1
|
Aggarwal R, Sidnam-Mauch E, Neffa-Creech D, Plant A, Williams E, Shami E, Menon U, George S, Langbaum JB. Development of a Mobile-First Registry to Recruit Healthy Volunteers and Members of Underrepresented Communities for Alzheimer's Disease Prevention Studies. J Prev Alzheimers Dis 2023; 10:857-864. [PMID: 37874108 PMCID: PMC10884078 DOI: 10.14283/jpad.2023.86] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/25/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Web-based participant recruitment registries can be useful tools for accelerating enrollment into studies, but existing Alzheimer's disease (AD)-focused recruitment registries have had limited success enrolling individuals from underrepresented racial and ethnic groups. Designing these registries to meet the needs of individuals from these communities, including designing mobile-first, may facilitate improvement in the enrollment of underrepresented groups. OBJECTIVES Evaluate the usability of a prototype mobile-first participant recruitment registry for AD prevention studies; assess users' perceptions of and willingness to sign up for the registry. DESIGN AND SETTING Quantitative usability testing and an online survey; online setting. PARTICIPANTS We recruited 1,358 adults ages 45-75 who self-reported not having a diagnosis of mild cognitive impairment, AD, or other forms of dementia (Study 1: n=589, Study 2: n=769). Black/African American and Hispanic/Latino participants were specifically recruited, including those with lower health literacy. METHODS AND MEASUREMENTS Study 1 measures the prototype's usability through observed task success rates, task completion times, and responses to the System Usability Scale. Study 2 uses an online survey to collect data on perceptions of and willingness to sign up for the mobile-first registry. RESULTS Study 1 findings show the prototype mobile-first recruitment registry website demonstrates high usability and is equally usable for Black / African American, Hispanic/Latino, and White user groups. Survey results from Study 2 indicate that users from underrepresented communities understand the registry's purpose and content and express willingness to sign up for the registry on a mobile device. CONCLUSIONS Designing mobile-first participant recruitment registries based on feedback from underrepresented communities may result in more sign-ups by individuals from minoritized communities.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- R Aggarwal
- Jessica Langbaum, Banner Alzheimer's Institute, 901 E. Willetta Street, Phoenix, AZ 85006,
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
2
|
Neffa-Creech D, Aggarwal R, Stowell C, Menon U, George S, Plant A, Langbaum JB. Understanding Barriers and Facilitators to Signing Up for a Mobile-Responsive Registry to Recruit Healthy Volunteers and Members of Underrepresented Communities for Alzheimer's Disease Prevention Studies. J Prev Alzheimers Dis 2023; 10:865-874. [PMID: 37874109 PMCID: PMC10884139 DOI: 10.14283/jpad.2023.67] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/25/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Alzheimer's disease (AD) disproportionately affects Black/African American and Hispanic/Latino adults, yet they are underrepresented in AD studies. Recruitment challenges for these populations limit generalizability of findings. OBJECTIVES This study explores barriers and facilitators to signing up for an AD participant recruitment registry website intended to optimize recruitment of these adults. The registry is geared toward recruitment on smartphones and tablets (mobile devices), as research suggests that mobile-first approaches may be more successful within these populations. DESIGN In 2020, we conducted four focus groups (n = 39) and an online survey (n = 1010) with Black/African American and Hispanic/Latino adults. The survey also included Whites as a comparison group. SETTING Focus groups were in-person at research facilities in New Orleans, Louisiana, and Los Angeles, California. The online survey was distributed by a survey panel company to participants nationwide. PARTICIPANTS Black/African American (n = 360), Hispanic/Latino (n = 359), or White (n = 330) individuals, 45-75 years old, who self-reported not having mild cognitive impairment (MCI), dementia, or AD. MEASUREMENTS Barriers and facilitators explored in the focus groups and survey were related to health and AD (e.g., AD-related concerns and past participation/willingness to participate in health or AD studies); current use of mobile devices (e.g., comfort using devices and receptivity to the AD recruitment registry); and participant characteristics and beliefs (e.g., demographics, health literacy level, and trust in government and the scientific community). RESULTS The focus groups and survey revealed similar findings. Participants commonly use mobile devices to go online and perform health-related activities. They were aware of AD, expressed concerns with developing it, and were willing to participate in AD-related studies (motivated by personal connection to AD, altruism, and compensation). When presented with the AD recruitment registry, most provided positive feedback (e.g., easy to use and informative) and shared an interest in joining. Barriers to joining the registry with a mobile device included complex or multistep enrollment processes, beliefs that studies are primarily for those with a specific disease, and confusion about how studies can prevent AD among those low-risk for AD. The focus groups also revealed that Black/African American participants expressed more hesitation than Hispanic/Latinos in joining the registry due to greater distrust in the government and scientific community. CONCLUSIONS Recruiting more Black/African American and Hispanic/Latino participants into AD studies is vitally important. This mixed methods study suggests that adults in these underrepresented groups are motivated to prevent AD and willing to sign up for an AD participant recruitment registry using mobile devices. Most barriers to joining a registry can be addressed through slight modifications to the registry's design and functionality and by adding content. These findings can help enhance the appeal of joining AD recruitment registries to ultimately enroll more diverse, representative groups of participants and increase the generalizability of AD study findings.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- D Neffa-Creech
- Jessica Langbaum, Banner Alzheimer's Institute, 901 E. Willetta Street, Phoenix, AZ 85006, USA,
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
3
|
Sampathkumar G, Valiyaparambil PP, Kumar H, Bhavani N, Nair V, Menon U, Menon A, Abraham N, Chapla A, Thomas N. Low genetic confirmation rate in South Indian subjects with a clinical diagnosis of maturity-onset diabetes of the young (MODY) who underwent targeted next-generation sequencing for 13 genes. J Endocrinol Invest 2022; 45:607-615. [PMID: 34741762 DOI: 10.1007/s40618-021-01698-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/22/2021] [Accepted: 10/29/2021] [Indexed: 12/29/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE To screen for maturity-onset diabetes of the young (MODY) variants in subjects with an early age of onset and positive family history of diabetes mellitus. METHODS 60 subjects with onset of diabetes between 3 and 30 years of age and parental history (onset < 35 years) of diabetes were recruited after excluding autoimmune, pancreatic and syndromic forms of diabetes. Detailed pedigree chart and clinical data were recorded. MODY genetic testing (MODY 1-13) was performed and variant classification was done adhering to the ACMG guidelines. RESULTS Baseline characteristics of subjects were as follows: mean age of onset of diabetes 19.9 ± 7 years, mean duration of diabetes 6.3 ± 6.8 years, BMI 23.3 ± 3 kg/m2 and C-peptide 1.56 ± 1.06 nmol/l. Four out of sixty (6.6%) were positive for variants classifiable as pathogenic/likely pathogenic: one patient with HNF4Ac.691C > T, (p.Arg231Trp), two with HNF 1A c.746C > A(p.Ser249Ter) and c.1340C > T(p.Pro447Leu), and one with ABCC8 c.4544C > T (p.Thr1515Met). MODY 1 and MODY 3 variants were documented in the paediatric age group (< 18 years). CONCLUSION A genetic diagnosis of MODY could be confirmed in only 6.6% (4/60) of patients clinically classifiable as MODY. This is less than that reported in clinically diagnosed MODY subjects of European descent. Newly published population data and more stringent criteria for assessment of pathogenicity and younger age of onset of type 2 diabetes in Indians could have contributed to the lower genetic confirmation rate. Apart from variants in the classical genes (HNF1A, HNF4A), a likely pathogenic variant in a non-classical gene (ABCC8) was noted in this study.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- G Sampathkumar
- Department of Endocrinology, Amrita Institute of Medical Sciences, Amrita University, Ponnekara P.O, Cochin, 682041, Kerala, India
| | - P P Valiyaparambil
- Department of Endocrinology, Amrita Institute of Medical Sciences, Amrita University, Ponnekara P.O, Cochin, 682041, Kerala, India.
| | - H Kumar
- Department of Endocrinology, Amrita Institute of Medical Sciences, Amrita University, Ponnekara P.O, Cochin, 682041, Kerala, India
| | - N Bhavani
- Department of Endocrinology, Amrita Institute of Medical Sciences, Amrita University, Ponnekara P.O, Cochin, 682041, Kerala, India
| | - V Nair
- Department of Endocrinology, Amrita Institute of Medical Sciences, Amrita University, Ponnekara P.O, Cochin, 682041, Kerala, India
| | - U Menon
- Department of Endocrinology, Amrita Institute of Medical Sciences, Amrita University, Ponnekara P.O, Cochin, 682041, Kerala, India
| | - A Menon
- Department of Endocrinology, Amrita Institute of Medical Sciences, Amrita University, Ponnekara P.O, Cochin, 682041, Kerala, India
| | - N Abraham
- Department of Endocrinology, Amrita Institute of Medical Sciences, Amrita University, Ponnekara P.O, Cochin, 682041, Kerala, India
| | - A Chapla
- Department of Endocrinology, Christian Medical College, Vellore, Tamil Nadu, India
| | - N Thomas
- Department of Endocrinology, Christian Medical College, Vellore, Tamil Nadu, India
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Manchanda R, Gaba F, Talaulikar V, Pundir J, Gessler S, Davies M, Menon U. Risk-Reducing Salpingo-Oophorectomy and the Use of Hormone Replacement Therapy Below the Age of Natural Menopause: Scientific Impact Paper No. 66 October 2021: Scientific Impact Paper No. 66. BJOG 2022; 129:e16-e34. [PMID: 34672090 PMCID: PMC7614764 DOI: 10.1111/1471-0528.16896] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/01/2022]
Abstract
This paper deals with the use of hormone replacement therapy (HRT) after the removal of fallopian tubes and ovaries to prevent ovarian cancer in premenopausal high risk women. Some women have an alteration in their genetic code, which makes them more likely to develop ovarian cancer. Two well-known genes which can carry an alteration are the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes. Examples of other genes associated with an increased risk of ovarian cancer include RAD51C, RAD51D, BRIP1, PALB2 and Lynch syndrome genes. Women with a strong family history of ovarian cancer and/or breast cancer, may also be at increased risk of developing ovarian cancer. Women at increased risk can choose to have an operation to remove the fallopian tubes and ovaries, which is the most effective way to prevent ovarian cancer. This is done after a woman has completed her family. However, removal of ovaries causes early menopause and leads to hot flushes, sweats, mood changes and bone thinning. It can also cause memory problems and increases the risk of heart disease. It may reduce libido or impair sexual function. Guidance on how to care for women following preventative surgery who are experiencing early menopause is needed. HRT is usually advisable for women up to 51 years of age (average age of menopause for women in the UK) who are undergoing early menopause and have not had breast cancer, to minimise the health risks linked to early menopause. For women with a womb, HRT should include estrogen coupled with progestogen to protect against thickening of the lining of the womb (called endometrial hyperplasia). For women without a womb, only estrogen is given. Research suggests that, unlike in older women, HRT for women in early menopause does not increase breast cancer risk, including in those who are BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers and have preventative surgery. For women with a history of receptor-negative breast cancer, the gynaecologist will liaise with an oncology doctor on a case-by-case basis to help to decide if HRT is safe to use. Women with a history of estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer are not normally offered HRT. A range of other therapies can be used if a woman is unable to take HRT. These include behavioural therapy and non-hormonal medicines. However, these are less effective than HRT. Regular exercise, healthy lifestyle and avoiding symptom triggers are also advised. Whether to undergo surgery to reduce risk or not and its timing can be a complex decision-making process. Women need to be carefully counselled on the pros and cons of both preventative surgery and HRT use so they can make informed decisions and choices.
Collapse
|
5
|
Taylor JA, Burnell M, Ryana A, Karpinskyj C, Kalsi JK, Taylor H, Apostolidou S, Sharma A, Manchanda R, Woolas R, Campbell S, Parmar M, Singh N, Jacobs IJ, Menon U, Gentry-Maharaj A. Association of hysterectomy and invasive epithelial ovarian and tubal cancer: a cohort study within UKCTOCS. BJOG 2022; 129:110-118. [PMID: 34555263 PMCID: PMC7615389 DOI: 10.1111/1471-0528.16943] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 08/24/2021] [Indexed: 11/26/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To investigate the association between hysterectomy with conservation of one or both adnexa and ovarian and tubal cancer. DESIGN Prospective cohort study. SETTING Thirteen NHS Trusts in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. POPULATION A total of 202 506 postmenopausal women recruited between 2001 and 2005 to the UK Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening (UKCTOCS) and followed up until 31 December 2014. METHODS Multiple sources (questionnaires, hospital notes, Hospital Episodes Statistics, national cancer/death registries, ultrasound reports) were used to obtain accurate data on hysterectomy (with conservation of one or both adnexa) and outcomes censored at bilateral oophorectomy, death, ovarian/tubal cancer diagnosis, loss to follow up or 31 December 2014. Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to assess the association. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Invasive epithelial ovarian and tubal cancer (WHO 2014) on independent outcome review. RESULTS Hysterectomy with conservation of one or both adnexa was reported in 41 912 (20.7%; 41 912/202 506) women. Median follow up was 11.1 years (interquartile range 9.96-12.04), totalling >2.17 million woman-years. Among women who had undergone hysterectomy, 0.55% (231/41 912) were diagnosed with ovarian/tubal cancer, compared with 0.59% (945/160 594) of those with intact uterus. Multivariable analysis showed no evidence of an association between hysterectomy and invasive epithelial ovarian/tubal cancer (hazard ratio 0.98, 95% CI 0.85-1.13, P = 0.765). CONCLUSIONS This large cohort study provides further independent validation that hysterectomy is not associated with alteration of invasive epithelial ovarian and tubal cancer risk. These data are important both for clinical counselling and for refining risk prediction models. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT Hysterectomy does not alter risk of invasive epithelial ovarian and tubal cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- JA Taylor
- MRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL, Institute of Clinical Trials and Methodology, University College London, London, UK
| | - M Burnell
- MRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL, Institute of Clinical Trials and Methodology, University College London, London, UK
| | - A Ryana
- MRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL, Institute of Clinical Trials and Methodology, University College London, London, UK
| | - C Karpinskyj
- MRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL, Institute of Clinical Trials and Methodology, University College London, London, UK
| | - JK Kalsi
- Department of Women’s Cancer, Institute for Women’s Health, University College London, London, UK
- Department Epidemiology and Public Health, Institute of Epidemiology and Health Care, UCL, London, UK
| | - H Taylor
- Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - S Apostolidou
- MRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL, Institute of Clinical Trials and Methodology, University College London, London, UK
| | - A Sharma
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University Hospital of Wales, Cardiff, UK
| | - R Manchanda
- Barts Health NHS Trust and Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, CRUK Barts Cancer Centre, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | - R Woolas
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology, Queen Alexandra Hospital, Portsmouth, UK
| | | | - M Parmar
- MRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL, Institute of Clinical Trials and Methodology, University College London, London, UK
| | - N Singh
- Department of Cellular Pathology, Barts Health NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - IJ Jacobs
- Department of Women’s Cancer, Institute for Women’s Health, University College London, London, UK
- University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - U Menon
- MRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL, Institute of Clinical Trials and Methodology, University College London, London, UK
| | - A Gentry-Maharaj
- MRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL, Institute of Clinical Trials and Methodology, University College London, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Reisel D, Burnell M, Side L, Loggenberg K, Gessler S, Desai R, Sanderson S, Brady AF, Dorkins H, Wallis Y, Jacobs C, Legood R, Beller U, Tomlinson I, Wardle J, Menon U, Jacobs I, Manchanda R. Jewish cultural and religious factors and uptake of population-based BRCA testing across denominations: a cohort study. BJOG 2021; 129:959-968. [PMID: 34758513 DOI: 10.1111/1471-0528.16994] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/18/2021] [Revised: 09/11/2021] [Accepted: 09/30/2021] [Indexed: 01/09/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To evaluate the association of Jewish cultural and religious identity and denominational affiliation with interest in, intention to undertake and uptake of population-based BRCA (Breast Cancer Gene)-testing. DESIGN Cohort-study set within recruitment to GCaPPS-trial (ISRCTN73338115). SETTING London Ashkenazi-Jewish (AJ) population. POPULATION OR SAMPLE AJ men and women, >18 years. METHODS Participants were self-referred, and attended recruitment clinics (clusters) for pre-test counselling. Subsequently consenting individuals underwent BRCA testing. Participants self-identified to one Jewish denomination: Conservative/Liberal/Reform/Traditional/Orthodox/Unaffiliated. Validated scales measured Jewish Cultural-Identity (JI) and Jewish Religious-identity (JR). Four-item Likert-scales analysed initial 'interest' and 'intention to test' pre-counselling. Item-Response-Theory and graded-response models, modelled responses to JI and JR scales. Ordered/multinomial logistic regression modelling evaluated association of JI-scale, JR-scale and Jewish Denominational affiliation on interest, intention and uptake of BRCA testing. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Interest, intention, uptake of BRCA testing. RESULTS In all, 935 AJ women/men of mean age = 53.8 (S.D = 15.02) years, received pre-test education and counselling through 256 recruitment clinic clusters (median cluster size = 3). Denominational affiliations included Conservative/Masorti = 91 (10.2%); Liberal = 82 (9.2%), Reform = 135 (15.1%), Traditional = 212 (23.7%), Orthodox = 239 (26.7%); and Unaffiliated/Non-practising = 135 (15.1%). Overall BRCA testing uptake was 88%. Pre-counselling, 96% expressed interest and 60% intention to test. JI and JR scores were highest for Orthodox, followed by Conservative/Masorti, Traditional, Reform, Liberal and Unaffiliated Jewish denominations. Regression modelling showed no significant association between overall Jewish Cultural or Religious Identity with either interest, intention or uptake of BRCA testing. Interest, intention and uptake of BRCA testing was not significantly associated with denominational affiliation. CONCLUSIONS Jewish religious/cultural identity and denominational affiliation do not appear to influence interest, intention or uptake of population-based BRCA testing. BRCA testing was robust across all Jewish denominations. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT Jewish cultural/religious factors do not affect BRCA testing, with robust uptake seen across all denominational affiliations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- D Reisel
- Institute for Women's Health, University College, London, UK
| | - M Burnell
- Institute for Women's Health, University College, London, UK
| | - L Side
- University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK
| | - K Loggenberg
- Institute for Women's Health, University College, London, UK
| | - S Gessler
- Institute for Women's Health, University College, London, UK
| | - R Desai
- Institute for Women's Health, University College, London, UK
| | - S Sanderson
- Behavioral Sciences Unit, Dept Epidemiology and Public Health, University College London, London, UK
| | - A F Brady
- North West Thames Regional Genetics Service, Northwick Park Hospital, Harrow, UK
| | - H Dorkins
- St Peter's College, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Y Wallis
- West Midlands Regional Genetics Laboratory, Birmingham Women's NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, UK
| | - C Jacobs
- Dept Clinical Genetics, Guy's Hospital, London, UK.,University of Technology Sydney, Ultimo, NSW, Australia
| | - R Legood
- Department of Health Services Research and Policy, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK
| | - U Beller
- Department of Gynaecology, Shaare Zedek Medical Center, Jerusalem, Israel
| | - I Tomlinson
- Institute of Cancer and Genomic Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | - J Wardle
- Behavioral Sciences Unit, Dept Epidemiology and Public Health, University College London, London, UK
| | - U Menon
- MRC Clinical Trials Unit, University College London, London, UK
| | - I Jacobs
- Institute for Women's Health, University College, London, UK.,University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - R Manchanda
