8 results on '"Stephen Allpress"'
Search Results
2. An unexpected zoonosis: pulmonary dirofilaria infection mimicking pulmonary neoplasm
- Author
-
Jaideep Sood, Gordon Maxwell, and Stephen Allpress
- Subjects
lcsh:RC705-779 ,Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine ,Pathology ,medicine.medical_specialty ,Australasia ,business.industry ,Zoonosis ,Case Report ,lcsh:Diseases of the respiratory system ,Case Reports ,medicine.disease ,Malignancy ,pulmonary dirofilaria infection ,03 medical and health sciences ,0302 clinical medicine ,Dirofilaria infection ,030228 respiratory system ,030220 oncology & carcinogenesis ,Pulmonary neoplasms ,parasitic diseases ,medicine ,business ,Pathological - Abstract
Pulmonary dirofilaria infection is a rare condition in Australasia. We describe a case with radiographic findings concerning for pulmonary malignancy, with the unexpected pathological diagnosis of dirofilarial infection.
- Published
- 2019
3. Axillary dissection versus no axillary dissection in patients with breast cancer and sentinel-node micrometastases (IBCSG 23-01): 10-year follow-up of a randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial
- Author
-
Achim Fleischmann, Cindy Mak, Jane Hill, David Littlejohn, Andreas Veronesi, Holger Moch, Stefano Zurrida, L Perey, Nirmala Pathmanathan, Carlo Tondini, Giancarlo Pruneri, Viviana Galimberti, Christian Oehlschlegel, Christoph Rageth, Jack Hoffmann, Richard D. Gelber, John J. Collins, Angelo Recalcati, Marisa Donatella Magri, Andrée Rorive, Bruno Späti, Dimitri Sarlos, Zsuzsanna Varga, Rolf A. Stahel, Mattia Intra, Charlotte Lanng, P. Smart, L. Tan, Anna Cardillo, Francesco Coran, James French, Rudolf Maibach, Manuela Rabaglio, Marco Colleoni, Emilia Montagna, Elisabeth Saurenmann, Elisabeth Elder, Michael Knauer, Samuele Massarut, Mauro Arcicasa, Karin Ribi, Julie Craik, Theresa Zielinski, Wendy Jeanneret Sozzi, Sandro Morassut, Tiziana Rusca, Paul Chin, Elgene Lim, Frances M. Boyle, Richard West, Patrizia Dell'Orto, Umberto Veronesi, Marie-Christine Mathieu, Jean-Remi Garbay, Katrina Moore, Marisa Cristina Leonardi, Gregory Bruce Mann, Donatella Santini, Mario Roncadin, Joëlle Collignon, Michael D. Green, David Moon, Oreste Gentilini, Petere G. Gill, Stephen Allpress, Giulia Peruzzotti, Elga Majdic, Caitlin Mahoney, Karen N. Price, Craig Murphy, Lori Hayes, Melissa Bochner, Lynette Mann, Christoph Tausch, Otto Schiltknecht, Antonino Carbone, Aron Goldhirsch, Giuseppe Cancello, Anand Murugasu, John F. Forbes, Erica Piccoli, Luca Mazzucchelli, Alberto Gianatti, Lucien Zaman, Jose Manuel Cotrina, Per Karlsson, Janez Zgajnar, Diana Crivellari, Birgitte Bruun Rasmussen, Elisabetta Candiago, Manuela Sargenti, Robert Whitfield, Silvia Dellapasqua, R. Ghisini, Meredith M. Regan, Michael Müller, Tiziana Perin, M. Thorburn, Stamatina Fournarakou, Monika Bamert, Malcolm Buchanan, Allison Jones, Gerhard Ries, Andreas Ehrsam, Hugh Carmalt, István Láng, Jürg Bernhard, Guy Jerusalem, Manuela Lagrassa, S. Fiona Bonar, Mario Mileto, Jurij Lindtner, P. Jeal, Fereshte Farshidi, Bernard F. Cole, John Hoerby, James Kollias, Privato Fenaroli, Giovanni Mazzarol, Richard Dyer, Angelo Buonadonna, Heidi Roschitzki, Stefania Andrighetto, Robert Macindoe, Martin F. Fey, Ingrid Kössler, Olivia Pagani, Anita Hiltbrunner, Camelia Chifu, William Ross, Rachele Volpe, Linda Leidi, Barbara Ruepp, Giorgio Caccia, Philippe Delvenne, Susanne Gerred, Tara Scolese, Mario Taffurelli, Paola Baratella, Jean Francois Delaloye, Richard Harman, A. Michael Bilous, Ian G. Campbell, Franco Nolè, Maryse Fiche, Ute Lorenz, Susanne Roux, Roberto Orecchia, Mark Sywak, Aashit Shah, Assia Treboux, Laura Cattaneo, Martina Egli-Tupaj, Rosmarie Caduff, Paolo Veronesi, Linda Madigan, Elena Kralidis, Maj-Lis Moeller Talman, Roswitha Kammler, Michael Töpfer, Eva Juhasz, Peer Schousen, Michele Ghielmini, Snjezana Frkovic-Grazio, Hanne