and 2022 was collected from 178 GBM patient records and analyzed using R. Device usage information was provided by Novocure. Kaplan-Meier survival estimates and reasons for termination were recorded. RESULTS: Of the 178 patients, 96 were offered TTFields. Among the 82 patients not offered Optune, 66% did not receive the treatment due to their poor KPS. The insurance provider ( P =0.86) did not play a role in Optune being offered. Of the 112 patients with spousal support, 65 started treatment (58%) as compared with 47% (29/62) of those without spousal support starting treatment. For those that started TTFields, disease progression was the primary reason for terminating device usage (26%) followed by discomfort from wearing the device (10%). Patient outcomes showed an elevated median survival in patients who used the device (21 mo vs. 9 mo). CONCLUSION: Although TTFields is effective, we identified several obstacles to initiating and sustaining treatment. Future work into finding initiatives to help patients overcome these barriers is imperative to increasing its use in all patient populations.

  PublisherDOI

• Treatment of localized hepatocellular carcinoma: resection vs. ablation vs. radiation

  Annals of Palliative Medicine · 2024 · 5 citations

  1st authorCorresponding
  • Medicine
  • Radiology
  • Surgery

  Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a common malignancy with many patients presenting with local disease. As of date, the use of radiation is not included in the commonly utilized Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) classification but is in the National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines. Radiation can volumetrically cover the entire tumor and with novel technologic advances can be administered non-invasively with excellent clinical outcomes with few adverse events. The gold standard for localized early HCC (such as BCLC-A) is resection or transplantation. In patients who are not candidates for surgical treatment, locoregional therapy should be considered as an optimal therapy for these patients. Tumor ablation techniques such as microwave ablation (MWA) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) are excellent tools to control local disease or bridge to transplantation. Should these not be possible though then ablation with external beam radiation is also capable of yielding comparable local control and serve as a bridge to transplant without worse rates of adverse events. For tumors that meet Milan criteria for transplantation, in comparison to transarterial chemoembolization (TACE), there is considerable randomized evidence demonstrating better local control, less adverse events, better progression-free survival (PFS), and less costly. It can be utilized as a bridge in Barcelona liver class B. For larger localized tumors though (extrahepatic disease or vascular invasion like BCLC-C), stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) is shown via a randomized clinical trial to have a survival benefit, local control benefit, and no worse adverse events compared to systemic therapy. In this setting, it should be considered the local consolidation standard of care.

  PublisherDOI

• Breast Radiation Therapy Survivorship and Cancer Support Groups: an Opportunity for Community Engagement and Education Through the Addressing Breast Cancer Dermatologic Side Effects (ABCDEs) Program

  Journal of Cancer Education · 2024-07-29 · 1 citations

  article
  PublisherDOI

• 52424 A Needs Assessment for Addressing Radiation-induced Dermatologic Side Effects in Breast Cancer Patients

  Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology · 2024-09-01

  articleOpen access
  PublisherOA PDFDOI

• Characteristics of Inpatient Deaths During the COVID-19 Pandemic at a Comprehensive Cancer Center (Sci214)

  Journal of Pain and Symptom Management · 2023-04-13

  articleOpen access
  PublisherOA PDFDOI

• Table S2 from Phase II Trial of Ipilimumab with Stereotactic Radiation Therapy for Metastatic Disease: Outcomes, Toxicities, and Low-Dose Radiation–Related Abscopal Responses

  2023-04-04

  preprintOpen access

  &lt;p&gt;Response Rates of Unirradiated Tumors by Target site and Histology&lt;/p&gt;

  PublisherDOI

• Data from Phase II Trial of Ipilimumab with Stereotactic Radiation Therapy for Metastatic Disease: Outcomes, Toxicities, and Low-Dose Radiation–Related Abscopal Responses

  2023-04-04

  preprintOpen access

  &lt;div&gt;Abstract&lt;p&gt;Ipilimumab is effective for patients with melanoma, but not for those with less immunogenic tumors. We report a phase II trial of ipilimumab with concurrent or sequential stereotactic ablative radiotherapy to metastatic lesions in the liver or lung (NCT02239900). Ipilimumab (every 3 weeks for 4 doses) was given with radiotherapy begun during the first dose (concurrent) or 1 week after the second dose (sequential) and delivered as 50 Gy in 4 fractions or 60 Gy in 10 fractions to metastatic liver or lung lesions. In total, 106 patients received ≥1 cycle of ipilimumab with radiation. Median follow-up was 10.5 months. Median progression-free survival time was 2.9 months (95% confidence interval, 2.45–3.40), and median overall survival time was not reached. Rates of clinical benefit of nonirradiated tumor volume were 26% overall, 28% for sequential versus 20% for concurrent therapy (&lt;i&gt;P&lt;/i&gt; = 0.250), and 31% for lung versus 14% for liver metastases (&lt;i&gt;P&lt;/i&gt; = 0.061). The sequential lung group had the highest rate of clinical benefit at 42%. There were no differences in treatment-related adverse events between groups. Exploratory analysis of nontargeted lesions revealed that lesions receiving low-dose radiation were more likely to respond than those that received no radiation (31% vs. 5%, &lt;i&gt;P&lt;/i&gt; = 0.0091). This phase II trial of ipilimumab with stereotactic radiotherapy describes satisfactory outcomes and low toxicities, lending support to further investigation of combined-modality therapy for metastatic cancers.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;

  PublisherDOI

• Supplementary Figure S1 from Phase II Trial of Ipilimumab with Stereotactic Radiation Therapy for Metastatic Disease: Outcomes, Toxicities, and Low-Dose Radiation–Related Abscopal Responses

  2023-04-04

  preprintOpen access

  &lt;p&gt;Supplementary Figure S1. CONSORT flow diagram for patient selection&lt;/p&gt;

  PublisherDOI

• Table S3 from Phase II Trial of Ipilimumab with Stereotactic Radiation Therapy for Metastatic Disease: Outcomes, Toxicities, and Low-Dose Radiation–Related Abscopal Responses

  2023-04-04

  preprintOpen access

  &lt;p&gt;Hepatic lesions measured at baseline for patients with evaluable imaging&lt;/p&gt;

  PublisherDOI

Recent grants

• NIH Grant R01HD035121

  NIH · $780k · 2001

• NIH Grant R01HD059912

  NIH · $2.0M · 2015

• NIH Grant R01CA024067

  NIH · $176k · 1986

• NIH Grant R01CA088053

  NIH · $1.2M · 2006

• NIH Grant R01AR066330

  NIH · $1.7M · 2020

Frequent coauthors

• John M. Robinson

  University of Sydney

  26 shared

• R. John Looney

  University of Rochester

  23 shared

• Susheela Tridandapani

  20 shared

• K. Mark Coggeshall

  16 shared

• Daniel H. Ryan

  Tallaght University Hospital

  15 shared

• G N Abraham

  14 shared

• Daniel D. Sedmak

  The Ohio State University

  13 shared

• Jo Ellen Carter

  Inserm

  13 shared

Labs

• Translational Biosciences LaboratoryPI

Education

• Ph.D.

  The Ohio State University

Awards & honors

• Fellow, National League for Nursing
• Academy of Nursing Education Fellow, American Academy of Nur…
• Fellow, National Academies of Practice
• Distinguished Scholar Fellow, American Heart Association Cou…
• Big 10 Academic Alliance Academic Leadership Development (20…