- MRC Clinical Trials Unit, University College London, London, UK.,Wolfson Institute of Population Health, CRUK Barts Centre, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.,Department of Gynaecological Oncology, St Bartholomew's Hospital, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Millstein J, Budden T, Goode EL, Anglesio MS, Talhouk A, Intermaggio MP, Leong HS, Chen S, Elatre W, Gilks B, Nazeran T, Volchek M, Bentley RC, Wang C, Chiu DS, Kommoss S, Leung SCY, Senz J, Lum A, Chow V, Sudderuddin H, Mackenzie R, George J, Fereday S, Hendley J, Traficante N, Steed H, Koziak JM, Köbel M, McNeish IA, Goranova T, Ennis D, Macintyre G, Silva De Silva D, Ramón Y Cajal T, García-Donas J, Hernando Polo S, Rodriguez GC, Cushing-Haugen KL, Harris HR, Greene CS, Zelaya RA, Behrens S, Fortner RT, Sinn P, Herpel E, Lester J, Lubiński J, Oszurek O, Tołoczko A, Cybulski C, Menkiszak J, Pearce CL, Pike MC, Tseng C, Alsop J, Rhenius V, Song H, Jimenez-Linan M, Piskorz AM, Gentry-Maharaj A, Karpinskyj C, Widschwendter M, Singh N, Kennedy CJ, Sharma R, Harnett PR, Gao B, Johnatty SE, Sayer R, Boros J, Winham SJ, Keeney GL, Kaufmann SH, Larson MC, Luk H, Hernandez BY, Thompson PJ, Wilkens LR, Carney ME, Trabert B, Lissowska J, Brinton L, Sherman ME, Bodelon C, Hinsley S, Lewsley LA, Glasspool R, Banerjee SN, Stronach EA, Haluska P, Ray-Coquard I, Mahner S, Winterhoff B, Slamon D, Levine DA, Kelemen LE, Benitez J, Chang-Claude J, Gronwald J, Wu AH, Menon U, Goodman MT, Schildkraut JM, Wentzensen N, Brown R, Berchuck A, Chenevix-Trench G, deFazio A, Gayther SA, García MJ, Henderson MJ, Rossing MA, Beeghly-Fadiel A, Fasching PA, Orsulic S, Karlan BY, Konecny GE, Huntsman DG, Bowtell DD, Brenton JD, Doherty JA, Pharoah PDP, Ramus SJ. Prognostic gene expression signature for high-grade serous ovarian cancer. Ann Oncol 2020; 31:1240-1250. [PMID: 32473302 PMCID: PMC7484370 DOI: 10.1016/j.annonc.2020.05.019] [Citation(s) in RCA: 72] [Impact Index Per Article: 18.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/04/2020] [Revised: 05/06/2020] [Accepted: 05/06/2020] [Indexed: 12/22/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Median overall survival (OS) for women with high-grade serous ovarian cancer (HGSOC) is ∼4 years, yet survival varies widely between patients. There are no well-established, gene expression signatures associated with prognosis. The aim of this study was to develop a robust prognostic signature for OS in patients with HGSOC. PATIENTS AND METHODS Expression of 513 genes, selected from a meta-analysis of 1455 tumours and other candidates, was measured using NanoString technology from formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tumour tissue collected from 3769 women with HGSOC from multiple studies. Elastic net regularization for survival analysis was applied to develop a prognostic model for 5-year OS, trained on 2702 tumours from 15 studies and evaluated on an independent set of 1067 tumours from six studies. RESULTS Expression levels of 276 genes were associated with OS (false discovery rate < 0.05) in covariate-adjusted single-gene analyses. The top five genes were TAP1, ZFHX4, CXCL9, FBN1 and PTGER3 (P < 0.001). The best performing prognostic signature included 101 genes enriched in pathways with treatment implications. Each gain of one standard deviation in the gene expression score conferred a greater than twofold increase in risk of death [hazard ratio (HR) 2.35, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.02-2.71; P < 0.001]. Median survival [HR (95% CI)] by gene expression score quintile was 9.5 (8.3 to -), 5.4 (4.6-7.0), 3.8 (3.3-4.6), 3.2 (2.9-3.7) and 2.3 (2.1-2.6) years. CONCLUSION The OTTA-SPOT (Ovarian Tumor Tissue Analysis consortium - Stratified Prognosis of Ovarian Tumours) gene expression signature may improve risk stratification in clinical trials by identifying patients who are least likely to achieve 5-year survival. The identified novel genes associated with the outcome may also yield opportunities for the development of targeted therapeutic approaches.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- J Millstein
- Division of Biostatistics, Department of Preventive Medicine, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, USA
| | - T Budden
- School of Women's and Children's Health, Faculty of Medicine, University of NSW Sydney, Sydney, Australia; CRUK Manchester Institute, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| | - E L Goode
- Department of Health Science Research, Division of Epidemiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, USA
| | - M S Anglesio
- British Columbia's Ovarian Cancer Research (OVCARE) Program, BC Cancer, Vancouver General Hospital, and University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada; Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada
| | - A Talhouk
- British Columbia's Ovarian Cancer Research (OVCARE) Program, BC Cancer, Vancouver General Hospital, and University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada
| | - M P Intermaggio
- School of Women's and Children's Health, Faculty of Medicine, University of NSW Sydney, Sydney, Australia
| | - H S Leong
- Peter MacCallum Cancer Center, Melbourne, Australia
| | - S Chen
- Center for Cancer Prevention and Translational Genomics, Samuel Oschin Comprehensive Cancer Institute, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, USA
| | - W Elatre
- Department of Pathology, Norris Comprehensive Cancer Center, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, USA
| | - B Gilks
- British Columbia's Ovarian Cancer Research (OVCARE) Program, BC Cancer, Vancouver General Hospital, and University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada; Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada
| | - T Nazeran
- British Columbia's Ovarian Cancer Research (OVCARE) Program, BC Cancer, Vancouver General Hospital, and University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada
| | - M Volchek
- Anatomical Pathology, Royal Women's Hospital, Parkville, Australia
| | - R C Bentley
- Department of Pathology, Duke University Hospital, Durham, USA
| | - C Wang
- Department of Health Science Research, Division of Biomedical Statistics and Informatics, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, USA
| | - D S Chiu
- British Columbia's Ovarian Cancer Research (OVCARE) Program, BC Cancer, Vancouver General Hospital, and University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada
| | - S Kommoss
- Department of Women's Health, Tuebingen University Hospital, Tuebingen, Germany
| | - S C Y Leung
- British Columbia's Ovarian Cancer Research (OVCARE) Program, BC Cancer, Vancouver General Hospital, and University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada
| | - J Senz
- British Columbia's Ovarian Cancer Research (OVCARE) Program, BC Cancer, Vancouver General Hospital, and University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada; Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada
| | - A Lum
- British Columbia's Ovarian Cancer Research (OVCARE) Program, BC Cancer, Vancouver General Hospital, and University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada
| | - V Chow
- British Columbia's Ovarian Cancer Research (OVCARE) Program, BC Cancer, Vancouver General Hospital, and University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada
| | - H Sudderuddin
- British Columbia's Ovarian Cancer Research (OVCARE) Program, BC Cancer, Vancouver General Hospital, and University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada
| | - R Mackenzie
- British Columbia's Ovarian Cancer Research (OVCARE) Program, BC Cancer, Vancouver General Hospital, and University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada
| | - J George
- The Jackson Laboratory for Genomic Medicine, Farmington, USA
| | - S Fereday
- Peter MacCallum Cancer Center, Melbourne, Australia; Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, Australia
| | - J Hendley
- Peter MacCallum Cancer Center, Melbourne, Australia; Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, Australia
| | - N Traficante
- Peter MacCallum Cancer Center, Melbourne, Australia; Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, Australia
| | - H Steed
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Royal Alexandra Hospital, Edmonton, Canada
| | - J M Koziak
- Alberta Health Services-Cancer Care, Calgary, Canada
| | - M Köbel
- Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of Calgary, Foothills Medical Center, Calgary, Canada
| | - I A McNeish
- Division of Cancer and Ovarian Cancer Action Research Centre, Department Surgery & Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK; Institute of Cancer Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK
| | - T Goranova
- Cancer Research UK Cambridge Institute, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - D Ennis
- Division of Cancer and Ovarian Cancer Action Research Centre, Department Surgery & Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK; Institute of Cancer Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK
| | - G Macintyre
- Cancer Research UK Cambridge Institute, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - D Silva De Silva
- Cancer Research UK Cambridge Institute, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - T Ramón Y Cajal
- Medical Oncology Service, Hospital Sant Pau, Barcelona, Spain
| | - J García-Donas
- HM Hospitales D Centro Integral Oncológico HM Clara Campal, Madrid, Spain
| | - S Hernando Polo
- Medical Oncology Service, Hospital Universitario Funcacion Alcorcon, Alcorcón, Spain
| | - G C Rodriguez
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, NorthShore University HealthSystem, University of Chicago, Evanston, USA
| | - K L Cushing-Haugen
- Program in Epidemiology, Division of Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, USA
| | - H R Harris
- Program in Epidemiology, Division of Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, USA; Department of Epidemiology, University of Washington, Seattle, USA
| | - C S Greene
- Department of Systems Pharmacology and Translational Therapeutics, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, USA
| | - R A Zelaya
- Department of Genetics, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Hanover, USA
| | - S Behrens
- Division of Cancer Epidemiology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - R T Fortner
- Division of Cancer Epidemiology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - P Sinn
- Department of Pathology, Institute of Pathology, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - E Herpel
- Department of Pathology, Institute of Pathology, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases, University Hospital and German Cancer Research Center, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - J Lester
- David Geffen School of Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, USA; Women's Cancer Program at the Samuel Oschin Comprehensive Cancer Institute, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, USA
| | - J Lubiński
- Department of Genetics and Pathology, Pomeranian Medical University, Szczecin, Poland
| | - O Oszurek
- Department of Genetics and Pathology, Pomeranian Medical University, Szczecin, Poland
| | - A Tołoczko
- Department of Genetics and Pathology, Pomeranian Medical University, Szczecin, Poland
| | - C Cybulski
- Department of Genetics and Pathology, Pomeranian Medical University, Szczecin, Poland
| | - J Menkiszak
- Department of Gynecological Surgery and Gynecological Oncology of Adults and Adolescents, Pomeranian Medical University, Szczecin, Poland
| | - C L Pearce
- Department of Epidemiology, University of Michigan School of Public Health, Ann Arbor, USA; Department of Preventive Medicine, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California Norris Comprehensive Cancer Center, Los Angeles, USA
| | - M C Pike
- Department of Preventive Medicine, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California Norris Comprehensive Cancer Center, Los Angeles, USA; Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, USA
| | - C Tseng
- Department of Preventive Medicine, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, USA
| | - J Alsop
- Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Oncology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - V Rhenius
- Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Oncology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - H Song
- Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Oncology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - M Jimenez-Linan
- Department of Pathology, Addenbrooke's Hospital NHS Trust, Cambridge, UK
| | - A M Piskorz
- Cancer Research UK Cambridge Institute, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - A Gentry-Maharaj
- MRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL, Institute of Clinical Trials & Methodology, University College London, London, UK
| | - C Karpinskyj
- MRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL, Institute of Clinical Trials & Methodology, University College London, London, UK
| | - M Widschwendter
- Department of Women's Cancer, Institute for Women's Health, University College London, London, UK
| | - N Singh
- Department of Pathology, Barts Health National Health Service Trust, London, UK
| | - C J Kennedy
- Centre for Cancer Research, The Westmead Institute for Medical Research, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia; Department of Gynaecological Oncology, Westmead Hospital, Sydney, Australia
| | - R Sharma
- Pathology West ICPMR Westmead, Westmead Hospital, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia; University of Western Sydney at Westmead Hospital, Sydney, Australia
| | - P R Harnett
- Centre for Cancer Research, The Westmead Institute for Medical Research, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia; The Crown Princess Mary Cancer Centre Westmead, Sydney-West Cancer Network, Westmead Hospital, Sydney, Australia
| | - B Gao
- Centre for Cancer Research, The Westmead Institute for Medical Research, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia; The Crown Princess Mary Cancer Centre Westmead, Sydney-West Cancer Network, Westmead Hospital, Sydney, Australia
| | - S E Johnatty
- Department of Genetics and Computational Biology, QIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
| | - R Sayer
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology, Westmead Hospital, Sydney, Australia
| | - J Boros
- Centre for Cancer Research, The Westmead Institute for Medical Research, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia; Department of Gynaecological Oncology, Westmead Hospital, Sydney, Australia
| | - S J Winham
- Department of Health Science Research, Division of Biomedical Statistics and Informatics, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, USA
| | - G L Keeney
- Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, Division of Anatomic Pathology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, USA
| | - S H Kaufmann
- Department of Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, USA; Department of Molecular Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, USA
| | - M C Larson
- Department of Health Science Research, Division of Biomedical Statistics and Informatics, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, USA
| | - H Luk
- Cancer Epidemiology Program, University of Hawaii Cancer Center, Honolulu, USA
| | - B Y Hernandez
- Cancer Epidemiology Program, University of Hawaii Cancer Center, Honolulu, USA
| | - P J Thompson
- Samuel Oschin Comprehensive Cancer Institute, Cancer Prevention and Genetics Program, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, USA
| | - L R Wilkens
- Cancer Epidemiology Program, University of Hawaii Cancer Center, Honolulu, USA
| | - M E Carney
- John A. Burns School of Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Hawaii, Honolulu, USA
| | - B Trabert
- Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, USA
| | - J Lissowska
- Department of Cancer Epidemiology and Prevention, M Sklodowska Curie National Research Institute of Oncology, Warsaw, Poland
| | - L Brinton
- Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, USA
| | - M E Sherman
- Department of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Jacksonville, USA
| | - C Bodelon
- Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, USA
| | - S Hinsley
- Cancer Research UK Clinical Trials Unit, Institute of Cancer Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK
| | - L A Lewsley
- Cancer Research UK Clinical Trials Unit, Institute of Cancer Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK
| | - R Glasspool
- Department of Medical Oncology, Beatson West of Scotland Cancer Centre and University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK
| | - S N Banerjee
- The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust and Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK
| | - E A Stronach
- Division of Cancer and Ovarian Cancer Action Research Centre, Department Surgery & Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - P Haluska
- Department of Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, USA
| | - I Ray-Coquard
- Centre Leon Berard and University Claude Bernard Lyon 1, Lyon, France
| | - S Mahner
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - B Winterhoff
- Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Women's Health, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, USA
| | - D Slamon
- David Geffen School of Medicine, Department of Medicine Division of Hematology and Oncology, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, USA
| | - D A Levine
- Gynecology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, USA; Gynecologic Oncology, Laura and Isaac Pearlmutter Cancer Center, NYU Langone Medical Center, New York, USA
| | - L E Kelemen
- Hollings Cancer Center and Department of Public Health Sciences, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, USA
| | - J Benitez
- Centro de Investigación en Red de Enfermedades Raras (CIBERER), Madrid, Spain; Human Cancer Genetics Programme, Spanish National Cancer Research Centre (CNIO), Madrid, Spain
| | - J Chang-Claude
- Division of Cancer Epidemiology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany; Cancer Epidemiology Group, University Cancer Center Hamburg (UCCH), University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | - J Gronwald
- Department of Genetics and Pathology, Pomeranian Medical University, Szczecin, Poland
| | - A H Wu
- Department of Preventive Medicine, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, USA
| | - U Menon
- MRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL, Institute of Clinical Trials & Methodology, University College London, London, UK
| | - M T Goodman
- Samuel Oschin Comprehensive Cancer Institute, Cancer Prevention and Genetics Program, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, USA
| | - J M Schildkraut
- Department of Epidemiology, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, USA
| | - N Wentzensen
- Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, USA
| | - R Brown
- Division of Cancer and Ovarian Cancer Action Research Centre, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - A Berchuck
- Department of Gynecologic Oncology, Duke University Hospital, Durham, USA
| | - G Chenevix-Trench
- Department of Genetics and Computational Biology, QIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
| | - A deFazio
- Centre for Cancer Research, The Westmead Institute for Medical Research, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia; Department of Gynaecological Oncology, Westmead Hospital, Sydney, Australia
| | - S A Gayther
- Center for Bioinformatics and Functional Genomics and the Cedars Sinai Genomics Core, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, USA
| | - M J García
- Human Cancer Genetics Programme, Spanish National Cancer Research Centre (CNIO), Madrid, Spain; Biomedical Network on Rare Diseases (CIBERER), Madrid, Spain
| | - M J Henderson
- Children's Cancer Institute, Lowy Cancer Research Centre, University of NSW Sydney, Sydney, Australia
| | - M A Rossing
- Program in Epidemiology, Division of Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, USA; Department of Epidemiology, University of Washington, Seattle, USA
| | - A Beeghly-Fadiel
- Division of Epidemiology, Department of Medicine, Vanderbilt Epidemiology Center, Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, USA
| | - P A Fasching
- David Geffen School of Medicine, Department of Medicine Division of Hematology and Oncology, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, USA; Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Comprehensive Cancer Center ER-EMN, University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Erlangen, Germany
| | - S Orsulic
- David Geffen School of Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, USA; Women's Cancer Program at the Samuel Oschin Comprehensive Cancer Institute, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, USA
| | - B Y Karlan
- David Geffen School of Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, USA; Women's Cancer Program at the Samuel Oschin Comprehensive Cancer Institute, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, USA
| | - G E Konecny
- David Geffen School of Medicine, Department of Medicine Division of Hematology and Oncology, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, USA
| | - D G Huntsman
- British Columbia's Ovarian Cancer Research (OVCARE) Program, BC Cancer, Vancouver General Hospital, and University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada; Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada; Department of Molecular Oncology, BC Cancer Research Centre, Vancouver, Canada
| | - D D Bowtell
- Peter MacCallum Cancer Center, Melbourne, Australia; Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, Australia
| | - J D Brenton
- Cancer Research UK Cambridge Institute, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - J A Doherty
- Huntsman Cancer Institute, Department of Population Health Sciences, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, USA
| | - P D P Pharoah
- Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Oncology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK; Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - S J Ramus
- School of Women's and Children's Health, Faculty of Medicine, University of NSW Sydney, Sydney, Australia; Adult Cancer Program, Lowy Cancer Research Centre, University of NSW Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Gaba F, Blyuss O, Chandrasekaran D, Osman M, Goyal S, Gan C, Izatt L, Tripathi V, Esteban I, McNicol L, Ragupathy K, Crawford R, Evans DG, Legood R, Menon U, Manchanda R. Attitudes towards risk-reducing early salpingectomy with delayed oophorectomy for ovarian cancer prevention: a cohort study. BJOG 2020; 128:714-726. [PMID: 32803845 DOI: 10.1111/1471-0528.16424] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 07/13/2020] [Indexed: 01/16/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To determine risk-reducing early salpingectomy and delayed oophorectomy (RRESDO) acceptability and effect of surgical prevention on menopausal sequelae/satisfaction/regret in women at increased ovarian cancer (OC) risk. DESIGN Multicentre, cohort, questionnaire study (IRSCTN:12310993). SETTING United Kingdom (UK). POPULATION UK women without OC ≥18 years, at increased OC risk, with/without previous RRSO, ascertained through specialist familial cancer/genetic clinics and BRCA support groups. METHODS Participants completed a 39-item questionnaire. Baseline characteristics were described using descriptive statistics. Logistic/linear regression models analysed the impact of variables on RRESDO acceptability and health outcomes. MAIN OUTCOMES RRESDO acceptability, menopausal sequelae, satisfaction/regret. RESULTS In all, 346 of 683 participants underwent risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO). Of premenopausal women who had not undergone RRSO, 69.1% (181/262) found it acceptable to participate in a research study offering RRESDO. Premenopausal women concerned about sexual dysfunction were more likely to find RRESDO acceptable (odds ratio [OR] = 2.9, 95% CI 1.2-7.7, P = 0.025). Women experiencing sexual dysfunction after premenopausal RRSO were more likely to find RRESDO acceptable in retrospect (OR = 5.3, 95% CI 1.2-27.5, P < 0.031). In all, 88.8% (143/161) premenopausal and 95.2% (80/84) postmenopausal women who underwent RRSO, respectively, were satisfied with their decision, whereas 9.4% (15/160) premenopausal and 1.2% (1/81) postmenopausal women who underwent RRSO regretted their decision. HRT uptake in premenopausal individuals without breast cancer (BC) was 74.1% (80/108). HRT use did not significantly affect satisfaction/regret levels but did reduce symptoms of vaginal dryness (OR = 0.4, 95% CI 0.2-0.9, P = 0.025). CONCLUSION Data show high RRESDO acceptability, particularly in women concerned about sexual dysfunction. Although RRSO satisfaction remains high, regret rates are much higher for premenopausal women than for postmenopausal women. HRT use following premenopausal RRSO does not increase satisfaction but does reduce vaginal dryness. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT RRESDO has high acceptability among premenopausal women at increased ovarian cancer risk, particularly those concerned about sexual dysfunction.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- F Gaba
- Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Cancer Research UK, Barts Centre, Queen Mary University of London, Charterhouse Square, London, UK.,Department of Gynaecological Oncology, St Bartholomew's Hospital, Barts Health NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - O Blyuss
- School of Physics, Astronomy and Mathematics, University of Hertfordshire, Hatfield, UK.,Department of Paediatrics and Paediatric Infectious Diseases, Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University, Moscow, Russia.,Department of Applied Mathematics, Lobachevsky State University of Nizhny Novgorod, Nizhny Novgorod, Russia
| | - D Chandrasekaran
- Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Cancer Research UK, Barts Centre, Queen Mary University of London, Charterhouse Square, London, UK.,Department of Gynaecological Oncology, St Bartholomew's Hospital, Barts Health NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - M Osman
- Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Cancer Research UK, Barts Centre, Queen Mary University of London, Charterhouse Square, London, UK
| | - S Goyal
- Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Cancer Research UK, Barts Centre, Queen Mary University of London, Charterhouse Square, London, UK
| | - C Gan
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology, Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, Nottingham, UK
| | - L Izatt
- Department of Clinical Genetics, Guy's Hospital, London, UK
| | - V Tripathi
- Department of Clinical Genetics, Guy's Hospital, London, UK
| | - I Esteban
- Ninewells Hospital, NHS Tayside, Dundee, UK
| | - L McNicol
- Ninewells Hospital, NHS Tayside, Dundee, UK
| | | | - R Crawford
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK
| | - D G Evans
- Manchester Centre for Genomic Medicine, MAHSC, Division of Evolution and Genomic Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| | - R Legood
- Department of Health Services Research and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK
| | - U Menon
- MRC Clinical Trials Unit, University College London, London, UK
| | - R Manchanda
- Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Cancer Research UK, Barts Centre, Queen Mary University of London, Charterhouse Square, London, UK.,Department of Gynaecological Oncology, St Bartholomew's Hospital, Barts Health NHS Trust, London, UK.,MRC Clinical Trials Unit, University College London, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Burnell M, Gentry‐Maharaj A, Glazer C, Karpinskyj C, Ryan A, Apostolidou S, Kalsi J, Parmar M, Campbell S, Jacobs I, Menon U. Serial endometrial thickness and risk of non-endometrial hormone-dependent cancers in postmenopausal women in UK Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2020; 56:267-275. [PMID: 31614036 PMCID: PMC7496247 DOI: 10.1002/uog.21894] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/11/2019] [Revised: 09/27/2019] [Accepted: 10/02/2019] [Indexed: 06/10/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Estrogen is a well-established risk factor for various cancers. It causes endometrial proliferation, which is assessed routinely as endometrial thickness (ET) using transvaginal ultrasound (TVS). Only one previous study, restricted to endometrial and breast cancer, has considered ET and the risk of non-endometrial cancer. The aim of this study was to explore the association between baseline and serial ET measurements and nine non-endometrial hormone-sensitive cancers, in postmenopausal women, using contemporary statistical methodology that attempts to minimize the biases typical of endogenous serial data. METHODS This was a cohort study nested within the UK Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening (UKCTOCS). In the ultrasound arm of UKCTOCS, 50639 postmenopausal women, aged 50-74, underwent annual TVS examination, of whom 38 105 had a valid ET measurement, no prior hysterectomy and complete covariate data, and were included in this study. All women were followed up through linkage to national cancer registries. The effect of ET on the risk of six estrogen-dependent cancers (breast, ovarian, colorectal, bladder, lung and pancreatic) was assessed using joint models for longitudinal biomarker and time-to-event data, and Cox models were used to assess the association between baseline ET measurement and these six cancers in addition to liver cancer, gastric cancer and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL). All models were adjusted for current hormone-replacement therapy (HRT) use, body mass index, age at last menstrual period, parity and oral contraceptive pill use. RESULTS The 38 105 included women had a combined total of 267 567 (median, 8; interquartile range, 5-9) valid ET measurements. During a combined total of 407 838 (median, 10.9) years of follow-up, 1398 breast, 351 endometrial, 381 lung, 495 colorectal, 222 ovarian, 94 pancreatic, 79 bladder, 62 gastric, 38 liver cancers and 52 NHLs were registered. Using joint models, a doubling of ET increased significantly the risk of breast (hazard ratio (HR), 1.21; 95% CI, 1.09-1.36; P = 0.001), ovarian (HR, 1.39; 95% CI, 1.06-1.82; P = 0.018) and lung (HR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.02-1.54; P = 0.036) cancers. There were no statistically significant associations between ET and the remaining six cancers. CONCLUSION Postmenopausal women with high/increasing ET on TVS are at increased risk of breast, ovarian and lung cancer. It is important that clinicians are aware of these risks, as TVS is a common investigation. © 2019 The Authors. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M. Burnell
- MRC CTU, Institute of Clinical Trials and MethodologyUniversity College LondonLondonUK
| | - A. Gentry‐Maharaj
- MRC CTU, Institute of Clinical Trials and MethodologyUniversity College LondonLondonUK
| | - C. Glazer
- Department of Occupational and Environmental MedicineFrederiksberg‐Bispebjerg University HospitalCopenhagenNVDenmark
| | - C. Karpinskyj
- MRC CTU, Institute of Clinical Trials and MethodologyUniversity College LondonLondonUK
| | - A. Ryan
- MRC CTU, Institute of Clinical Trials and MethodologyUniversity College LondonLondonUK
- Department of Women's Cancer, Institute for Women's HealthUniversity College LondonLondonUK
| | - S. Apostolidou
- MRC CTU, Institute of Clinical Trials and MethodologyUniversity College LondonLondonUK
| | - J. Kalsi
- Department of Women's Cancer, Institute for Women's HealthUniversity College LondonLondonUK
| | - M. Parmar
- MRC CTU, Institute of Clinical Trials and MethodologyUniversity College LondonLondonUK
| | | | - I. Jacobs
- Department of Women's Cancer, Institute for Women's HealthUniversity College LondonLondonUK
- University of New South WalesSydneyAustralia
| | - U. Menon
- MRC CTU, Institute of Clinical Trials and MethodologyUniversity College LondonLondonUK
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Manchanda R, Burnell M, Gaba F, Desai R, Wardle J, Gessler S, Side L, Sanderson S, Loggenberg K, Brady AF, Dorkins H, Wallis Y, Chapman C, Jacobs C, Legood R, Beller U, Tomlinson I, Menon U, Jacobs I. Randomised trial of population‐based
BRCA
testing in Ashkenazi Jews: long‐term outcomes. BJOG 2019; 127:364-375. [PMID: 31507061 DOI: 10.1111/1471-0528.15905] [Citation(s) in RCA: 40] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 08/02/2019] [Indexed: 12/31/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- R Manchanda
- Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine Barts Cancer Institute Queen Mary University of London London UK
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology St Bartholomew's Hospital London UK
- MRC Clinical Trials Unit University College London London UK
| | - M Burnell
- MRC Clinical Trials Unit University College London London UK
| | - F Gaba
- Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine Barts Cancer Institute Queen Mary University of London London UK
| | - R Desai
- MRC Clinical Trials Unit University College London London UK
| | - J Wardle
- Behavioural Sciences Unit Department of Epidemiology and Public Health University College London London UK
| | - S Gessler
- MRC Clinical Trials Unit University College London London UK
| | - L Side
- University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust Southampton UK
| | - S Sanderson
- Behavioural Sciences Unit Department of Epidemiology and Public Health University College London London UK
| | - K Loggenberg
- North East Thames Regional Genetics Unit Department of Clinical Genetics Great Ormond Street Hospital London UK
| | - AF Brady
- North West Thames Regional Genetics Service Northwick Park Hospital Harrow UK
| | - H Dorkins
- St Peter's College University of Oxford Oxford UK
| | - Y Wallis
- West Midlands Regional Genetics Laboratory Birmingham Women's NHS Foundation Trust Birmingham UK
| | - C Chapman
- West Midlands Regional Genetics Service Department of Clinical Genetics Birmingham Women's NHS Foundation Trust Birmingham UK
| | - C Jacobs
- Department of Clinical Genetics Guy's Hospital London UK
- University of Technology Sydney Sydney NSW Australia
| | - R Legood
- Department of Health Services Research and Policy London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine London UK
| | - U Beller
- Department of Gynaecology Shaare Zedek Medical Centre Jerusalem Israel
| | - I Tomlinson
- Institute of Cancer and Genomic Sciences University of Birmingham Birmingham UK
| | - U Menon
- MRC Clinical Trials Unit University College London London UK
| | - I Jacobs
- University of New South Wales UNSW Sydney Sydney NSW Australia
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Manchanda R, Burnell M, Gaba F, Sanderson S, Loggenberg K, Gessler S, Wardle J, Side L, Desai R, Brady AF, Dorkins H, Wallis Y, Chapman C, Jacobs C, Tomlinson I, Beller U, Menon U, Jacobs I. Attitude towards and factors affecting uptake of population-based BRCA testing in the Ashkenazi Jewish population: a cohort study. BJOG 2019; 126:784-794. [PMID: 30767407 DOI: 10.1111/1471-0528.15654] [Citation(s) in RCA: 20] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 12/29/2018] [Indexed: 11/30/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To evaluate factors affecting unselected population-based BRCA testing in Ashkenazi Jews (AJ). DESIGN Cohort-study set within recruitment to the GCaPPS trial (ISRCTN73338115). SETTING North London AJ population. POPULATION OR SAMPLE Ashkenazi Jews women/men >18 years, recruited through self-referral. METHODS Ashkenazi Jews women/men underwent pre-test counselling for BRCA testing through recruitment clinics (clusters). Consenting individuals provided blood samples for BRCA testing. Data were collected on socio-demographic/family history/knowledge/psychological well-being along with benefits/risks/cultural influences (18-item questionnaire measuring 'attitude'). Four-item Likert-scales analysed initial 'interest' and 'intention-to-test' pre-counselling. Uni- and multivariable logistic regression models evaluated factors affecting uptake/interest/intention to undergo BRCA testing. Statistical inference was based on cluster robust standard errors and joint Wald tests for significance. Item-Response Theory and graded-response models modelled responses to 18-item questionnaire. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Interest, intention, uptake, attitude towards BRCA testing. RESULTS A total of 935 individuals (women = 67%/men = 33%; mean age = 53.8 (SD = 15.02) years) underwent pre-test genetic-counselling. During the pre-counselling, 96% expressed interest in and 60% indicated a clear intention to undergo BRCA testing. Subsequently, 88% opted for BRCA testing. BRCA-related knowledge (P = 0.013) and degree-level education (P = 0.01) were positively and negatively (respectively) associated with intention-to-test. Being married/cohabiting had four-fold higher odds for BRCA testing uptake (P = 0.009). Perceived benefits were associated with higher pre-counselling odds for interest in and intention to undergo BRCA testing. Reduced uncertainty/reassurance were the most important factors contributing to decision-making. Increased importance/concern towards risks/limitations (confidentiality/insurance/emotional impact/inability to prevent cancer/marriage ability/ethnic focus/stigmatisation) were significantly associated with lower odds of uptake of BRCA testing, and discriminated between acceptors and decliners. Male gender/degree-level education (P = 0.001) had weaker correlations, whereas having children showed stronger (P = 0.005) associations with attitudes towards BRCA testing. CONCLUSIONS BRCA testing in the AJ population has high acceptability. Pre-test counselling increases awareness of disadvantages/limitations of BRCA testing, influencing final cost-benefit perception and decision-making on undergoing testing. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT BRCA testing in Ashkenazi Jews has high acceptability and uptake. Pre-test counselling facilitates informed decision-making.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- R Manchanda
- Barts Cancer Institute, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology, St Bartholomew's Hospital, London, UK
| | - M Burnell
- MRC Clinical Trials Unit, University College London, London, UK
| | - F Gaba
- Barts Cancer Institute, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology, St Bartholomew's Hospital, London, UK
| | - S Sanderson
- Behavioural Sciences Unit, Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, University College London, London, UK
| | - K Loggenberg
- Department of Clinical Genetics, North East Thames Regional Genetics Unit, Great Ormond Street Hospital, London, UK
| | - S Gessler
- MRC Clinical Trials Unit, University College London, London, UK
| | - J Wardle
- Behavioural Sciences Unit, Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, University College London, London, UK
| | - L Side
- University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK
| | - R Desai
- MRC Clinical Trials Unit, University College London, London, UK
| | - A F Brady
- Department of Clinical Genetics, North West Thames Regional Genetics Unit, Northwick Park Hospital, London, UK
| | - H Dorkins
- St Peter's College, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Y Wallis
- West Midlands Regional Genetics Laboratory, Birmingham Women's NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, UK
| | - C Chapman
- Department of Clinical Genetics, West Midlands Regional Genetics Service, Birmingham Women's NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, UK
| | - C Jacobs
- Department of Clinical Genetics, Guy's Hospital, London, UK
- University of Technology Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - I Tomlinson
- Institute of Cancer and Genomic Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | - U Beller
- Department of Gynecology, Shaare Zedek Medical Center, Jerusalem, Israel
| | - U Menon
- MRC Clinical Trials Unit, University College London, London, UK
| | - I Jacobs
- University of New South Wales, UNSW Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Gaba F, Piek J, Menon U, Manchanda R. Risk‐reducing early salpingectomy and delayed oophorectomy as a two‐staged alternative for primary prevention of ovarian cancer in women at increased risk: a commentary. BJOG 2019; 126:831-839. [DOI: 10.1111/1471-0528.15651] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 01/28/2019] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- F Gaba
- Barts Cancer Institute Queen Mary University of London London UK
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology St Bartholomew's Hospital London UK
| | - J Piek
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology Catharina Hospital Eindhoven the Netherlands
| | - U Menon
- MRC Clinical Trials Unit University College London London UK
| | - R Manchanda
- Barts Cancer Institute Queen Mary University of London London UK
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology St Bartholomew's Hospital London UK
- MRC Clinical Trials Unit University College London London UK
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Bergin R, Emery J, Bollard R, Falborg A, Jensen H, Weller D, Menon U, Vedsted P, Thomas R, Whitfield K, White V. Rural-Urban Variation in Time to Diagnosis and Treatment of Colorectal or Breast Cancer in Victoria, Australia. J Glob Oncol 2018. [DOI: 10.1200/jgo.18.10700] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
Background: Rural-urban disparities in cancer outcomes are found in many countries, though these vary by cancer type. In Victoria, Australia, survival is poorer for rural patients with colorectal cancer, but not breast cancer. Delayed diagnosis and treatment may contribute to disparities, but previous studies have not compared the timeliness of rural and urban pathways to treatment of these common cancers. Aim: We investigated whether time to diagnosis and treatment differed for rural and urban patients with colorectal or breast cancer in Victoria, Australia. Methods: Population-based, cross-sectional surveys examining events and dates on the pathway to treatment completed by patients aged ≥ 40 and approached within six months of diagnosis, their general practitioner (GP) and specialist. Data were collected from 2013 to 2014 as part of the International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership, Module 4. Six intervals were explored: patient (symptom to presentation), primary care (presentation to referral), diagnostic (presentation/screening to diagnosis), treatment (diagnosis to treatment), health system (presentation to treatment) and total intervals (symptom/screening to treatment). Rural-urban differences were examined for each cancer using quantile regression (50th, 75th and 90th percentiles) models including age, gender, health insurance and socioeconomic status. Results: 433 colorectal (48% rural) and 489 breast (42% rural) patients, 621 GPs and 370 specialists completed surveys. Compared with urban patients, symptomatic colorectal cancer patients from rural areas had a significantly longer total interval at all percentiles: 50th (18 days longer, 95% confidence interval (CI): 9-27), 75th (53, 95% CI: 47-59) 90th (44, 95% CI: 40-48). These patients also had longer health system intervals, ranging 7-85 days longer. This appeared mostly due to longer diagnostic intervals (range: 6-54 days longer). Results were similar when including screen-detected cases. In contrast, breast cancer intervals were similar for rural and urban patients, except the patient interval, which was shorter for rural patients. Conclusion: Consistent with variation in survival, we found longer total and diagnostic intervals for rural compared with urban patients with colorectal cancer, but not breast cancer. The lack of rural-urban differences observed for breast cancer suggest that inequities in the timeliness of colorectal cancer pathways can be ameliorated, and may improve clinical outcomes. Indeed, based on previous research, delays observed in this study could result in stage progression and hence reduced survival. From our results, interventions targeting the time from presentation to colorectal cancer diagnosis in rural populations should be pursued. Countries seeking to understand cancer disparities in their local context may also consider using a pathways approach to identify possible targets for policy intervention.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- R. Bergin
- Cancer Council Victoria, Centre for Behavioural Research, Melbourne, Australia
| | - J. Emery
- Cancer Council Victoria, Centre for Behavioural Research, Melbourne, Australia
| | - R. Bollard
- Cancer Council Victoria, Centre for Behavioural Research, Melbourne, Australia
| | - A. Falborg
- Cancer Council Victoria, Centre for Behavioural Research, Melbourne, Australia
| | - H. Jensen
- Cancer Council Victoria, Centre for Behavioural Research, Melbourne, Australia
| | - D. Weller
- Cancer Council Victoria, Centre for Behavioural Research, Melbourne, Australia
| | - U. Menon
- Cancer Council Victoria, Centre for Behavioural Research, Melbourne, Australia
| | - P. Vedsted
- Cancer Council Victoria, Centre for Behavioural Research, Melbourne, Australia
| | - R. Thomas
- Cancer Council Victoria, Centre for Behavioural Research, Melbourne, Australia
| | - K. Whitfield
- Cancer Council Victoria, Centre for Behavioural Research, Melbourne, Australia
| | - V. White
- Cancer Council Victoria, Centre for Behavioural Research, Melbourne, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Manchanda R, Legood R, Antoniou AC, Pearce L, Menon U. Commentary on changing the risk threshold for surgical prevention of ovarian cancer. BJOG 2018; 125:541-544. [PMID: 28548227 DOI: 10.1111/1471-0528.14763] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 05/20/2017] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- R Manchanda
- Barts Cancer Institute, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology, St Bartholomew's Hospital, London, UK
- Department of Women's Cancer, Gynaecological Cancer Research Centre, Institute for Women's Health, University College London, London, UK
| | - R Legood
- Department of Health Services Research and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK
| | - A C Antoniou
- Strangeways Research Laboratory, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - L Pearce
- Department of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
- Department of Preventive Medicine, USC Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - U Menon
- Department of Women's Cancer, Gynaecological Cancer Research Centre, Institute for Women's Health, University College London, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Trembling PM, Apostolidou S, Gentry-Maharaj A, Parkes J, Ryan A, Tanwar S, Burnell M, Menon U, Rosenberg WM. Association between skirt size and chronic liver disease in post-menopausal women: a prospective cohort study within the United Kingdom Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening (UKCTOCS). BMC Public Health 2018; 18:409. [PMID: 29587697 PMCID: PMC5870222 DOI: 10.1186/s12889-018-5308-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/25/2017] [Accepted: 03/13/2018] [Indexed: 11/25/2022] Open
Abstract
Background We investigated the association between self-reported skirt size (SS) and change in SS, and incidence of chronic liver disease (CLD) in a prospective cohort study of women recruited to the UKCTOCS trial. Methods Women recruited to UKCTOCS in England without documented CLD self-reported their current UK SS during trial participation and were asked to recall their SS when aged in 20s (via completion of a questionnaire 3–5 years after recruitment). Participants were followed up via electronic health record linkage and hazard ratios (HR) calculated for incident liver-related events (LRE). Results Three hundred twenty-two (0.3%) of 94,124 women experienced a first LRE. Compared to SS ≤ 16, rates of LRE were higher in the SS ≥ 18 groups (both when aged in 20s and at questionnaire completion). Event rates were higher if there was no change in SS or an increase in SS, compared to a decrease in SS. In the models adjusted for potential confounders, HRs for LRE were higher in the groups of women reporting SS ≥ 18 both when aged in 20s (HR = 1.39 (95% CI; 0.87–2.23)) and at questionnaire completion (HR = 1.37 (95% CI; 1.07–1.75)). Compared to a decrease in SS, HRs were higher in the no change (HR = 1.78 (95% CI; 0.95–3.34)) and increase (HR = 1.80 (95% CI; 1.01–3.21)) groups. Conclusion CLD is associated with high SS and an increase in SS over time. These data suggest SS can be used in simple public health messages about communicating the risk of liver disease. Trial Registration UKCTOCS is registered as an International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial, number ISRCTN22488978. Registered 06/04/2000. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s12889-018-5308-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- P M Trembling
- Institute for Liver and Digestive Health, Division of Medicine, University College London, Royal Free Hospital, Rowland Hill Street, NW3 2PF, London, UK.