Galatius, Elisabeth Rippy, Sylvie Maweja, Lynette Blacher, Stefan Aebi, D.F. Preece, Gilles Berclaz, Daniel Wyss, D. F. Lindsay, Andreas Günthert, Frederick Mayall, Lucia Bronz, Paul McKenzie, Andrew J. Spillane, Giuseppe Viale, Sandra Lippert, Alberto Luini, Virginia Howard, Giuseppe Curigliano, Rainer Grobholz, Robert Millar, Julio Abugattas, Hans-Anton Lehr, Maria Emanuela Limonta, Monica Iorfida, Elisa Vicini, Helle Holtveg, Angelo Di Leo, Giuseppe Renne, Alan S. Coates, Ezio Candiani, Karolyn Scott, Mauro G. Mastropasqua, Paolo Tricomi, Thomas Gyr, Karen Briscoe, and Viviana Galimberti, Bernard F Cole, Giuseppe Viale, Paolo Veronesi, Elisa Vicini, Mattia Intra, Giovanni Mazzarol, Samuele Massarut, Janez Zgajnar, Mario Taffurelli, David Littlejohn, Michael Knauer, Carlo Tondini, Angelo Di Leo, Marco Colleoni, Meredith M Regan, Alan S Coates, Richard D Gelber, Aron Goldhirsch
- Subjects
0301 basic medicine ,medicine.medical_specialty ,Time Factors ,medicine.medical_treatment ,Population ,Breast Neoplasms ,Disease-Free Survival ,03 medical and health sciences ,0302 clinical medicine ,Breast cancer ,Risk Factors ,Clinical endpoint ,Medicine ,Humans ,education ,Mastectomy ,education.field_of_study ,business.industry ,Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy ,Hazard ratio ,Sentinel node ,medicine.disease ,Breast cancer, axillary dissection, IBCSG 23-01, follow up ,Surgery ,Clinical trial ,Axilla ,030104 developmental biology ,medicine.anatomical_structure ,Oncology ,Neoplasm Micrometastasis ,030220 oncology & carcinogenesis ,Lymphatic Metastasis ,Disease Progression ,Lymph Node Excision ,Female ,Sentinel Lymph Node ,business - Abstract
Summary Background We previously reported the 5-year results of the phase 3 IBCSG 23-01 trial comparing disease-free survival in patients with breast cancer with one or more micrometastatic (≤2 mm) sentinel nodes randomly assigned to either axillary dissection or no axillary dissection. The results showed no difference in disease-free survival between the groups and showed non-inferiority of no axillary dissection relative to axillary dissection. The current analysis presents the results of the study after a median follow-up of 9·7 years (IQR 7·8–12·7). Methods In this multicentre, randomised, controlled, open-label, non-inferiority, phase 3 trial, participants were recruited from 27 hospitals and cancer centres in nine countries. Eligible women could be of any age with clinical, mammographic, ultrasonographic, or pathological diagnosis of breast cancer with largest lesion diameter of 5 cm or smaller, and one or more metastatic sentinel nodes, all of which were 2 mm or smaller and with no extracapsular extension. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) before surgery (mastectomy or breast-conserving surgery) to no axillary dissection or axillary dissection using permuted blocks generated by a web-based congruence algorithm, with stratification by centre and menopausal status. The protocol-specified primary endpoint was disease-free survival, analysed in the intention-to-treat population (as randomly assigned). Safety was assessed in all randomly assigned patients who received their allocated treatment (as treated). We did a one-sided test for non-inferiority of no axillary dissection by comparing the observed hazard ratios (HRs) for disease-free survival with a margin of 1·25. This 10-year follow-up analysis was not prespecified in the trial's protocol and thus was not adjusted for multiple, sequential testing. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00072293. Findings Between April 1, 2001, and Feb 8, 2010, 6681 patients were screened and 934 randomly assigned to no axillary dissection (n=469) or axillary dissection (n=465). Three patients were ineligible and were excluded from the trial after randomisation. Disease-free survival at 10 years was 76·8% (95% CI 72·5–81·0) in the no axillary dissection group, compared with 74·9% (70·5–79·3) in the axillary dissection group (HR 0·85, 95% CI 0·65–1·11; log-rank p=0·24; p=0·0024 for non-inferiority). Long-term surgical complications included lymphoedema of any grade in 16 (4%) of 453 patients in the no axillary dissection group and 60 (13%) of 447 in the axillary dissection group, sensory neuropathy of any grade in 57 (13%) in the no axillary dissection group versus 85 (19%) in the axillary dissection group, and motor neuropathy of any grade (14 [3%] in the no axillary dissection group vs 40 [9%] in the axillary dissection group). One serious adverse event (postoperative infection and inflamed axilla requiring hospital admission) was attributed to axillary dissection; the event resolved without sequelae. Interpretation The findings of the IBCSG 23-01 trial after a median follow-up of 9·7 years (IQR 7·8–12·7) corroborate those obtained at 5 years and are consistent with those of the 10-year follow-up analysis of the Z0011 trial. Together, these findings support the current practice of not doing an axillary dissection when the tumour burden in the sentinel nodes is minimal or moderate in patients with early breast cancer. Funding International Breast Cancer Study Group.
- Published
- 2018
4. Abstract P2-05-16: Gene expression in synchronous primary, axillary nodal and disseminated breast cancer cells
- Author
-
Richard Harman, Anna Brown, Annette Lasham, Sam Rice, Cherie Blenkiron, Reuben James Broom, Stephen Allpress, Peter Shin, Cristin G. Print, Katherine Gale, and Erica Whineray Kelly
- Subjects
Cancer Research ,Pathology ,medicine.medical_specialty ,education.field_of_study ,Axillary lymph nodes ,business.industry ,Cell ,Population ,Cancer ,medicine.disease ,medicine.anatomical_structure ,Breast cancer ,Oncology ,Gene expression ,medicine ,Cancer research ,Bone marrow ,education ,business ,Lymph node - Abstract
Disseminated Tumour Cells (DTC) have been found in the bone marrow (BM) of up to 70% of patients with breast cancer metastatic to axillary lymph nodes. They are a biologically and therapeutically interesting tumour cell population. Although there is uncertainty about their relationship to cancer prognosis, DTC provide a valuable window into the processes by which primary tumour (PT) cells disseminate. DTC can be enriched from BM by immunoaffinity using antibodies directed against epithelial cell markers such as EpCAM. To better understand the changing gene expression patterns that may accompany breast cancer metastasis, we have compared the whole genome RNA expression profiles of matched PT, axillary lymph node metastases (LNM), and EpCAM-enriched cells from the BM of seven patients. Compared to PT, axillary LNM had consistently altered expression of RNAs encoding matrix metalloproteinases (MMP), growth factors, transcription factors, as well as downstream targets of Catenin-a, Tumour Necrosis Factor (TNF)-a and miR-22. Once the gene expression patterns of potentially contaminating BM cells were subtracted, compared to PT and LNM EpCAM-enriched MB cells had consistently elevated expression of RNAs encoding metabolic enzymes, ribosomal proteins, and DNA-binding factors such as YB-1. The gene expression changes we identify are candidate mediators of breast cancer metastases and represent attractive targets for further study on a cell by cell basis. Citation Format: Reuben J Broom, Cherie Blenkiron, Richard Harman, Erica Whineray Kelly, Stephen Allpress, Katherine Gale, Sam Rice, Peter Shin, Anna Brown, Annette Lasham, Cristin Print. Gene expression in synchronous primary, axillary nodal and disseminated breast cancer cells [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the Thirty-Seventh Annual CTRC-AACR San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium: 2014 Dec 9-13; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2015;75(9 Suppl):Abstract nr P2-05-16.