| | - S Apostolidou
- Gynaecological Cancer Research Centre, Department of Women's Cancer, Institute for Women's Health, University College London, London, UK
| | - A Gentry-Maharaj
- Gynaecological Cancer Research Centre, Department of Women's Cancer, Institute for Women's Health, University College London, London, UK
| | - J Parkes
- Public Health Sciences and Medical Statistics, Faculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK
| | - A Ryan
- Gynaecological Cancer Research Centre, Department of Women's Cancer, Institute for Women's Health, University College London, London, UK
| | - S Tanwar
- Institute for Liver and Digestive Health, Division of Medicine, University College London, Royal Free Hospital, Rowland Hill Street, NW3 2PF, London, UK
| | - M Burnell
- Gynaecological Cancer Research Centre, Department of Women's Cancer, Institute for Women's Health, University College London, London, UK
| | - U Menon
- Gynaecological Cancer Research Centre, Department of Women's Cancer, Institute for Women's Health, University College London, London, UK
| | - W M Rosenberg
- Institute for Liver and Digestive Health, Division of Medicine, University College London, Royal Free Hospital, Rowland Hill Street, NW3 2PF, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Stott W, Campbell S, Franchini A, Blyuss O, Zaikin A, Ryan A, Jones C, Gentry‐Maharaj A, Fletcher G, Kalsi J, Skates S, Parmar M, Amso N, Jacobs I, Menon U. Sonographers' self-reported visualization of normal postmenopausal ovaries on transvaginal ultrasound is not reliable: results of expert review of archived images from UKCTOCS. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2018; 51:401-408. [PMID: 28796383 PMCID: PMC5888153 DOI: 10.1002/uog.18836] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/23/2016] [Revised: 07/28/2017] [Accepted: 08/01/2017] [Indexed: 06/07/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE In the UK Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening (UKCTOCS), self-reported visualization rate (VR) of the ovaries by the sonographer on annual transvaginal sonographic (TVS) examinations was a key quality control (QC) metric. The objective of this study was to assess self-reported VR using expert review of a random sample of archived images of TVS examinations from UKCTOCS, and then to develop software for measuring VR automatically. METHODS A single expert reviewed images archived from 1000 TVS examinations selected randomly from 68 931 TVS scans performed in UKCTOCS between 2008 and 2011 with ovaries reported as 'seen and normal'. Software was developed to identify the exact images used by the sonographer to measure the ovaries. This was achieved by measuring caliper dimensions in the image and matching them to those recorded by the sonographer. A logistic regression classifier to determine visualization was trained and validated using ovarian dimensions and visualization data reported by the expert. RESULTS The expert reviewer confirmed visualization of both ovaries (VR-Both) in 50.2% (502/1000) of the examinations. The software identified the measurement image in 534 exams, which were split 2:1:1 providing training, validation and test data. Classifier mean accuracy on validation data was 70.9% (95% CI, 70.0-71.8%). Analysis of test data (133 exams) provided a sensitivity of 90.5% (95% CI, 80.9-95.8%) and specificity of 47.5% (95% CI, 34.5-60.8%) in detecting expert confirmed visualization of both ovaries. CONCLUSIONS Our results suggest that, in a significant proportion of TVS annual screens, the sonographers may have mistaken other structures for normal ovaries. It is uncertain whether or not this affected the sensitivity and stage at detection of ovarian cancer in the ultrasound arm of UKCTOCS, but we conclude that QC metrics based on self-reported visualization of normal ovaries are unreliable. The classifier shows some potential for addressing this problem, though further research is needed. © 2017 The Authors. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- W. Stott
- Women's CancerUCL EGA Institute for Women's HealthLondonUK
| | | | - A. Franchini
- London School of Hygiene and Tropical MedicineLondonUK
| | - O. Blyuss
- Women's CancerUCL EGA Institute for Women's HealthLondonUK
| | - A. Zaikin
- Women's CancerUCL EGA Institute for Women's HealthLondonUK
| | - A. Ryan
- Women's CancerUCL EGA Institute for Women's HealthLondonUK
| | - C. Jones
- Women's CancerUCL EGA Institute for Women's HealthLondonUK
| | | | - G. Fletcher
- Women's CancerUCL EGA Institute for Women's HealthLondonUK
| | - J. Kalsi
- Women's CancerUCL EGA Institute for Women's HealthLondonUK
| | - S. Skates
- Biostatistics CenterMassachusetts General HospitalBostonMAUSA
| | - M. Parmar
- Medical Research Council Clinical Trials Unit at UCLLondonUK
| | - N. Amso
- School of Medicine, College of Biomedical and Life SciencesCardiff UniversityCardiffUK
| | - I. Jacobs
- Women's CancerUCL EGA Institute for Women's HealthLondonUK
- University of New South Wales, SydneyAustralia
| | - U. Menon
- Women's CancerUCL EGA Institute for Women's HealthLondonUK
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Gentry-Maharaj A, Karpinskyj C, Glazer C, Burnell M, Bailey K, Apostolidou S, Ryan A, Lanceley A, Fraser L, Jacobs I, Hunter MS, Menon U. Prevalence and predictors of complementary and alternative medicine/non-pharmacological interventions use for menopausal symptoms within the UK Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening. Climacteric 2017; 20:240-247. [PMID: 28326899 PMCID: PMC5448394 DOI: 10.1080/13697137.2017.1301919] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/25/2016] [Revised: 01/26/2017] [Accepted: 02/19/2017] [Indexed: 12/04/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES The negative publicity about menopausal hormone therapy (MHT) has led to increased use of complementary and alternative medicines (CAM) and non-pharmacological interventions (NPI) for menopausal symptom relief. We report on the prevalence and predictors of CAM/NPI among UK postmenopausal women. METHOD Postmenopausal women aged 50-74 years were invited to participate in the UK Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening (UKCTOCS). A total of 202 638 women were recruited and completed a baseline questionnaire. Of these, 136 020 were sent a postal follow-up-questionnaire between September 2006 and May 2009 which included ever-use of CAM/NPI for menopausal symptom relief. Both questionnaires included MHT use. RESULTS A total of 88 430 (65.0%) women returned a completed follow-up-questionnaire; 22 206 (25.1%) reported ever-use of one or more CAM/NPI. Highest use was reported for herbal therapies (43.8%; 9725/22 206), vitamins (42.6%; 9458/22 206), lifestyle approaches (32.1%; 7137/22 206) and phytoestrogens (21.6%; 4802/22 206). Older women reported less ever-use of herbal therapies, vitamins and phytoestrogens. Lifestyle approaches, aromatherapy/reflexology/acupuncture and homeopathy were similar across age groups. Higher education, Black ethnicity, MHT or previous oral contraceptive pill use were associated with higher CAM/NPI use. Women assessed as being less hopeful about their future were less likely to use CAM/NPI. CONCLUSION One in four postmenopausal women reported ever-use of CAM therapies/NPI for menopausal symptom relief, with lower use reported by older women. Higher levels of education and previous MHT use were positive predictors of CAM/NPI use. UKCTOCS Trial registration: ISRCTN22488978.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- A. Gentry-Maharaj
- Gynaecological Cancer Research Centre, Department of Women’s Cancer, Institute for Women's Health, University College LondonLondonUK
| | - C. Karpinskyj
- Gynaecological Cancer Research Centre, Department of Women’s Cancer, Institute for Women's Health, University College LondonLondonUK
| | - C. Glazer
- Gynaecological Cancer Research Centre, Department of Women’s Cancer, Institute for Women's Health, University College LondonLondonUK
- Department of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Bispebjerg - Frederiksberg Hospital, Institute of Public Health, University of CopenhagenCopenhagenDenmark
| | - M. Burnell
- Gynaecological Cancer Research Centre, Department of Women’s Cancer, Institute for Women's Health, University College LondonLondonUK
| | - K. Bailey
- Gynaecological Cancer Research Centre, Department of Women’s Cancer, Institute for Women's Health, University College LondonLondonUK
| | - S. Apostolidou
- Gynaecological Cancer Research Centre, Department of Women’s Cancer, Institute for Women's Health, University College LondonLondonUK
| | - A. Ryan
- Gynaecological Cancer Research Centre, Department of Women’s Cancer, Institute for Women's Health, University College LondonLondonUK
| | - A. Lanceley
- Gynaecological Cancer Research Centre, Department of Women’s Cancer, Institute for Women's Health, University College LondonLondonUK
| | - L. Fraser
- Gynaecological Cancer Research Centre, Department of Women’s Cancer, Institute for Women's Health, University College LondonLondonUK
| | - I. Jacobs
- Gynaecological Cancer Research Centre, Department of Women’s Cancer, Institute for Women's Health, University College LondonLondonUK
- UNSW AustraliaSydneyAustralia
- Centre for Women's Health, Institute of Human Development, University of ManchesterManchesterUK
| | - M. S. Hunter
- Department of Psychology, Institute of Psychiatry, Guy’s Campus, King's College LondonLondonUK
| | - U. Menon
- Gynaecological Cancer Research Centre, Department of Women’s Cancer, Institute for Women's Health, University College LondonLondonUK
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Morgan K, Maguire N, Fushimi R, Gleaves JT, Goguet A, Harold MP, Kondratenko EV, Menon U, Schuurman Y, Yablonsky GS. Forty years of temporal analysis of products. Catal Sci Technol 2017. [DOI: 10.1039/c7cy00678k] [Citation(s) in RCA: 89] [Impact Index Per Article: 12.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/21/2022]
Abstract
A detailed understanding of reaction mechanisms and kinetics is required in order to develop and optimize catalysts and catalytic processes. Temporal analysis of products (TAP) is an instrument capable of providing such understanding.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- K. Morgan
- School of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering
- Queen's University Belfast
- Belfast BT9 5AG
- UK
| | - N. Maguire
- School of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering
- Queen's University Belfast
- Belfast BT9 5AG
- UK
| | | | - J. T. Gleaves
- Department of Energy, Environmental and Chemical Engineering
- Washington University
- St Louis
- USA
| | - A. Goguet
- School of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering
- Queen's University Belfast
- Belfast BT9 5AG
- UK
| | - M. P. Harold
- Department of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering
- University of Houston
- Houston
- USA
| | - E. V. Kondratenko
- Leibniz-Institut für Katalyse e.V. an der Universität Rostock
- Rostock
- Germany
| | - U. Menon
- Department of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering
- University of Houston
- Houston
- USA
| | - Y. Schuurman
- IRCELYON
- Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1
- Villeurbanne Cédex
- France
| | - G. S. Yablonsky
- Parks College of Engineering, Aviation and Technology
- Saint Louis University
- Saint Louis
- USA
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Gopalan M, Menon U. 3-D construction of lateral wall of nose. J ANAT SOC INDIA 2016. [DOI: 10.1016/j.jasi.2016.08.177] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/30/2022]
|
20
|
Datta S, Tripathi L, Varghese R, Logan J, Gessler S, Chatterjee S, Bhaumik J, Menon U. Pivotal role of families in doctor-patient communication in oncology: a qualitative study of patients, their relatives and cancer clinicians. Eur J Cancer Care (Engl) 2016; 26. [PMID: 27430633 DOI: 10.1111/ecc.12543] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 06/11/2016] [Indexed: 12/01/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- S.S. Datta
- Department of Palliative Care and Psycho-oncology; Tata Medical Center; Kolkata West Bengal India
- Gynaecological Cancer Research Centre; Institute for Women's Health; University College London; London UK
| | - L. Tripathi
- Department of Palliative Care and Psycho-oncology; Tata Medical Center; Kolkata West Bengal India
| | - R. Varghese
- School of Public Health; University of California; Berkeley CA USA
| | - J. Logan
- Clare College; University of Cambridge; Cambridge UK
| | - S. Gessler
- Gynaecological Cancer Research Centre; Institute for Women's Health; University College London; London UK
| | - S. Chatterjee
- Department of Radiation Oncology; Tata Medical Center; Kolkata West Bengal India
| | - J. Bhaumik
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology; Tata Medical Center; Kolkata West Bengal India
| | - U. Menon
- Gynaecological Cancer Research Centre; Institute for Women's Health; University College London; London UK
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology; Tata Medical Center; Kolkata West Bengal India
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Lim AWW, Mesher D, Gentry‐Maharaj A, Balogun N, Widschwendter M, Jacobs I, Sasieni P, Menon U. Time to diagnosis of Type I or II invasive epithelial ovarian cancers: a multicentre observational study using patient questionnaire and primary care records. BJOG 2016; 123:1012-20. [PMID: 26032603 PMCID: PMC4855631 DOI: 10.1111/1471-0528.13447] [Citation(s) in RCA: 21] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 03/26/2015] [Indexed: 01/25/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To compare time to diagnosis of the typically slow-growing Type I (low-grade serous, low-grade endometrioid, mucinous, clear cell) and the more aggressive Type II (high-grade serous, high-grade endometrioid, undifferentiated, carcinosarcoma) invasive epithelial ovarian cancer (iEOC). DESIGN Multicentre observational study. SETTING Ten UK gynaecological oncology centres. POPULATION Women diagnosed with primary EOC between 2006 and 2008. METHODS Symptom data were collected before diagnosis using patient questionnaire and primary-care records. We estimated patient interval (first symptom to presentation) using questionnaire data and diagnostic interval (presentation to diagnosis) using primary-care records. We considered the impact of first symptom, referral and stage on intervals for Type I and Type II iEOC. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Patient and diagnostic intervals. RESULTS In all, 78% of 60 Type I and 21% of 134 Type II iEOC were early-stage. Intervals were comparable and independent of stage [e.g. median patient interval for Type I: early-stage 0.3 months (interquartile range 0.3-3.0) versus late-stage 0.3 months (interquartile range 0.3-4.5), P = 0.8]. Twenty-seven percent of women with Type I and Type II had diagnostic intervals of at least 9 months. First symptom (questionnaire) was also similar, except for the infrequent abnormal bleeding (Type I 15% versus Type II 4%, P = 0.01). More women with Type I disease (57% versus 41%, P = 0.04) had been referred for suspected gynaecological cancer. Median time from referral to diagnosis was 1.4 months for women with iEOC referred via a 2-week cancer referral to any specialty compared with 2.6 months (interquartile range 2.0-3.7) for women who were referred routinely to gynaecology. CONCLUSION Overall, shorter diagnostic delays were seen when a cancer was suspected, even if the primary tumour site was not recognised to be ovarian. Despite differences in carcinogenesis and stage for Type I and Type II iEOC, time to diagnosis and symptoms were similar. Referral patterns were different, implying subtle symptom differences. If symptom-based interventions are to impact on ovarian cancer survival, it is likely to be through reduced volume rather than stage-shift. Further research on histological subtypes is needed. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT No difference in time to diagnosis for Type I versus Type II invasive epithelial ovarian cancers.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- AWW Lim
- Centre for Cancer PreventionWolfson Institute of Preventive MedicineQueen Mary University of LondonBarts & The London School of Medicine and DentistryLondonUK
| | - D Mesher
- Centre for Cancer PreventionWolfson Institute of Preventive MedicineQueen Mary University of LondonBarts & The London School of Medicine and DentistryLondonUK
| | - A Gentry‐Maharaj
- Gynaecological Cancer Research CentreWomen's CancerInstitute for Women's HealthUniversity College LondonLondonUK
| | - N Balogun
- Gynaecological Cancer Research CentreWomen's CancerInstitute for Women's HealthUniversity College LondonLondonUK
| | - M Widschwendter
- Gynaecological Cancer Research CentreWomen's CancerInstitute for Women's HealthUniversity College LondonLondonUK
| | - I Jacobs
- Gynaecological Cancer Research CentreWomen's CancerInstitute for Women's HealthUniversity College LondonLondonUK
- Faculty of Medical and Human SciencesUniversity of ManchesterManchesterUK
| | - P Sasieni
- Centre for Cancer PreventionWolfson Institute of Preventive MedicineQueen Mary University of LondonBarts & The London School of Medicine and DentistryLondonUK
| | - U Menon
- Gynaecological Cancer Research CentreWomen's CancerInstitute for Women's HealthUniversity College LondonLondonUK
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Burnell M, Iyer R, Gentry-Maharaj A, Nordin A, Liston R, Manchanda R, Das N, Gornall R, Beardmore-Gray A, Hillaby K, Leeson S, Linder A, Lopes A, Meechan D, Mould T, Nevin J, Olaitan A, Rufford B, Shanbhag S, Thackeray A, Wood N, Reynolds K, Ryan A, Menon U. Benchmarking of surgical complications in gynaecological oncology: prospective multicentre study. BJOG 2016; 123:2171-2180. [DOI: 10.1111/1471-0528.13994] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 12/27/2015] [Indexed: 11/26/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- M Burnell
- Department of Women's Cancer; Gynaecological Cancer Research Centre; Institute for Women's Health; University College London; London UK
| | - R Iyer
- Department of Women's Cancer; Gynaecological Cancer Research Centre; Institute for Women's Health; University College London; London UK
| | - A Gentry-Maharaj
- Department of Women's Cancer; Gynaecological Cancer Research Centre; Institute for Women's Health; University College London; London UK
| | - A Nordin
- East Kent Gynaecological Oncology Centre; Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother Hospital; Margate UK
| | - R Liston
- Department of Women's Cancer; Gynaecological Cancer Research Centre; Institute for Women's Health; University College London; London UK
| | - R Manchanda
- Department of Women's Cancer; Gynaecological Cancer Research Centre; Institute for Women's Health; University College London; London UK
- Department of Gynaecological Cancer; Barts Cancer Centre; Barts and the London NHS Trust; London UK
| | - N Das
- Department of Gynaecological Cancer; Royal Cornwall Hospitals NHS Trust; Truro UK
| | - R Gornall
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology; Cheltenham General Hospital; Cheltenham UK
| | - A Beardmore-Gray
- Department of Women's Cancer; Gynaecological Cancer Research Centre; Institute for Women's Health; University College London; London UK
| | - K Hillaby
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology; Cheltenham General Hospital; Cheltenham UK
| | - S Leeson
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology; BetsiCadwaladr University Health Board; Bangor UK
| | - A Linder
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology; The Ipswich Hospital NHS Trust; Ipswich Suffolk UK
| | - A Lopes
- Department of Gynaecological Cancer; Royal Cornwall Hospitals NHS Trust; Truro UK
| | | | - T Mould
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology; University College London Hospital NHS Foundation Trust; London UK
| | - J Nevin
- Pan Birmingham Gynaecological Cancer Centre; Birmingham City Hospital; Birmingham UK
| | - A Olaitan
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology; University College London Hospital NHS Foundation Trust; London UK
| | - B Rufford
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology; The Ipswich Hospital NHS Trust; Ipswich Suffolk UK
| | - S Shanbhag
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology; Glasgow Royal Infirmary; Glasgow UK
| | | | - N Wood
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology; Lancashire Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation trust; Royal Preston Hospital; Preston UK
| | - K Reynolds
- Department of Gynaecological Cancer; Barts Cancer Centre; Barts and the London NHS Trust; London UK
| | - A Ryan
- Department of Women's Cancer; Gynaecological Cancer Research Centre; Institute for Women's Health; University College London; London UK
| | - U Menon
- Department of Women's Cancer; Gynaecological Cancer Research Centre; Institute for Women's Health; University College London; London UK
| |
Collapse
|
23
|
Sharma A, Burnell M, Gentry‐Maharaj A, Campbell S, Amso NN, Seif MW, Fletcher G, Brunell C, Turner G, Rangar R, Ryan A, Jacobs I, Menon U. Quality assurance and its impact on ovarian visualization rates in the multicenter United Kingdom Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening (UKCTOCS). Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2016; 47:228-35. [PMID: 26095052 PMCID: PMC4755159 DOI: 10.1002/uog.14929] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/23/2015] [Accepted: 04/28/2015] [Indexed: 05/27/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To describe the quality assurance (QA) processes and their impact on visualization of postmenopausal ovaries in the ultrasound arm of a multicenter screening trial for ovarian cancer. METHODS In the United Kingdom Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening, 50 639 women aged 50-74 years were randomized to the ultrasound arm and underwent annual transvaginal ultrasound (TVS) examinations. QA processes were developed during the course of the trial and included regular monitoring of the visualization rate (VR) of the right ovary. Non-subjective factors identified previously as impacting on VR of the right ovary were included in a generalized estimating equation model for binary outcomes to enable comparison of observed vs adjusted VR between individual sonographers who had undertaken > 1000 scans during the trial and comparison between centers. Observed and adjusted VRs of sonographers and centers were ranked according to the highest VR. Analysis of annual VRs of sonographers and those of the included centers was undertaken. RESULTS Between June 2001 and December 2010, 48 230 of 50 639 women attended one of 13 centers for a total of 270 035 annual TVS scans. One or both ovaries were seen in 228 145 (84.5%) TVS scans. The right ovary was seen on 196 426 (72.7%) of the scans. For the 78 sonographers included in the model, the median difference between observed and adjusted VR was -0.7% (range, -7.9 to 5.9%) and the median change in VR rank after adjustment was 3 (range, 0-18). For the 13 centers, the median difference between observed and adjusted VR was -0.5% (range, -2.2 to 1%), with no change in ranking after adjustment. The median adjusted VR was 73% (interquartile range (IQR), 65-82%) for sonographers and 74.7% (IQR, 67.1-79.0%) for centers. Despite the increasing age of the women being scanned, there was a steady decrease in the number of sonographers with VR < 60% (21.4% in 2002 vs 2.0% in 2010) and an increase in sonographers with VR > 80% (14.3% in 2002 vs 40.8% in 2010). The median VR of the centers increased from 65.5% (range, 55.7-81.0%) in 2001 to 80.3% (range, 74.5-90.9%) in 2010. CONCLUSIONS A robust QA program can improve visualization of postmenopausal ovaries and is an essential component of ultrasound-based ovarian cancer screening trials. While VR should be adjusted for non-subjective factors that impact on ovarian visualization, subjective factors are likely to be the largest contributors to differences in VR.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- A. Sharma
- Gynaecological Cancer Research Center, Department of Women's Cancer, Institute for Women's HealthUniversity College LondonLondonUK
- Department of Gynaecological OncologyUniversity Hospital of WalesCardiffUK
| | - M. Burnell
- Gynaecological Cancer Research Center, Department of Women's Cancer, Institute for Women's HealthUniversity College LondonLondonUK
| | - A. Gentry‐Maharaj
- Gynaecological Cancer Research Center, Department of Women's Cancer, Institute for Women's HealthUniversity College LondonLondonUK
| | | | - N. N. Amso
- Institute for Translation, Innovation, Methodology and Engagement, School of MedicineCardiff UniversityCardiffUK
| | - M. W. Seif
- Academic Unit of Obstetrics and GynaecologySt Mary's HospitalManchesterUK
| | - G. Fletcher
- Gynaecological Cancer Research Center, Department of Women's Cancer, Institute for Women's HealthUniversity College LondonLondonUK
| | - C. Brunell
- Department of RadiologyUniversity College London HospitalsLondonUK
| | - G. Turner
- Department of RadiologyRoyal Derby HospitalDerbyUK
| | - R. Rangar
- Northern Gynaecological Oncology CenterQueen Elizabeth HospitalGatesheadUK
| | - A. Ryan
- Gynaecological Cancer Research Center, Department of Women's Cancer, Institute for Women's HealthUniversity College LondonLondonUK
| | - I. Jacobs
- Gynaecological Cancer Research Center, Department of Women's Cancer, Institute for Women's HealthUniversity College LondonLondonUK
- University of New South WalesSydneyNSWAustralia
| | - U. Menon
- Gynaecological Cancer Research Center, Department of Women's Cancer, Institute for Women's HealthUniversity College LondonLondonUK
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
Key TJ, Appleby PN, Reeves GK, Travis RC, Brinton LA, Helzlsouer KJ, Dorgan JF, Gapstur SM, Gaudet MM, Kaaks R, Riboli E, Rinaldi S, Manjer J, Hallmans G, Giles GG, Le Marchand L, Kolonel LN, Henderson BE, Tworoger SS, Hankinson SE, Zeleniuch-Jacquotte A, Koenig K, Krogh V, Sieri S, Muti P, Ziegler RG, Schairer C, Fuhrman BJ, Barrett-Connor E, Laughlin GA, Grant EJ, Cologne J, Ohishi W, Hida A, Cauley JA, Fourkala EO, Menon U, Rohan TE, Strickler HD, Gunter MJ. Steroid hormone measurements from different types of assays in relation to body mass index and breast cancer risk in postmenopausal women: Reanalysis of eighteen prospective studies. Steroids 2015; 99:49-55. [PMID: 25304359 PMCID: PMC4502556 DOI: 10.1016/j.steroids.2014.09.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 49] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/05/2014] [Accepted: 08/22/2014] [Indexed: 12/20/2022]
Abstract
Epidemiological studies have examined breast cancer risk in relation to sex hormone concentrations measured by different methods: "extraction" immunoassays (with prior purification by organic solvent extraction, with or without column chromatography), "direct" immunoassays (no prior extraction or column chromatography), and more recently with mass spectrometry-based assays. We describe the associations of estradiol, estrone and testosterone with both body mass index and breast cancer risk in postmenopausal women according to assay method, using data from a collaborative pooled analysis of 18 prospective studies. In general, hormone concentrations were highest in studies that used direct assays and lowest in studies that used mass spectrometry-based assays. Estradiol and estrone were strongly positively associated with body mass index, regardless of the assay method; testosterone was positively associated with body mass index for direct assays, but less clearly for extraction assays, and there were few data for mass spectrometry assays. The correlations of estradiol with body mass index, estrone and testosterone were lower for direct assays than for extraction and mass spectrometry assays, suggesting that the estimates from the direct assays were less precise. For breast cancer risk, all three hormones were strongly positively associated with risk regardless of assay method (except for testosterone by mass spectrometry where there were few data), with no statistically significant differences in the trends, but differences may emerge as new data accumulate. Future epidemiological and clinical research studies should continue to use the most accurate assays that are feasible within the design characteristics of each study.
Collapse
|
25
|
Thomas DS, Fourkala EO, Apostolidou S, Gunu R, Ryan A, Jacobs I, Menon U, Alderton W, Gentry-Maharaj A, Timms JF. Evaluation of serum CEA, CYFRA21-1 and CA125 for the early detection of colorectal cancer using longitudinal preclinical samples. Br J Cancer 2015; 113:268-74. [PMID: 26035703 PMCID: PMC4506388 DOI: 10.1038/bjc.2015.202] [Citation(s) in RCA: 76] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Revised: 03/23/2015] [Accepted: 05/06/2015] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
Background: Blood-borne biomarkers for early detection of colorectal cancer (CRC) could markedly increase screening uptake. The aim of this study was to evaluate serum carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), CYFRA21-1 and CA125 for the early detection of CRC in an asymptomatic cohort. Methods: This nested case–control study within UKCTOCS used 381 serial serum samples from 40 women subsequently diagnosed with CRC, 20 women subsequently diagnosed with benign disease and 40 matched non-cancer controls with three to four samples per subject taken annually up to 4 years before diagnosis. CEA, CYFRA21-1 and CA125 were measured using validated assays and performance of markers evaluated for different pre-diagnosis time groups. Results: CEA levels increased towards diagnosis in a third of all cases (half of late-stage cases), whereas longitudinal profiles were static in both benign and non-cancer controls. At a threshold of >5 ng ml−1 the sensitivities for detecting CRC up to 1 and 4 years before clinical presentation were 25% and 13%, respectively, at 95% specificity. At a threshold of >2.5 ng ml−1, sensitivities were 57.5% and 38.4%, respectively, with specificities of 81% and 83.5%. CYFRA21-1 and CA125 had no utility as screening markers and did not enhance CEA performance when used in combination. CEA gave average lead times of 17–24 months for test-positive cases. Conclusions: CEA is elevated in a significant proportion of individuals with preclinical CRC, but would not be useful alone as a screening tool. This work sets a baseline from which to develop panels of biomarkers which combine CEA for improved early detection of CRC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- D S Thomas
- Women's Cancer, Institute for Women's Health, University College London, Gower Street, London WC1E 6BT, UK
| | - E-O Fourkala
- Women's Cancer, Institute for Women's Health, University College London, Gower Street, London WC1E 6BT, UK
| | - S Apostolidou
- Women's Cancer, Institute for Women's Health, University College London, Gower Street, London WC1E 6BT, UK
| | - R Gunu
- Women's Cancer, Institute for Women's Health, University College London, Gower Street, London WC1E 6BT, UK
| | - A Ryan
- Women's Cancer, Institute for Women's Health, University College London, Gower Street, London WC1E 6BT, UK
| | - I Jacobs
- 1] Women's Cancer, Institute for Women's Health, University College London, Gower Street, London WC1E 6BT, UK [2] Faculty of Medical and Human Sciences, 1.018 Core Technology Facility, University of Manchester, Grafton Street Manchester M13 9NT, UK
| | - U Menon
- Women's Cancer, Institute for Women's Health, University College London, Gower Street, London WC1E 6BT, UK
| | - W Alderton
- Abcodia Ltd, The Network Building, 97 Tottenham Court Road, London W1T 4TP, UK
| | - A Gentry-Maharaj
- Women's Cancer, Institute for Women's Health, University College London, Gower Street, London WC1E 6BT, UK
| | - J F Timms
- Women's Cancer, Institute for Women's Health, University College London, Gower Street, London WC1E 6BT, UK
| |
Collapse
|
26
|
Iyer R, Gentry-Maharaj A, Nordin A, Burnell M, Liston R, Manchanda R, Das N, Desai R, Gornall R, Beardmore-Gray A, Nevin J, Hillaby K, Leeson S, Linder A, Lopes A, Meechan D, Mould T, Varkey S, Olaitan A, Rufford B, Ryan A, Shanbhag S, Thackeray A, Wood N, Reynolds K, Menon U. Predictors of complications in gynaecological oncological surgery: a prospective multicentre study (UKGOSOC-UK gynaecological oncology surgical outcomes and complications). Br J Cancer 2015; 112:475-84. [PMID: 25535730 PMCID: PMC4453652 DOI: 10.1038/bjc.2014.630] [Citation(s) in RCA: 33] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/29/2014] [Revised: 11/16/2014] [Accepted: 11/30/2014] [Indexed: 12/14/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND There are limited data on surgical outcomes in gynaecological oncology. We report on predictors of complications in a multicentre prospective study. METHODS Data on surgical procedures and resulting complications were contemporaneously recorded on consented patients in 10 participating UK gynaecological cancer centres. Patients were sent follow-up letters to capture any further complications. Post-operative (Post-op) complications were graded (I-V) in increasing severity using the Clavien-Dindo system. Grade I complications were excluded from the analysis. Univariable and multivariable regression was used to identify predictors of complications using all surgery for intra-operative (Intra-op) and only those with both hospital and patient-reported data for Post-op complications. RESULTS Prospective data were available on 2948 major operations undertaken between April 2010 and February 2012. Median age was 62 years, with 35% obese and 20.4% ASA grade ⩾3. Consultant gynaecological oncologists performed 74.3% of operations. Intra-op complications were reported in 139 of 2948 and Grade II-V Post-op complications in 379 of 1462 surgeries. The predictors of risk were different for Intra-op and Post-op complications. For Intra-op complications, previous abdominal surgery, metabolic/endocrine disorders (excluding diabetes), surgical complexity and final diagnosis were significant in univariable and multivariable regression (P<0.05), with diabetes only in multivariable regression (P=0.006). For Post-op complications, age, comorbidity status, diabetes, surgical approach, duration of surgery, and final diagnosis were significant in both univariable and multivariable regression (P<0.05). CONCLUSIONS This multicentre prospective audit benchmarks the considerable morbidity associated with gynaecological oncology surgery. There are significant patient and surgical factors that influence this risk.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- R Iyer
- Gynaecological Cancer Research Centre, Department of Women's Cancer, Institute for Women's Health, University College London, 1st Floor Maple House, 149 Tottenham Court Road, London W1T 7DN, UK
| | - A Gentry-Maharaj
- Gynaecological Cancer Research Centre, Department of Women's Cancer, Institute for Women's Health, University College London, 1st Floor Maple House, 149 Tottenham Court Road, London W1T 7DN, UK
| | - A Nordin
- National Cancer Intelligence Network Gynaecology Clinical Reference Group, 5th Floor, Wellington House, 133-155 Waterloo Road, London SE1 8UG, UK
| | - M Burnell
- Gynaecological Cancer Research Centre, Department of Women's Cancer, Institute for Women's Health, University College London, 1st Floor Maple House, 149 Tottenham Court Road, London W1T 7DN, UK
| | - R Liston
- Gynaecological Cancer Research Centre, Department of Women's Cancer, Institute for Women's Health, University College London, 1st Floor Maple House, 149 Tottenham Court Road, London W1T 7DN, UK
| | - R Manchanda
- Gynaecological Cancer Research Centre, Department of Women's Cancer, Institute for Women's Health, University College London, 1st Floor Maple House, 149 Tottenham Court Road, London W1T 7DN, UK
| | - N Das
- Department of Gynaecological Cancer, Royal Cornwall Hospitals NHS Trust, Truro, Cornwall TR1 3LJ, UK
| | - R Desai
- Gynaecological Cancer Research Centre, Department of Women's Cancer, Institute for Women's Health, University College London, 1st Floor Maple House, 149 Tottenham Court Road, London W1T 7DN, UK
| | - R Gornall
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology, Cheltenham General Hospital, Sandford Road, Cheltenham, Gloucestershire GL53 7AN, UK
| | - A Beardmore-Gray
- Gynaecological Cancer Research Centre, Department of Women's Cancer, Institute for Women's Health, University College London, 1st Floor Maple House, 149 Tottenham Court Road, London W1T 7DN, UK
| | - J Nevin
- Pan Birmingham Gynaecological Cancer Centre, Birmingham City Hospital, Dudley Road, Birmingham, West Midlands B18 7QH, UK
| | - K Hillaby
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology, Cheltenham General Hospital, Sandford Road, Cheltenham, Gloucestershire GL53 7AN, UK
| | - S Leeson
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board, Penrhosgarnedd, Bangor, Gwynedd, North Wales LL57 2PW, UK
| | - A Linder
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology, The Ipswich Hospital NHS Trust, Heath Road, Ipswich, Suffolk IP4 5PD, UK
| | - A Lopes
- Department of Gynaecological Cancer, Royal Cornwall Hospitals NHS Trust, Truro, Cornwall TR1 3LJ, UK
| | - D Meechan
- Trent Cancer Registry, 5 Old Fulwood Road, Sheffield S10 3TG, UK
| | - T Mould
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology, University College London Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, 2nd Floor North, 250 Euston Road, London NW1 2PG, UK
| | - S Varkey
- Gynaecological Cancer Research Centre, Department of Women's Cancer, Institute for Women's Health, University College London, 1st Floor Maple House, 149 Tottenham Court Road, London W1T 7DN, UK
| | - A Olaitan
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology, University College London Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, 2nd Floor North, 250 Euston Road, London NW1 2PG, UK
| | - B Rufford
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology, The Ipswich Hospital NHS Trust, Heath Road, Ipswich, Suffolk IP4 5PD, UK
| | - A Ryan
- Gynaecological Cancer Research Centre, Department of Women's Cancer, Institute for Women's Health, University College London, 1st Floor Maple House, 149 Tottenham Court Road, London W1T 7DN, UK
| | - S Shanbhag
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology, Glasgow Royal Infirmary, 16 Alexandra Parade, Glasgow G31 2ER, UK
| | - A Thackeray
- Trent Cancer Registry, 5 Old Fulwood Road, Sheffield S10 3TG, UK
| | - N Wood
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology, Lancashire Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Royal Preston Hospital, Sharoe Green Lane, North Fulwood, Preston Lancashire PR2 9HT, UK
| | - K Reynolds
- Department of Gynaecological Cancer, Barts Cancer Centre, Barts and the London NHS Trust, St Bartholomew's Hospital (Barts), West Smithfield, London EC1A 7BE, UK
| | - U Menon
- Gynaecological Cancer Research Centre, Department of Women's Cancer, Institute for Women's Health, University College London, 1st Floor Maple House, 149 Tottenham Court Road, London W1T 7DN, UK
| |
Collapse
|
27
|
Jenkinson C, Elliott V, Menon U, Apostolidou S, Fourkala OE, Gentry-Maharaj A, Pereira SP, Jacobs I, Cox TF, Greenhalf W, Timms JF, Sutton R, Neoptolemos JP, Costello E. Evaluation in pre-diagnosis samples discounts ICAM-1 and TIMP-1 as biomarkers for earlier diagnosis of pancreatic cancer. J Proteomics 2015; 113:400-2. [PMID: 25316052 DOI: 10.1016/j.jprot.2014.10.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 31] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/26/2014] [Accepted: 10/02/2014] [Indexed: 12/17/2022]
Abstract
Circulating intercellular adhesion molecule-1 (ICAM-1) and tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinases-1 (TIMP-1) have been widely proposed as potential diagnostic biomarkers for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). We report on serum protein levels prior to clinical presentation of pancreatic cancer. Serum ICAM-1 and TIMP-1 were measured by ELISA in two case–control sets: 1) samples from patients diagnosed with pancreatic cancer (n = 40), chronic pancreatitis (n = 20), benign jaundice due to gall stones (n = 20) and healthy subjects (n = 20); 2) a preclinical set from the UK Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening biobank of samples collected from 27 post-menopausal women 0–12 months prior to diagnosis of pancreatic cancer and controls matched for date of donation and centre. Levels of ICAM-1 and TIMP-1 were significantly elevated in set 1 in PDAC patients with jaundice compared to PDAC patients without jaundice and both proteins were elevated in patients with jaundice due to gall stones. Neither protein was elevated in samples taken 0–12 months prior to PDAC diagnosis compared to non-cancer control samples. In conclusion, evaluation in pre-diagnosis samples discounts ICAM-1 and TIMP-1 as biomarkers for earlier diagnosis of pancreatic cancer. Failure to account for obstructive jaundice may have contributed to the previous promise of these candidate biomarkers. BIOLOGICAL SIGNIFICANCE Pancreatic cancer is usually diagnosed when at an advanced stage which greatly limits therapeutic options. Biomarkers that could facilitate earlier diagnosis are urgently sought.
Collapse
|
28
|
Köbel M, Madore J, Ramus SJ, Clarke BA, Pharoah PDP, Deen S, Bowtell DD, Odunsi K, Menon U, Morrison C, Lele S, Bshara W, Sucheston L, Beckmann MW, Hein A, Thiel FC, Hartmann A, Wachter DL, Anglesio MS, Høgdall E, Jensen A, Høgdall C, Kalli KR, Fridley BL, Keeney GL, Fogarty ZC, Vierkant RA, Liu S, Cho S, Nelson G, Ghatage P, Gentry-Maharaj A, Gayther SA, Benjamin E, Widschwendter M, Intermaggio MP, Rosen B, Bernardini MQ, Mackay H, Oza A, Shaw P, Jimenez-Linan M, Driver KE, Alsop J, Mack M, Koziak JM, Steed H, Ewanowich C, DeFazio A, Chenevix-Trench G, Fereday S, Gao B, Johnatty SE, George J, Galletta L, Goode EL, Kjær SK, Huntsman DG, Fasching PA, Moysich KB, Brenton JD, Kelemen LE. Evidence for a time-dependent association between FOLR1 expression and survival from ovarian carcinoma: implications for clinical testing. An Ovarian Tumour Tissue Analysis consortium study. Br J Cancer 2014; 111:2297-307. [PMID: 25349970 PMCID: PMC4264456 DOI: 10.1038/bjc.2014.567] [Citation(s) in RCA: 72] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Revised: 09/03/2014] [Accepted: 10/02/2014] [Indexed: 12/15/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Folate receptor 1 (FOLR1) is expressed in the majority of ovarian carcinomas (OvCa), making it an attractive target for therapy. However, clinical trials testing anti-FOLR1 therapies in OvCa show mixed results and require better understanding of the prognostic relevance of FOLR1 expression. We conducted a large study evaluating FOLR1 expression with survival in different histological types of OvCa. METHODS Tissue microarrays composed of tumour samples from 2801 patients in the Ovarian Tumour Tissue Analysis (OTTA) consortium were assessed for FOLR1 expression by centralised immunohistochemistry. We estimated associations for overall (OS) and progression-free (PFS) survival using adjusted Cox regression models. High-grade serous ovarian carcinomas (HGSC) from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) were evaluated independently for association between FOLR1 mRNA upregulation and survival. RESULTS FOLR1 expression ranged from 76% in HGSC to 11% in mucinous carcinomas in OTTA. For HGSC, the association between FOLR1 expression and OS changed significantly during the years following diagnosis in OTTA (Pinteraction=0.01, N=1422) and TCGA (Pinteraction=0.01, N=485). In OTTA, particularly for FIGO stage I/II tumours, patients with FOLR1-positive HGSC showed increased OS during the first 2 years only (hazard ratio=0.44, 95% confidence interval=0.20-0.96) and patients with FOLR1-positive clear cell carcinomas (CCC) showed decreased PFS independent of follow-up time (HR=1.89, 95% CI=1.10-3.25, N=259). In TCGA, FOLR1 mRNA upregulation in HGSC was also associated with increased OS during the first 2 years following diagnosis irrespective of tumour stage (HR: 0.48, 95% CI: 0.25-0.94). CONCLUSIONS FOLR1-positive HGSC tumours were associated with an increased OS in the first 2 years following diagnosis. Patients with FOLR1-negative, poor prognosis HGSC would be unlikely to benefit from anti-FOLR1 therapies. In contrast, a decreased PFS interval was observed for FOLR1-positive CCC. The clinical efficacy of FOLR1-targeted interventions should therefore be evaluated according to histology, stage and time following diagnosis.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M Köbel
- Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of Calgary, Foothills Medical Center, 1403 29 ST NW, Calgary, AB T2N 2T9, Canada
| | - J Madore
- Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of British Columbia, BC Cancer Agency, 600 West 10th Avenue, Vancouver, BC V5E 4E6, Canada
- Melanoma Institute Australia, University of Sydney, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Gloucester House–level 3, Missenden Road, Camperdown, NSW 2050, Australia
| | - S J Ramus
- Department of Preventive Medicine, Keck School of Medicine, USC/Norris Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Southern California, Harlyne Norris Research Tower, 1450 Biggy Street, Office 2517G, Los Angeles, CA 90033, USA
| | - B A Clarke
- Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University of Toronto, 610 Univeristy Avenue, M-700, Toronto, ON M5T 2M9, Canada
| | - P D P Pharoah
- Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Strangeways Research Laboratory, Worts Causeway, Cambridge CB1 8RN, UK
- Department of Oncology, University of Cambridge, Strangeways Research Laboratory, Worts Causeway, Cambridge CB1 8RN, UK
| | - S Deen
- Department of Histopathology, Queen's Medical Centre, Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, Nottingham NG7 2UH, UK
| | - D D Bowtell
- Department of Cancer Genomics and Genetics, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Locked Bag I, A'Beckett Street, East Melbourne, VIC 8006, Australia
- Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, University of Melbourne, 30 Flemington Road, Melbourne, VIC 3010, Australia
- Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, 30 Flemington Road, Melbourne, VIC 3010, Australia
| | - K Odunsi
- Department of Gynecological Oncology, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Elm and Carlton Streets, Buffalo, NY 14263, USA
| | - U Menon
- Gynaecological Cancer Research Centre, Department of Women's Cancer, Institute for Women's Health, University College London, Maple House 1st Floor, 149 Tottenham Court Road, London W1T 7DN, UK
| | - C Morrison
- Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Elm and Carlton Streets, Buffalo, NY 14263, USA
| | - S Lele
- Department of Gynecological Oncology, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Elm and Carlton Streets, Buffalo, NY 14263, USA
- Department of Cancer Prevention and Control, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Elm and Carlton Streets, Buffalo, NY 14263, USA
| | - W Bshara
- Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Elm and Carlton Streets, Buffalo, NY 14263, USA
| | - L Sucheston
- Department of Cancer Prevention and Control, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Elm and Carlton Streets, Buffalo, NY 14263, USA
| | - M W Beckmann
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN, Universitaetsstrasse 21-23, 91054 Erlangen, Germany
| | - A Hein
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN, Universitaetsstrasse 21-23, 91054 Erlangen, Germany
| | - F C Thiel
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN, Universitaetsstrasse 21-23, 91054 Erlangen, Germany
| | - A Hartmann
- Institute of Pathology, University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN, Krankenhausstrasse 8-10, 91054 Erlangen, Germany
| | - D L Wachter
- Institute of Pathology, University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN, Krankenhausstrasse 8-10, 91054 Erlangen, Germany
| | - M S Anglesio
- Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of British Columbia, BC Cancer Agency, 600 West 10th Avenue, Vancouver, BC V5E 4E6, Canada
| | - E Høgdall
- Department of Virus, Lifestyle and Genes, Danish Cancer Society Research Center, Strandboulevarden 49, DK-2100 Copenhagen, Ø, Denmark
- Department of Pathology, Herlev Hospital, University of Copenhagen, Herlev Ringvej 75, DK-2370 Herlev, Denmark
| | - A Jensen
- Department of Virus, Lifestyle and Genes, Danish Cancer Society Research Center, Strandboulevarden 49, DK-2100 Copenhagen, Ø, Denmark
| | - C Høgdall
- The Juliane Marie Center, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Rigshospitalet, University of Copenhagen, Blegdamsvej 9, DK-2100 Copenhagen, Ø, Denmark
| | - K R Kalli
- Department of Medical Oncology, Mayo Clinic, 200 First Street SW, Charlton 6, Rochester, MN 55905, USA
| | - B L Fridley
- Department of Biostatistics, University of Kansas Medical Center, 3901 Rainbow Boulevard, Kansas City, KS 66160, USA
| | - G L Keeney
- Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, Division of Anatomic Pathology, Mayo Clinic, 200 First Street SW, Stabile 13, Rochester, MN 55905, USA
| | - Z C Fogarty
- Department of Health Sciences Research, Division of Biomedical Statistics and Informatics, Mayo Clinic, 200 First Street SW, Charlton 6, Rochester, MN 55905, USA
| | - R A Vierkant
- Department of Health Sciences Research, Division of Biomedical Statistics and Informatics, Mayo Clinic, 200 First Street SW, Charlton 6, Rochester, MN 55905, USA
| | - S Liu
- Anatomic Pathology Research Laboratory, Calgary Laboratory Services, Foothills Medical Center, 1403 29 ST NW, Calgary, AB T2N 2T9, Canada
| | - S Cho
- Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of Calgary, Foothills Medical Center, 1403 29 ST NW, Calgary, AB T2N 2T9, Canada
| | - G Nelson
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Oncology, Tom Baker Cancer Centre, University of Calgary, Foothills Medical Center, 1403 29 ST NW, Calgary, AB T2N 2T9, Canada
| | - P Ghatage
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Oncology, Tom Baker Cancer Centre, University of Calgary, Foothills Medical Center, 1403 29 ST NW, Calgary, AB T2N 2T9, Canada
| | - A Gentry-Maharaj
- Gynaecological Cancer Research Centre, Department of Women's Cancer, Institute for Women's Health, University College London, Maple House 1st Floor, 149 Tottenham Court Road, London W1T 7DN, UK
| | - S A Gayther
- Department of Preventive Medicine, Keck School of Medicine, USC/Norris Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Southern California, Harlyne Norris Research Tower, 1450 Biggy Street, Office 2517G, Los Angeles, CA 90033, USA
| | - E Benjamin
- Department of Pathology, Cancer Institute, University College London, Maple House, 149 Tottenham Court Road, London WC1E 6JJ, UK
| | - M Widschwendter
- Department of Women's Cancer, UCL EGA Institute for Women's Health, University College London, 74 Huntley Street, London WC1E 6AU, UK
| | - M P Intermaggio
- Department of Preventive Medicine, Keck School of Medicine, USC/Norris Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Southern California, Harlyne Norris Research Tower, 1450 Biggy Street, Office 2517G, Los Angeles, CA 90033, USA
| | - B Rosen
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Toronto, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, 610 University Avenue, M-700, Toronto, ON M5T 2M9, Canada
| | - M Q Bernardini
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Toronto, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, 610 University Avenue, M-700, Toronto, ON M5T 2M9, Canada
| | - H Mackay
- Department of Medicine, Division of Medical Oncology, University of Toronto, Princess Margaret Hospital, 610 University Avenue, Toronto, ON M5G 2M9, Canada
| | - A Oza
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Toronto, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, 610 University Avenue, M-700, Toronto, ON M5T 2M9, Canada
| | - P Shaw
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Toronto, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, 610 University Avenue, M-700, Toronto, ON M5T 2M9, Canada
| | - M Jimenez-Linan
- Department of Pathology, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Hills Road, Cambridge CB2 0QQ, UK
- National Institute for Health Research Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre, Cambridge CB2 2QQ, UK
| | - K E Driver
- Department of Oncology, University of Cambridge, Strangeways Research Laboratory, Worts Causeway, Cambridge CB1 8RN, UK
| | - J Alsop
- Department of Oncology, University of Cambridge, Strangeways Research Laboratory, Worts Causeway, Cambridge CB1 8RN, UK
| | - M Mack
- Department of Oncology, University of Cambridge, Strangeways Research Laboratory, Worts Causeway, Cambridge CB1 8RN, UK
| | - J M Koziak
- Department of Population Health Research, Alberta Health Services-Cancer Care, 2210 2nd Street SW, Calgary, AB, T2S 3C3, Canada
| | - H Steed
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Royal Alexandra Hospital, 10240 Kingsway Ave, Edmonton, AB T5H 3V9, Canada
| | - C Ewanowich
- Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, Royal Alexandra Hospital, 10240 Kingsway Ave, Edmonton, AB T5H 3V9, Canada
| | - A DeFazio
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology and Westmead Institute for Cancer Research, University of Sydney at Westmead Millennium Institute, Westmead Hospital, Westmead, NSW 2145, Australia
| | - G Chenevix-Trench
- Genetics and Computational Biology Department, QIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute, 300 Herston Road, Herston, QLD,4006, Australia
| | - S Fereday
- Department of Cancer Genomics and Genetics, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Locked Bag I, A'Beckett Street, East Melbourne, VIC 8006, Australia
| | - B Gao
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology and Westmead Institute for Cancer Research, University of Sydney at Westmead Millennium Institute, Westmead Hospital, Westmead, NSW 2145, Australia
| | - S E Johnatty
- Genetics and Computational Biology Department, QIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute, 300 Herston Road, Herston, QLD,4006, Australia
| | - J George
- Department of Cancer Genomics and Genetics, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Locked Bag I, A'Beckett Street, East Melbourne, VIC 8006, Australia
| | - L Galletta
- Department of Cancer Genomics and Genetics, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Locked Bag I, A'Beckett Street, East Melbourne, VIC 8006, Australia
| | - AOCS Study Group
- Department of Cancer Genomics and Genetics, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Locked Bag I, A'Beckett Street, East Melbourne, VIC 8006, Australia
| | - E L Goode
- Department of Health Sciences Research, Division of Epidemiology, Mayo Clinic, 200 First Street SW Charlton 6, Rochester, MN 55905, USA
| | - S K Kjær
- Department of Virus, Lifestyle and Genes, Danish Cancer Society Research Center, Strandboulevarden 49, DK-2100 Copenhagen, Ø, Denmark
- The Juliane Marie Center, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Rigshospitalet, University of Copenhagen, Blegdamsvej 9, DK-2100 Copenhagen, Ø, Denmark
| | - D G Huntsman
- Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of British Columbia, BC Cancer Agency, 600 West 10th Avenue, Vancouver, BC V5E 4E6, Canada
- Centre For Translational and Applied Genomics, British Columbia Cancer Agency, 600 West 10th Avenue, Vancouver, BC V5Z 4E6, Canada
| | - P A Fasching
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN, Universitaetsstrasse 21-23, 91054 Erlangen, Germany
- Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology and Oncology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA
| | - K B Moysich
- Department of Cancer Prevention and Control, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Elm and Carlton Streets, Buffalo, NY 14263, USA
| | - J D Brenton
- National Institute for Health Research Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre, Cambridge CB2 2QQ, UK
- Department of Oncology, University of Cambridge, Hutchison/MRC Research Centre, Hills Road, Cambridge CB2 0XZ, UK
- Cancer Research UK Cambridge Institute, University of Cambridge, Li Ka Shing Centre, Robinson Way, Cambridge CB2 0RE, UK
- Cambridge Experimental Cancer Medicine Centre, Cambridge CB2 0RE, UK
| | - L E Kelemen
- Department of Public Health Sciences, Medical University of South Carolina and Hollings Cancer Center, 135 Cannon Street, Charleston, SC 29425, USA
| |
Collapse
|
29
|
Köbel M, Madore J, Ramus SJ, Clarke BA, Pharoah PDP, Deen S, Bowtell DD, Odunsi K, Menon U, Morrison C, Lele S, Bshara W, Sucheston L, Beckmann MW, Hein A, Thiel FC, Hartmann A, Wachter DL, Anglesio MS, Høgdall E, Jensen A, Høgdall C, Kalli KR, Fridley BL, Keeney GL, Fogarty ZC, Vierkant RA, Liu S, Cho S, Nelson G, Ghatage P, Gentry-Maharaj A, Gayther SA, Benjamin E, Widschwendter M, Intermaggio MP, Rosen B, Bernardini MQ, Mackay H, Oza A, Shaw P, Jimenez-Linan M, Driver KE, Alsop J, Mack M, Koziak JM, Steed H, Ewanowich C, DeFazio A, Chenevix-Trench G, Fereday S, Gao B, Johnatty SE, George J, Galletta L, Goode EL, Kjær SK, Huntsman DG, Fasching PA, Moysich KB, Brenton JD, Kelemen LE. Evidence for a time-dependent association between FOLR1 expression and survival from ovarian carcinoma: implications for clinical testing. An Ovarian Tumour Tissue Analysis consortium study. Br J Cancer 2014. [PMID: 25349970 DOI: 10.1038/bjc.2014.567] [] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/09/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Folate receptor 1 (FOLR1) is expressed in the majority of ovarian carcinomas (OvCa), making it an attractive target for therapy. However, clinical trials testing anti-FOLR1 therapies in OvCa show mixed results and require better understanding of the prognostic relevance of FOLR1 expression. We conducted a large study evaluating FOLR1 expression with survival in different histological types of OvCa. METHODS Tissue microarrays composed of tumour samples from 2801 patients in the Ovarian Tumour Tissue Analysis (OTTA) consortium were assessed for FOLR1 expression by centralised immunohistochemistry. We estimated associations for overall (OS) and progression-free (PFS) survival using adjusted Cox regression models. High-grade serous ovarian carcinomas (HGSC) from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) were evaluated independently for association between FOLR1 mRNA upregulation and survival. RESULTS FOLR1 expression ranged from 76% in HGSC to 11% in mucinous carcinomas in OTTA. For HGSC, the association between FOLR1 expression and OS changed significantly during the years following diagnosis in OTTA (Pinteraction=0.01, N=1422) and TCGA (Pinteraction=0.01, N=485). In OTTA, particularly for FIGO stage I/II tumours, patients with FOLR1-positive HGSC showed increased OS during the first 2 years only (hazard ratio=0.44, 95% confidence interval=0.20-0.96) and patients with FOLR1-positive clear cell carcinomas (CCC) showed decreased PFS independent of follow-up time (HR=1.89, 95% CI=1.10-3.25, N=259). In TCGA, FOLR1 mRNA upregulation in HGSC was also associated with increased OS during the first 2 years following diagnosis irrespective of tumour stage (HR: 0.48, 95% CI: 0.25-0.94). CONCLUSIONS FOLR1-positive HGSC tumours were associated with an increased OS in the first 2 years following diagnosis. Patients with FOLR1-negative, poor prognosis HGSC would be unlikely to benefit from anti-FOLR1 therapies. In contrast, a decreased PFS interval was observed for FOLR1-positive CCC. The clinical efficacy of FOLR1-targeted interventions should therefore be evaluated according to histology, stage and time following diagnosis.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M Köbel
- Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of Calgary, Foothills Medical Center, 1403 29 ST NW, Calgary, AB T2N 2T9, Canada
| | - J Madore
- 1] Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of British Columbia, BC Cancer Agency, 600 West 10th Avenue, Vancouver, BC V5E 4E6, Canada [2] Melanoma Institute Australia, University of Sydney, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Gloucester House-level 3, Missenden Road, Camperdown, NSW 2050, Australia
| | - S J Ramus
- Department of Preventive Medicine, Keck School of Medicine, USC/Norris Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Southern California, Harlyne Norris Research Tower, 1450 Biggy Street, Office 2517G, Los Angeles, CA 90033, USA
| | - B A Clarke
- Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University of Toronto, 610 Univeristy Avenue, M-700, Toronto, ON M5T 2M9, Canada
| | - P D P Pharoah
- 1] Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Strangeways Research Laboratory, Worts Causeway, Cambridge CB1 8RN, UK [2] Department of Oncology, University of Cambridge, Strangeways Research Laboratory, Worts Causeway, Cambridge CB1 8RN, UK
| | - S Deen
- Department of Histopathology, Queen's Medical Centre, Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, Nottingham NG7 2UH, UK
| | - D D Bowtell
- 1] Department of Cancer Genomics and Genetics, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Locked Bag I, A'Beckett Street, East Melbourne, VIC 8006, Australia [2] Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, University of Melbourne, 30 Flemington Road, Melbourne, VIC 3010, Australia [3] Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, 30 Flemington Road, Melbourne, VIC 3010, Australia
| | - K Odunsi
- Department of Gynecological Oncology, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Elm and Carlton Streets, Buffalo, NY 14263, USA
| | - U Menon
- Gynaecological Cancer Research Centre, Department of Women's Cancer, Institute for Women's Health, University College London, Maple House 1st Floor, 149 Tottenham Court Road, London W1T 7DN, UK
| | - C Morrison
- Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Elm and Carlton Streets, Buffalo, NY 14263, USA
| | - S Lele
- 1] Department of Gynecological Oncology, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Elm and Carlton Streets, Buffalo, NY 14263, USA [2] Department of Cancer Prevention and Control, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Elm and Carlton Streets, Buffalo, NY 14263, USA
| | - W Bshara
- Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Elm and Carlton Streets, Buffalo, NY 14263, USA
| | - L Sucheston
- Department of Cancer Prevention and Control, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Elm and Carlton Streets, Buffalo, NY 14263, USA
| | - M W Beckmann
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN, Universitaetsstrasse 21-23, 91054 Erlangen, Germany
| | - A Hein
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN, Universitaetsstrasse 21-23, 91054 Erlangen, Germany
| | - F C Thiel
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN, Universitaetsstrasse 21-23, 91054 Erlangen, Germany
| | - A Hartmann
- Institute of Pathology, University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN, Krankenhausstrasse 8-10, 91054 Erlangen, Germany
| | - D L Wachter
- Institute of Pathology, University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN, Krankenhausstrasse 8-10, 91054 Erlangen, Germany
| | - M S Anglesio
- Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of British Columbia, BC Cancer Agency, 600 West 10th Avenue, Vancouver, BC V5E 4E6, Canada
| | - E Høgdall
- 1] Department of Virus, Lifestyle and Genes, Danish Cancer Society Research Center, Strandboulevarden 49, DK-2100 Copenhagen, Ø, Denmark [2] Department of Pathology, Herlev Hospital, University of Copenhagen, Herlev Ringvej 75, DK-2370 Herlev, Denmark
| | - A Jensen
- Department of Virus, Lifestyle and Genes, Danish Cancer Society Research Center, Strandboulevarden 49, DK-2100 Copenhagen, Ø, Denmark
| | - C Høgdall
- The Juliane Marie Center, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Rigshospitalet, University of Copenhagen, Blegdamsvej 9, DK-2100 Copenhagen, Ø, Denmark
| | - K R Kalli
- Department of Medical Oncology, Mayo Clinic, 200 First Street SW, Charlton 6, Rochester, MN 55905, USA
| | - B L Fridley
- Department of Biostatistics, University of Kansas Medical Center, 3901 Rainbow Boulevard, Kansas City, KS 66160, USA
| | - G L Keeney
- Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, Division of Anatomic Pathology, Mayo Clinic, 200 First Street SW, Stabile 13, Rochester, MN 55905, USA
| | - Z C Fogarty
- Department of Health Sciences Research, Division of Biomedical Statistics and Informatics, Mayo Clinic, 200 First Street SW, Charlton 6, Rochester, MN 55905, USA
| | - R A Vierkant
- Department of Health Sciences Research, Division of Biomedical Statistics and Informatics, Mayo Clinic, 200 First Street SW, Charlton 6, Rochester, MN 55905, USA
| | - S Liu
- Anatomic Pathology Research Laboratory, Calgary Laboratory Services, Foothills Medical Center, 1403 29 ST NW, Calgary, AB T2N 2T9, Canada
| | - S Cho
- Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of Calgary, Foothills Medical Center, 1403 29 ST NW, Calgary, AB T2N 2T9, Canada
| | - G Nelson
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Oncology, Tom Baker Cancer Centre, University of Calgary, Foothills Medical Center, 1403 29 ST NW, Calgary, AB T2N 2T9, Canada
| | - P Ghatage
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Oncology, Tom Baker Cancer Centre, University of Calgary, Foothills Medical Center, 1403 29 ST NW, Calgary, AB T2N 2T9, Canada
| | - A Gentry-Maharaj
- Gynaecological Cancer Research Centre, Department of Women's Cancer, Institute for Women's Health, University College London, Maple House 1st Floor, 149 Tottenham Court Road, London W1T 7DN, UK
| | - S A Gayther
- Department of Preventive Medicine, Keck School of Medicine, USC/Norris Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Southern California, Harlyne Norris Research Tower, 1450 Biggy Street, Office 2517G, Los Angeles, CA 90033, USA
| | - E Benjamin
- Department of Pathology, Cancer Institute, University College London, Maple House, 149 Tottenham Court Road, London WC1E 6JJ, UK
| | - M Widschwendter
- Department of Women's Cancer, UCL EGA Institute for Women's Health, University College London, 74 Huntley Street, London WC1E 6AU, UK
| | - M P Intermaggio
- Department of Preventive Medicine, Keck School of Medicine, USC/Norris Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Southern California, Harlyne Norris Research Tower, 1450 Biggy Street, Office 2517G, Los Angeles, CA 90033, USA
| | - B Rosen
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Toronto, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, 610 University Avenue, M-700, Toronto, ON M5T 2M9, Canada
| | - M Q Bernardini
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Toronto, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, 610 University Avenue, M-700, Toronto, ON M5T 2M9, Canada
| | - H Mackay
- Department of Medicine, Division of Medical Oncology, University of Toronto, Princess Margaret Hospital, 610 University Avenue, Toronto, ON M5G 2M9, Canada
| | - A Oza
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Toronto, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, 610 University Avenue, M-700, Toronto, ON M5T 2M9, Canada
| | - P Shaw
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Toronto, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, 610 University Avenue, M-700, Toronto, ON M5T 2M9, Canada
| | - M Jimenez-Linan
- 1] Department of Pathology, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Hills Road, Cambridge CB2 0QQ, UK [2] National Institute for Health Research Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre, Cambridge CB2 2QQ, UK
| | - K E Driver
- Department of Oncology, University of Cambridge, Strangeways Research Laboratory, Worts Causeway, Cambridge CB1 8RN, UK
| | - J Alsop
- Department of Oncology, University of Cambridge, Strangeways Research Laboratory, Worts Causeway, Cambridge CB1 8RN, UK
| | - M Mack
- Department of Oncology, University of Cambridge, Strangeways Research Laboratory, Worts Causeway, Cambridge CB1 8RN, UK
| | - J M Koziak
- Department of Population Health Research, Alberta Health Services-Cancer Care, 2210 2nd Street SW, Calgary, AB, T2S 3C3, Canada
| | - H Steed
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Royal Alexandra Hospital, 10240 Kingsway Ave, Edmonton, AB T5H 3V9, Canada
| | - C Ewanowich
- Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, Royal Alexandra Hospital, 10240 Kingsway Ave, Edmonton, AB T5H 3V9, Canada
| | - A DeFazio
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology and Westmead Institute for Cancer Research, University of Sydney at Westmead Millennium Institute, Westmead Hospital, Westmead, NSW 2145, Australia
| | - G Chenevix-Trench
- Genetics and Computational Biology Department, QIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute, 300 Herston Road, Herston, QLD,4006, Australia
| | - S Fereday
- Department of Cancer Genomics and Genetics, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Locked Bag I, A'Beckett Street, East Melbourne, VIC 8006, Australia
| | - B Gao
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology and Westmead Institute for Cancer Research, University of Sydney at Westmead Millennium Institute, Westmead Hospital, Westmead, NSW 2145, Australia
| | - S E Johnatty
- Genetics and Computational Biology Department, QIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute, 300 Herston Road, Herston, QLD,4006, Australia
| | - J George
- Department of Cancer Genomics and Genetics, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Locked Bag I, A'Beckett Street, East Melbourne, VIC 8006, Australia
| | - L Galletta
- Department of Cancer Genomics and Genetics, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Locked Bag I, A'Beckett Street, East Melbourne, VIC 8006, Australia
| | | | - E L Goode
- Department of Health Sciences Research, Division of Epidemiology, Mayo Clinic, 200 First Street SW Charlton 6, Rochester, MN 55905, USA
| | - S K Kjær
- 1] Department of Virus, Lifestyle and Genes, Danish Cancer Society Research Center, Strandboulevarden 49, DK-2100 Copenhagen, Ø, Denmark [2] The Juliane Marie Center, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Rigshospitalet, University of Copenhagen, Blegdamsvej 9, DK-2100 Copenhagen, Ø, Denmark
| | - D G Huntsman
- 1] Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of British Columbia, BC Cancer Agency, 600 West 10th Avenue, Vancouver, BC V5E 4E6, Canada [2] Centre For Translational and Applied Genomics, British Columbia Cancer Agency, 600 West 10th Avenue, Vancouver, BC V5Z 4E6, Canada
| | - P A Fasching
- 1] Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN, Universitaetsstrasse 21-23, 91054 Erlangen, Germany [2] Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology and Oncology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA
| | - K B Moysich
- Department of Cancer Prevention and Control, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Elm and Carlton Streets, Buffalo, NY 14263, USA
| | - J D Brenton
- 1] National Institute for Health Research Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre, Cambridge CB2 2QQ, UK [2] Department of Oncology, University of Cambridge, Hutchison/MRC Research Centre, Hills Road, Cambridge CB2 0XZ, UK [3] Cancer Research UK Cambridge Institute, University of Cambridge, Li Ka Shing Centre, Robinson Way, Cambridge CB2 0RE, UK [4] Cambridge Experimental Cancer Medicine Centre, Cambridge CB2 0RE, UK
| | - L E Kelemen
- Department of Public Health Sciences, Medical University of South Carolina and Hollings Cancer Center, 135 Cannon Street, Charleston, SC 29425, USA
| |
Collapse
|
30
|
Bailey K, Pikhart H, Ryan A, Apostolidou S, Fourkala E, Burnell M, Gentry-Maharaj A, Kalsi J, Parmar M, Jacobs I, Menon U. Socioeconomic inequalities in mortality in national sample of English women: the UKCTOCS Study. Eur J Public Health 2014. [DOI: 10.1093/eurpub/cku151.068] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/14/2022] Open
|
31
|
Barrett J, Jenkins V, Farewell V, Menon U, Jacobs I, Kilkerr J, Ryan A, Langridge C, Fallowfield L. Psychological morbidity associated with ovarian cancer screening: results from more than 23 000 women in the randomised trial of ovarian cancer screening (UKCTOCS). BJOG 2014; 121:1071-9. [DOI: 10.1111/1471-0528.12870] [Citation(s) in RCA: 34] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 04/07/2014] [Indexed: 11/28/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- J Barrett
- Cardiovascular Epidemiology Unit; Department of Public Health & Primary Care; University of Cambridge; Cambridge UK
| | - V Jenkins
- Sussex Health Outcomes Research & Education in Cancer (SHORE-C); University of Sussex; Sussex UK
| | - V Farewell
- Medical Research Council Biostatistics Unit; Institute of Public Health; Cambridge UK
| | - U Menon
- EGA Institute for Women's Health; University College London; London UK
| | - I Jacobs
- Faculty of Medical & Human Sciences; University of Manchester; Manchester UK
| | - J Kilkerr
- Sussex Health Outcomes Research & Education in Cancer (SHORE-C); University of Sussex; Sussex UK
| | - A Ryan
- EGA Institute for Women's Health; University College London; London UK
| | - C Langridge
- Sussex Health Outcomes Research & Education in Cancer (SHORE-C); University of Sussex; Sussex UK
| | - L Fallowfield
- Sussex Health Outcomes Research & Education in Cancer (SHORE-C); University of Sussex; Sussex UK
| | | |
Collapse
|
32
|
Sharma A, Gentry-Maharaj A, Burnell M, Ryan A, Amso NN, Campbell S, Jacobs I, Menon U. Reply: To PMID 23456790. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2014; 43:600-601. [PMID: 24789307 DOI: 10.1002/uog.13354] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/03/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- A Sharma
- Gynaecological Cancer Research Centre, Women's Cancer, UCL EGA Institute for Women's Health, Maple House 1st Floor, 149 Tottenham Court Road, London, W1T 7DN, UK
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
33
|
|
34
|
Sharma A, Burnell M, Gentry-Maharaj A, Campbell S, Amso NN, Seif MW, Fletcher G, Brunel C, Turner G, Rangar R, Ryan A, Jacobs I, Menon U. Factors affecting visualization of postmenopausal ovaries: descriptive study from the multicenter United Kingdom Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening (UKCTOCS). Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2013; 42:472-477. [PMID: 23456790 DOI: 10.1002/uog.12447] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/29/2012] [Revised: 01/28/2013] [Accepted: 02/12/2013] [Indexed: 06/01/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Transvaginal sonography (TVS) is core to any ovarian cancer screening strategy. General-population screening involves older postmenopausal women in whom ovarian visualization is difficult because of decreasing ovarian size and lack of follicular activity. We report on factors affecting the visualization of postmenopausal ovaries in the multicenter United Kingdom Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening (UKCTOCS). METHODS The UKCTOCS is a randomized controlled trial of 202 638 postmenopausal women with 50 639 women in the ultrasound scan arm. TVS is the primary screening modality in the ultrasound scan arm. Age, education, ethnicity, body mass index (BMI), previous pelvic surgery, lifestyle and reproductive factors, and a personal/family history of cancer were assessed for their effects on ovarian visualization at the initial TVS. RESULTS Between 11 June 2001 and 18 August 2007, 43 867 women underwent TVS. The median age and BMI of the women were 60.6 (interquartile range (IQR), 9.9) years and 25.7 (IQR, 5.8), respectively. The right ovary was visualized in 29 297 (66.8%) and the left ovary was visualized in 28 726 (65.5%). Visualization of ovaries decreased with previous hysterectomy (odds ratio (OR) = 0.534; 95% CI, 0.504-0.567), previous tubal ligation (OR = 0.895; 95% CI, 0.852-0.940), increasing age (OR = 0.953; 95% CI, 0.950-0.956), unilateral oophorectomy (OR = 0.224; 95% CI, 0.186-0.269) and being overweight (OR = 0.918; 95% CI, 0.876-0.962) or obese (OR = 0.715; 95% CI, 0.677-0.755). Increased visualization was observed with a history of infertility (OR = 1.134; 95% CI, 1.005-1.279) and increasing age (in years) at menopause (OR = 1.005; 95% CI, 1.001-1.009). CONCLUSIONS Several factors affect the visualization of postmenopausal ovaries. Their impact needs to be taken into consideration when developing quality assurance for ovarian ultrasound scanning or comparing study results as their prevalence may differ between populations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- A Sharma
- Women's Cancer, UCL EGA Institute for Women's Health, London, UK
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
35
|
Low EL, Simon AE, Waller J, Wardle J, Menon U. Experience of symptoms indicative of gynaecological cancers in UK women. Br J Cancer 2013; 109:882-7. [PMID: 23880819 PMCID: PMC3749578 DOI: 10.1038/bjc.2013.412] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/21/2013] [Revised: 06/27/2013] [Accepted: 07/01/2013] [Indexed: 12/31/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Gynaecological cancers account for ∼12% of female cancer incidence in the United Kingdom. Encouraging prompt help-seeking for potential symptoms could help improve outcomes. However, before developing help-seeking interventions, it is important to estimate the number of women with symptoms potentially indicative of a gynaecological cancer to help estimate the impact of such interventions on primary care. METHODS As part of a face-to-face, population-based survey, women aged ≥16 (n=911) were shown a list of symptoms potentially indicative of a gynaecological cancer and were asked to indicate any experienced in the last 3 months. Those who reported symptoms were asked about their responses to one randomly selected index symptom. RESULTS Just under half (44%) of the respondents reported a symptom, with 35% reporting a frequent and/or severe symptom. Younger (P<0.001), lower socioeconomic status (P<0.01) and non-White women (P<0.05) were significantly more likely to report symptoms. Few (14%) respondents were both older (≥45 years) and had a frequent and/or severe symptom. Of these women, 38% had seen a GP. CONCLUSION Symptoms that potentially indicate a gynaecological cancer, even if limited to those that are frequent and/or severe, appear to be common. Consequently, encouraging prompt help-seeking may increase the burden on primary care. However, targeting those at increased risk (older women with frequent or severe symptoms) should avoid unmanageable increases in primary care consultations for gynaecological conditions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- E L Low
- Health Behaviour Research Centre, Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, University College London, Gower Street, London WC1E 6BT, UK
| | - A E Simon
- Health Services Research & Management, A224, College Building, City University London, Northampton Square, London EC1V 0HB, UK
| | - J Waller
- Health Behaviour Research Centre, Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, University College London, Gower Street, London WC1E 6BT, UK
| | - J Wardle
- Health Behaviour Research Centre, Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, University College London, Gower Street, London WC1E 6BT, UK
| | - U Menon
- Gynaecological Cancer Research Centre, Institute of Women's Health, University College London, Gower Street, London WC1E 6BT, UK
| |
Collapse
|
36
|
Iyer R, Gentry-Maharaj A, Nordin A, Liston R, Burnell M, Das N, Desai R, Gornall R, Beardmore-Gray A, Hillaby K, Leeson S, Linder A, Lopes A, Meechan D, Mould T, Nevin J, Olaitan A, Rufford B, Ryan A, Shanbhag S, Thackeray A, Wood N, Reynolds K, Menon U. Patient-reporting improves estimates of postoperative complication rates: a prospective cohort study in gynaecological oncology. Br J Cancer 2013; 109:623-32. [PMID: 23846170 PMCID: PMC3738134 DOI: 10.1038/bjc.2013.366] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/30/2013] [Revised: 06/16/2013] [Accepted: 06/22/2013] [Indexed: 12/04/2022] Open
Abstract
Background: Most studies use hospital data to calculate postoperative complication rates (PCRs). We report on improving PCR estimates through use of patient-reporting. Methods: A prospective cohort study of major surgery performed at 10 UK gynaecological cancer centres was undertaken. Hospitals entered the data contemporaneously into an online database. Patients were sent follow-up letters to capture postoperative complications. Grade II–V (Clavien–Dindo classification) patient-reported postoperative complications were verified from hospital records. Postoperative complication rate was defined as the proportion of surgeries with a Grade II–V postoperative complication. Results: Patient replies were received for 1462 (68%) of 2152 surgeries undertaken between April 2010 and February 2012. Overall, 452 Grade II–V (402 II, 50 III–V) complications were reported in 379 of the 1462 surgeries. This included 172 surgeries with 200 hospital-reported complications and 231 with 280 patient-reported complications. All (100% concordance) 36 Grade III–V and 158 of 280 (56.4% concordance) Grade II patient-reported complications were verified on hospital case-note review. The PCR using hospital-reported data was 11.8% (172 out of 1462; 95% CI 11–14), patient-reported was 15.8% (231 out of 1462; 95% CI 14–17.8), hospital and verified patient-reported was 19.4% (283 out of 1462; 95% CI 17.4–21.4) and all data were 25.9% (379 out of 1462; 95% CI 24–28). After excluding Grade II complications, the hospital and patient verified Grade III–V PCR was 3.3% (48 out of 1462; 95% CI 2.5–4.3). Conclusion: This is the first prospective study of postoperative complications we are aware of in gynaecological oncology to include the patient-reported data. Patient-reporting is invaluable for obtaining complete information on postoperative complications. Primary care case-note review is likely to improve verification rates of patient-reported Grade II complications.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- R Iyer
- University College, London, UK
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
37
|
Gentry-Maharaj A, Sharma A, Burnell M, Ryan A, Amso NN, Seif MW, Turner G, Brunell C, Fletcher G, Rangar R, Fallowfield L, Campbell S, Jacobs I, Menon U. Acceptance of transvaginal sonography by postmenopausal women participating in the United Kingdom Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2013; 41:73-79. [PMID: 22791597 DOI: 10.1002/uog.12262] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 06/21/2012] [Indexed: 06/01/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To assess pain and overall experience of transvaginal sonography (TVS) in asymptomatic postmenopausal women. METHODS In the United Kingdom Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening (UKCTOCS), 50 639 postmenopausal women were randomized to undergo annual TVS at 13 trial centers in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. Together with the appointment letter for their annual scan, a random sample of 150 women per center was sent a detailed 48-item postal questionnaire regarding the screening experience. It included a specific question about pain using a score of 0-5, where 5 was severe pain and 3 was discomfort. To assess factors that might affect a woman's reported pain experience, the pain score was regressed on age, hormone replacement therapy use, body mass index, a history of hysterectomy, prolonged scanning time, ovarian visualization, scan result, sonographer's visualization rates and opinion of the women regarding the sonographer who performed the scan. RESULTS Between 7 July and 9 September 2009, 1950 randomly chosen women (150 per regional center) were sent the questionnaire. Of the 800 (41.0%) who returned the questionnaire, 651 could be linked to their TVS appointment. One-hundred and fifty-two (23.3%) women reported pain/discomfort (score 3-5) during TVS and 473 (72.7%) reported no discomfort (score 0-2). Only 23 (3.5%) women reported experiencing moderate/severe pain. Increasing discomfort/pain was independently associated with a history of hysterectomy and participant's reporting of prolonged scan time. Women who experienced pain on TVS were less compliant (odds ratio = 0.87) with the following year's scan compared with those who did not experience pain. CONCLUSIONS The majority of postmenopausal women found TVS acceptable. Pain influenced compliance and correlated with women's perception of increased scanning time and previous hysterectomy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- A Gentry-Maharaj
- Gynaecological Cancer Research Centre, Women's Cancer, UCL EGA Institute for Women's Health, London, UK.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
38
|
Pedersen JW, Gentry-Maharaj A, Fourkala EO, Dawnay A, Burnell M, Zaikin A, Pedersen AE, Jacobs I, Menon U, Wandall HH. Early detection of cancer in the general population: a blinded case-control study of p53 autoantibodies in colorectal cancer. Br J Cancer 2012; 108:107-14. [PMID: 23169294 PMCID: PMC3553520 DOI: 10.1038/bjc.2012.517] [Citation(s) in RCA: 63] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/13/2022] Open
Abstract
Background: Recent reports from cancer screening trials in high-risk populations suggest that autoantibodies can be detected before clinical diagnosis. However, there is minimal data on the role of autoantibody signatures in cancer screening in the general population. Methods: Informative p53 peptides were identified in sera from patients with colorectal cancer using an autoantibody microarray with 15-mer overlapping peptides covering the complete p53 sequence. The selected peptides were evaluated in a blinded case–control study using stored serum from the multimodal arm of the United Kingdom Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening where women gave annual blood samples. Cases were postmenopausal women who developed colorectal cancer following recruitment, with 2 or more serum samples preceding diagnosis. Controls were age-matched women with no history of cancer. Results: The 50 640 women randomised to the multimodal group were followed up for a median of 6.8 (inter-quartile range 5.9–8.4) years. Colorectal cancer notification was received in 101 women with serial samples of whom 97 (297 samples) had given consent for secondary studies. They were matched 1 : 1 with 97 controls (296 serial samples). The four most informative peptides identified 25.8% of colorectal cancer patients with a specificity of 95%. The median lead time was 1.4 (range 0.12–3.8) years before clinical diagnosis. Conclusion: Our findings suggest that in the general population, autoantibody signatures are detectable during preclinical disease and may be of value in cancer screening. In colorectal cancer screening in particular, where the current need is to improve compliance, it suggests that p53 autoantibodies may contribute towards risk stratification.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- J W Pedersen
- Copenhagen Center for Glycomics, Department of Cellular and Molecular Medicine, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen N, DK-2200, Denmark
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
39
|
Sharma A, Apostolidou S, Burnell M, Campbell S, Habib M, Gentry-Maharaj A, Amso N, Seif MW, Fletcher G, Singh N, Benjamin E, Brunell C, Turner G, Rangar R, Godfrey K, Oram D, Herod J, Williamson K, Jenkins H, Mould T, Woolas R, Murdoch J, Dobbs S, Leeson S, Cruickshank D, Fourkala EO, Ryan A, Parmar M, Jacobs I, Menon U. Risk of epithelial ovarian cancer in asymptomatic women with ultrasound-detected ovarian masses: a prospective cohort study within the UK collaborative trial of ovarian cancer screening (UKCTOCS). Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2012; 40:338-344. [PMID: 22911637 DOI: 10.1002/uog.12270] [Citation(s) in RCA: 51] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/01/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To estimate the risk of primary epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) and slow growing borderline or Type I and aggressive Type II EOC in postmenopausal women with adnexal abnormalities on ultrasound. METHODS This was a prospective cohort study in the ultrasound group of the UK Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening of postmenopausal women with ultrasound-detected abnormal adnexal (unilocular, multilocular, unilocular solid and multilocular solid, solid) morphology on their first scan. Women were followed up through the national cancer registries and by postal questionnaires. Absolute risks of EOC and borderline, Type I and Type II EOC within 3 years of initial scan were calculated. RESULTS Of 48 053 women who underwent ultrasound examination and had complete scan data, 4367 (9.1% (95% CI, 8.8-9.3%)) had abnormal adnexal morphology. Median follow-up was 7.09 (25(th) -75(th) centiles, 6.03-7.92) years. Forty-seven (32 borderline or Type I, 15 Type II) were diagnosed with EOC. The overall absolute risk of EOC associated with abnormal adnexal morphology was 1.08% (95% CI, 0.79-1.43%); for borderline and Type I it was 0.73% (95% CI, 0.5-1.03%); and for Type II it was 0.34% (95% CI, 0.33-0.79%). In the subgroup (n = 741) with solid elements (unilocular solid, multilocular solid and solid) overall absolute risk was 4.45% (95% CI, 3.08-6.20%), for borderline and Type I it was 3.1% (95% CI, 1.9-4.6%) and for Type II it was 1.3% (95% CI, 0.6-2.4%). 11 982 women had both ovaries visualized and normal annual scans throughout the 3-year follow-up period. In this group, no borderline or Type I and eight Type II cancers were diagnosed. CONCLUSION Asymptomatic postmenopausal women with ultrasound-detected adnexal abnormalities with solid elements have a 1 in 22 risk for EOC. Despite the higher prevalence of Type II EOC, the risk of borderline or Type I cancer in women with ultrasound abnormalities seems to be higher than does the risk of Type II cancer. This has important immediate implications for patients with incidental adnexal findings as well as for any future ultrasound-based screening.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- A Sharma
- Gynaecological Cancer Research Centre, UCL EGA Institute for Women's Health, London, UK
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
40
|
Fourkala EO, Gentry-Maharaj A, Burnell M, Ryan A, Manchanda R, Dawnay A, Jacobs I, Widschwendter M, Menon U. Histological confirmation of breast cancer registration and self-reporting in England and Wales: a cohort study within the UK Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening. Br J Cancer 2012; 106:1910-6. [PMID: 22596242 PMCID: PMC3388556 DOI: 10.1038/bjc.2012.155] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/05/2012] [Revised: 03/20/2012] [Accepted: 03/22/2012] [Indexed: 11/08/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND In research studies, accurate information of cancer diagnosis is crucial. In women with breast cancer (BC), we compare cancer registration (CR) in England/Wales and self-reporting with independent confirmation. METHODS In the UK Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening, notification of BC diagnosed between randomisation and 31 December 2009 was obtained through (1) CR (17 October 2011) and (2) self-reporting using postal-questionnaire. Breast cancer was confirmed using a detailed questionnaire (BC questionnaire BCQ) completed by the treating clinician (gold standard). Apparent sensitivity and positive-predictive value of CR/self-reporting vs BCQ were calculated. RESULTS Of 1065 women with possible BC notification, diagnosis was confirmed in 932 (87.5%). A total of 3.1% (28 out of 918) of BC CR and 12.4% (128 out of 1032) of women with self-reported BC only had in-situ carcinoma on BCQ. Another 4.6% (43 out of 932) of BCQ-confirmed cancer did not have a BC registration, and 3.6% (34 out of 932) did not self-report BC. Apparent sensitivity of CR and self-reporting vs BCQ were 95.4 and 96.4%, respectively. Positive-predictive value of self-reporting (87.1%) was significantly lower than that of CR (96.8%). Women aged<65 were more likely to over report in-situ carcinoma as BC. Overall, 73 (6.8%) women would have been misclassified/missed if CR, and 167 (15.6%) if self-reporting data alone was used. CONCLUSION This study confirms the reliability of BC registration in England/Wales and highlights the fact that 1 in 10 women self-reporting BC might only have in-situ breast carcinoma.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- E O Fourkala
- Gynaecological Cancer Research Centre, UCL EGA Institute for Women’s Health, University College London, 149 Tottenham Road, London W1T 7DN, UK
| | - A Gentry-Maharaj
- Gynaecological Cancer Research Centre, UCL EGA Institute for Women’s Health, University College London, 149 Tottenham Road, London W1T 7DN, UK
| | - M Burnell
- Gynaecological Cancer Research Centre, UCL EGA Institute for Women’s Health, University College London, 149 Tottenham Road, London W1T 7DN, UK
| | - A Ryan
- Gynaecological Cancer Research Centre, UCL EGA Institute for Women’s Health, University College London, 149 Tottenham Road, London W1T 7DN, UK
| | - R Manchanda
- Gynaecological Cancer Research Centre, UCL EGA Institute for Women’s Health, University College London, 149 Tottenham Road, London W1T 7DN, UK
| | - A Dawnay
- Gynaecological Cancer Research Centre, UCL EGA Institute for Women’s Health, University College London, 149 Tottenham Road, London W1T 7DN, UK
| | - I Jacobs
- Gynaecological Cancer Research Centre, UCL EGA Institute for Women’s Health, University College London, 149 Tottenham Road, London W1T 7DN, UK
| | - M Widschwendter
- Gynaecological Cancer Research Centre, UCL EGA Institute for Women’s Health, University College London, 149 Tottenham Road, London W1T 7DN, UK
| | - U Menon
- Gynaecological Cancer Research Centre, UCL EGA Institute for Women’s Health, University College London, 149 Tottenham Road, London W1T 7DN, UK
| |
Collapse
|
41
|
Manchanda R, Burnell M, Abdelraheim A, Johnson M, Sharma A, Benjamin E, Brunell C, Saridogan E, Gessler S, Oram D, Side L, Rosenthal AN, Jacobs I, Menon U. Factors influencing uptake and timing of risk reducing salpingo-oophorectomy in women at risk of familial ovarian cancer: a competing risk time to event analysis. BJOG 2012; 119:527-36. [PMID: 22260402 DOI: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2011.03257.x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 51] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/20/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To evaluate factors affecting uptake of risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) over time in women at high-risk of familial ovarian cancer. DESIGN Prospective observational cohort. SETTING Tertiary high-risk familial gynaecological cancer clinic. POPULATION/SAMPLE New clinic attendees between March 2004 and November 2009, fulfilling the high-risk criteria for the UK Familial Ovarian Cancer Screening Study. METHODS Risk management options discussed included RRSO and ovarian surveillance. Outcome data were analysed from a bespoke database. The competing risk method was used to model the cumulative incidence function (CIF) of RRSO over time, and the sub-hazard ratio (SHR) was used to assess the strength of the association of variables of interest with RRSO. Gray's test was used to evaluate the difference in CIF between two groups and multivariable competing risk regression analysis was used to model the cumulative probabilities of covariates on the CIF. RESULTS Of 1133 eligible women, 265 (21.4%) opted for RRSO and 868 (69.9%) chose screening. Women undergoing RRSO were older (49 years, interquartile range 12.2 years) than those preferring screening (43.4 years, interquartile range 11.9 years) (P < 0.0005). The CIF for RRSO at 5 years was 0.55 (95% CI 0.45-0.64) for BRCA1/2 carriers and 0.22 (95% CI 0.19-0.26) for women of unknown mutation status (P < 0.0001); 0.42 (95% CI 0.36-0.47) for postmenopausal women (P < 0.0001); 0.29 (95% CI 0.25-0.33) for parity ≥1 (P = 0.009) and 0.47 (95% CI 0.39-0.55) for a personal history of breast cancer (P < 0.0001). Variables of significance from the regression analysis were: a BRCA1/2 mutation (SHR 2.31, 95% CI 1.7-3.14), postmenopausal status (SHR 2.16, 95% CI 1.62-2.87)) and a personal history of breast cancer (SHR 1.5, 95% CI 1.09-2.06). CONCLUSIONS Decision-making is a complex process and women opt for surgery many years after initial risk assessment. BRCA carriers, postmenopausal women and women who had breast cancer are significantly more likely to opt for preventative surgery.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- R Manchanda
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology, EGA Institute for Women's Health, UCL, London, UK.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
42
|
Vaes E, Manchanda R, Autier P, Nir R, Nir D, Bleiberg H, Robert A, Menon U. Differential diagnosis of adnexal masses: sequential use of the risk of malignancy index and HistoScanning, a novel computer-aided diagnostic tool. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2012; 39:91-98. [PMID: 21695741 DOI: 10.1002/uog.9079] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/30/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To assess the value of ovarian Histo-Scanning(™) , a novel computerized technique for interpreting ultrasound data, in combination with the risk of malignancy index (RMI) in improving triage for women with adnexal masses. METHODS RMI indices were assessed in 199 women enrolled in a prospective study to investigate the use of HistoScanning. Ultrasound scores were obtained by blinded analysis of archived images. The following sequential test was developed: HistoScanning was modeled as a second-line test for RMI between a lower cut-off and an upper cut-off. The optimal combination of these cut-offs that together maximized the Youden index (Sensitivity + Specificity - 1) was determined. RESULTS Using RMI at the standard cut-off value of 250 resulted in a sensitivity of 74% and a specificity of 86%. When RMI was combined with HistoScanning, the highest accuracy was achieved by using HistoScanning as a sequential second-line test for patients with RMI values between 105 and 2100. At these cut-off values, sequential use of RMI and HistoScanning resulted in mean sensitivity and specificity estimates of 88% and 95%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS Our data suggest that HistoScanning may have the potential to improve the diagnostic accuracy of RMI, which could result in better triage for women with adnexal masses. Further prospective validation is warranted.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- E Vaes
- Université Catholique de Louvain, Brussels, Belgium.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
43
|
Hunter MS, Gentry-Maharaj A, Ryan A, Burnell M, Lanceley A, Fraser L, Jacobs I, Menon U. Prevalence, frequency and problem rating of hot flushes persist in older postmenopausal women: impact of age, body mass index, hysterectomy, hormone therapy use, lifestyle and mood in a cross-sectional cohort study of 10,418 British women aged 54-65. BJOG 2011; 119:40-50. [PMID: 22008610 DOI: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2011.03166.x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 95] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/27/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Hot flushes and night sweats (HFs/NSs) are the main menopausal symptoms, but few studies have been adequately powered to examine the dimensions or predictors of experiencing HFs/NSs. We report on these variables in a large UK cohort of postmenopausal women. DESIGN Cross-sectional cohort study. SETTING UK Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening (UKCTOCS) cohort. POPULATION A cohort of 202,638 postmenopausal women, aged 50-74 years, without oophorectomy, recruited to UKCTOCS between 2001 and 2005. METHODS Women completed a follow-up questionnaire, and those aged 54-65 years were mailed a survey in July 2008. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Hot flush prevalence and hot flush rating scale. RESULTS Of the 15,000 women mailed, 10,418 returned completed questionnaires; 90% had previously had HFs/NSs. Despite being on average 10 years postmenopausal, 54% experienced HFs/NSs (frequency of 33 per week with mean problem rating 4/10) that persisted across the age range. Past hysterectomy (OR 1.50, 95% CI 1.19-1.86), ever having smoked (OR 1.27, 95% CI 1.11-1.46) and alcohol consumption (current units) (OR 1.05, 95% CI 1.01-1.09) predicted ever having had HFs/NSs. Anxiety (OR 3.09, 95% CI 2.57-3.72), hysterectomy (OR 2.74, 95% CI 2.32-3.25), depressed mood (OR 1.57, 95% CI 1.24-1.99), years since last menstrual period (OR 0.95, 95% CI 0.94-0.96) and education (above and below 18 years) (OR 0.98, 95% CI 0.97-0.99) predicted the current prevalence of HFs/NSs. Few predictors of frequency were identified, but problem rating was associated with depressed mood, hysterectomy, skirt size increase and frequency of HFs/NSs. Past hormone therapy users who had discontinued treatment were more likely to have HFs/NSs that were more frequent and problematic. CONCLUSIONS To date, this is the largest UK study of the experience of HFs/NSs amongst older postmenopausal women. HFs/NSs are more prevalent in this age band than has previously been assumed. These findings and the associations of smoking, hysterectomy, anxiety, depressed mood and hormone therapy use with the experience of HFs/NSs have implications for prevention and symptom management.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M S Hunter
- Department of Psychology, Institute of Psychiatry, King's College London, London, UK.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
44
|
Sharma A, Gentry-Maharaj A, Burnell M, Fourkala EO, Campbell S, Amso N, Seif MW, Ryan A, Parmar M, Jacobs I, Menon U. Assessing the malignant potential of ovarian inclusion cysts in postmenopausal women within the UK Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening (UKCTOCS): a prospective cohort study. BJOG 2011; 119:207-19. [PMID: 21762355 DOI: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2011.03038.x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 28] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To evaluate the malignant potential of ultrasound-detected ovarian inclusion cysts in the development of ovarian cancer (OC) in postmenopausal women. DESIGN Prospective cohort study. SETTING UK Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening (UKCTOCS). POPULATION Postmenopausal women. METHODS In UKCTOCS, women in the ultrasound group have annual scans. Women with inclusion cysts (single/multiple anechoic ≤10-mm ovarian cysts) and normal ovaries (both uniform hypoechogenicity) on their first scan were identified and followed up through cancer registry/questionnaires. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Relative risk (RR) of developing OC, invasive epithelial ovarian cancer (iEOC), breast cancer (BC) and endometrial cancer (EC) in women with inclusion cysts relative to those with normal ovaries. The incidence was compared with UK age-adjusted expected rates (Office for National Statistics, 2005). RESULTS Postmenopausal women (n = 48,230) attended the year 1 (11 June 2001-6 December 2006) screen; 1234 (2.5%) had inclusion cysts alone and 22,914 had normal scans. By 1 November 2009 (median follow-up, 6.13 years; interquartile range, 4.96-6.98 years), four, three (one Type II), seven and 22 women with inclusion cysts and 32, 29 (20 Type II), 90 and 397 women with normal ovaries were diagnosed with OC, iEOC, EC and BC, respectively. The RR values for the respective cancers (OC [RR, 2.32; confidence interval [CI], 0.86-6.28], iEOC [RR, 1.92; CI, 0.62-5.92], EC [RR, 1.44; CI, 0.68-3.05], BC [RR, 1.12; CI, 0.73-1.73]) were not increased. There was no difference between the observed versus expected incidence rates for these cancers in women with inclusion cysts. CONCLUSIONS Postmenopausal women with ultrasound-detected inclusion cysts do not seem to be at increased risk of ovarian or breast/endometrial (hormone-dependent) cancers.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- A Sharma
- Gynaecological Cancer Research Centre, University College London, EGA Institute for Women's Health, UK
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
45
|
Manchanda R, Abdelraheim A, Johnson M, Rosenthal AN, Benjamin E, Brunell C, Burnell M, Side L, Gessler S, Saridogan E, Oram D, Jacobs I, Menon U. Outcome of risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy in BRCA carriers and women of unknown mutation status. BJOG 2011; 118:814-24. [DOI: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2011.02920.x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 102] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/28/2022]
|
46
|
Pichert G, Jacobs C, Jacobs I, Menon U, Manchanda R, Johnson M, Hamed H, Firth C, Evison M, Tutt A, de Silva L, Langman C, Izatt L. Novel one-stop multidisciplinary follow-up clinic significantly improves cancer risk management in BRCA1/2 carriers. Fam Cancer 2010; 9:313-9. [PMID: 20300867 DOI: 10.1007/s10689-010-9333-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/19/2022]
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to measure the impact of a multidisciplinary one-stop follow-up clinic (MDOSC) on breast and ovarian surveillance, risk reducing surgery and enrolment in clinical trials in BRCA1/2 carriers. All BRCA1/2 carriers in our region were invited and chose which specialists to see in our MDOSC offering best practice using clinical protocols based on national guidelines and published data. Uptake was evaluated over 24 months recording numbers of individuals undergoing breast and ovarian surveillance, risk reducing surgery, newly diagnosed cancers, their method of detection and participation in clinical trials. 172 (60%) of invited BRCA1/2 carriers chose to attend the MDOSC. Breast surveillance was initiated in 88% and screening frequency altered in 14% of women to comply with national guidelines. Risk reducing salpingo-oophorectomy was chosen by 47% of women and an additional 39% were considering it. The rate of failure to remove fallopian tubes fell from 15 to 3% of procedures (P < 0.01) and peritoneal washings and serial sectioning of tubes and ovaries rose from 25% and 14% before, to 67% (P < 0.001) and 63% (P < 0.001) procedures, respectively, after initiation of our MDOSC. 24% of women considered and 18% decided to undergo risk reducing mastectomy during the follow-up period. Participation in clinical trials increased significantly from 51 to 229 enrolments (P < 0.001). Our novel MDOSC designed to devise an individually tailored cancer risk management strategy had a high uptake amongst our BRCA1/2 carriers. Attendance resulted in improved breast and ovarian cancer risk management.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- G Pichert
- Clinical Genetics Department, Guy's and St Thomas NHS Foundation Trust, Guys Hospital, 7th Floor Borough Wing, Great Maze Pond Road, SE1 9RT, London, UK.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
47
|
Niswender C, Hopkins C, Jones C, Thompson A, Engers D, Williams R, Zhou S, Salovich J, Cheung YY, Gogliotti R, Gentry P, Johnson K, Jadhav S, Menon U, Zamorano R, Days E, Lindsley C, Weaver C, Conn P. P2.105 The development of positive allosteric modulators of mGluR4 for the treatment of Parkinson's disease. Parkinsonism Relat Disord 2009. [DOI: 10.1016/s1353-8020(09)70456-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/20/2022]
|
48
|
Pearce CL, Near AM, Van Den Berg DJ, Ramus SJ, Gentry-Maharaj A, Menon U, Gayther SA, Anderson AR, Edlund CK, Wu AH, Chen X, Beesley J, Webb PM, Holt SK, Chen C, Doherty JA, Rossing MA, Whittemore AS, McGuire V, DiCioccio RA, Goodman MT, Lurie G, Carney ME, Wilkens LR, Ness RB, Moysich KB, Edwards R, Jennison E, Kjaer SK, Hogdall E, Hogdall CK, Goode EL, Sellers TA, Vierkant RA, Cunningham JM, Schildkraut JM, Berchuck A, Moorman PG, Iversen ES, Cramer DW, Terry KL, Vitonis AF, Titus-Ernstoff L, Song H, Pharoah PDP, Spurdle AB, Anton-Culver H, Ziogas A, Brewster W, Galitovskiy V, Chenevix-Trench G. Erratum: Validating genetic risk associations for ovarian cancer through the International Ovarian Cancer Association Consortium. Br J Cancer 2009. [PMCID: PMC2778538 DOI: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6605431] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/12/2022] Open
|
49
|
Cunningham JM, Vierkant RA, Sellers TA, Phelan C, Rider DN, Liebow M, Schildkraut J, Berchuck A, Couch FJ, Wang X, Fridley BL, Gentry-Maharaj A, Menon U, Hogdall E, Kjaer S, Whittemore A, DiCioccio R, Song H, Gayther SA, Ramus SJ, Pharaoh PDP, Goode EL. Cell cycle genes and ovarian cancer susceptibility: a tagSNP analysis. Br J Cancer 2009; 101:1461-8. [PMID: 19738611 PMCID: PMC2768434 DOI: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6605284] [Citation(s) in RCA: 34] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/05/2023] Open
Abstract
Background: Dysregulation of the cell cycle is a hallmark of many cancers including ovarian cancer, a leading cause of gynaecologic cancer mortality worldwide. Methods: We examined single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) (n=288) from 39 cell cycle regulation genes, including cyclins, cyclin-dependent kinases (CDKs) and CDK inhibitors, in a two-stage study. White, non-Hispanic cases (n=829) and ovarian cancer-free controls (n=941) were genotyped using an Illumina assay. Results: Eleven variants in nine genes (ABL1, CCNB2, CDKN1A, CCND3, E2F2, CDK2, E2F3, CDC2, and CDK7) were associated with risk of ovarian cancer in at least one genetic model. Seven SNPs were then assessed in four additional studies with 1689 cases and 3398 controls. Association between risk of ovarian cancer and ABL1 rs2855192 found in the original population [odds ratio, ORBB vs AA 2.81 (1.29–6.09), P=0.01] was also observed in a replication population, and the association remained suggestive in the combined analysis [ORBB vs AA 1.59 (1.08–2.34), P=0.02]. No other SNP associations remained suggestive in the replication populations. Conclusion: ABL1 has been implicated in multiple processes including cell division, cell adhesion and cellular stress response. These results suggest that characterization of the function of genetic variation in this gene in other ovarian cancer populations is warranted.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- J M Cunningham
- Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, MN 55905, USA.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
50
|
Vaes E, Manchanda R, Nir R, Nir D, Bleiberg H, Robert A, Menon U. 1329 A sequential use of the Risk of Malignancy Index and Ovarian HistoScanning for the differential diagnosis of adnexal masses. EJC Suppl 2009. [DOI: 10.1016/s1359-6349(09)70502-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/01/2022] Open
|