- Published
- 2015
5. Adenocarcinoma in situ of the cervix
- Author
-
Gregory F. Sterrett, Felicity A. Frost, Amanda Segal, Stephen Allpress, Meike Schoolland, and Alina Miranda
- Subjects
Gynecology ,Cancer Research ,medicine.medical_specialty ,business.industry ,Carcinoma in situ ,Papanicolaou stain ,medicine.disease ,Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia ,Squamous intraepithelial lesion ,medicine.anatomical_structure ,Oncology ,Cytopathology ,medicine ,Adenocarcinoma ,Sampling (medicine) ,Radiology ,business ,Cervix - Abstract
BACKGROUND The current study examines 1) the sensitivity of detection and 2) sampling and screening/diagnostic error in the cytologic diagnosis of adenocarcinoma in situ (AIS) of the cervix. The data were taken from public and private sector screening laboratories reporting 25,000 and 80,000 smears, respectively, each year. METHODS The study group was comprised of women with a biopsy diagnosis of AIS or AIS combined with a high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (HSIL) who were accessioned by the Western Australian Cervical Cytology Registry (WACCR) between 1993–1998. Cervical smears reported by the Western Australia Centre for Pathology and Medical Research (PathCentre) or Western Diagnostic Pathology (WDP) in the 36 months before the index biopsy was obtained were retrieved. A true measure of the sensitivity of detection could not be determined because to the authors' knowledge the exact prevalence of disease is unknown at present. For the current study, sensitivity was defined as the percentage of smears reported as demonstrating a possible or definite high-grade epithelial abnormality (HGEA), either glandular or squamous. Sampling error was defined as the percentage of smears found to have no HGEA on review. Screening/diagnostic error was defined as the percentage of smears in which HGEA was not diagnosed initially but review demonstrated possible or definite HGEA. Sensitivity also was calculated for a randomly selected control group of biopsy proven cases of Grade 3 cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN 3) accessioned at the WACCR in 1999. RESULTS For biopsy findings of AIS alone, the diagnostic “sensitivity” of a single smear was 47.6% for the PathCentre and 54.3% for WDP. Nearly all the abnormalities were reported as glandular. The sampling and screening/diagnostic errors were 47.6% and 4.8%, respectively, for the PathCentre and 33.3% and 12.3%, respectively, for WDP. The results from the PathCentre were better for AIS plus HSIL than for AIS alone, but the results from WDP were similar for both groups. For the CIN 3 control cases, the “sensitivity” of a single smear was 42.5%. CONCLUSIONS To the authors' knowledge epidemiologic studies published to date have not demonstrated a benefit from screening for precursors of cervical adenocarcinoma. However, in the study laboratories as in many others, reasonable expertise in diagnosing AIS has been acquired only within the last 10–15 years, which may be too short a period in which to demonstrate a significant effect. The results of the current study provide some encouraging baseline data regarding the sensitivity of the Papanicolaou smear in detecting AIS. Further improvements in sampling and cytodiagnosis may be possible. [See editorial on pages 000–000, this issue.] Cancer (Cancer Cytopathol) 2002. © 2002 American Cancer Society.
- Published
- 2002
6. Adenocarcinoma of the cervix
- Author
-
Gregory F. Sterrett, Meike Schoolland, and Stephen Allpress
- Subjects
Cancer Research ,medicine.medical_specialty ,Cervical screening ,medicine.diagnostic_test ,business.industry ,Adenosquamous carcinoma ,Cancer ,medicine.disease ,medicine.anatomical_structure ,Oncology ,Cytopathology ,Biopsy ,medicine ,Adenocarcinoma ,Sampling (medicine) ,Radiology ,business ,Cervix - Abstract
BACKGROUND The current study examines 1) the sensitivity of detection of invasive adenocarcinoma of the cervix in a routine cervical screening service, and 2) the frequency in smears of cytologic criteria previously found to be useful in diagnosis. METHODS Data on women with diagnoses of adenocarcinoma of the cervix accessioned at the Western Australian Cervical Cytology Registry during the period 1993-1998 were examined, where smears had been reported by Western Diagnostic Pathology within three years of the biopsy diagnosis. Smears and biopsy material were reviewed. RESULTS Thirty-six smears from 24 women were reviewed. Of those, 58.3% had been reported as a possible or definite high grade epithelial abnormality (HGEA). On review it was thought that this could be improved to 77.8%. The screening or diagnostic error was thus 19.4% and the sampling error 22.2%. The likelihood of an individual woman receiving a report of a possible or definite HGEA in the three years before biopsy was 83.3%. In retrospect this could have been improved to 91.7%. Heavy bloodstaining with abundant abnormal glandular epithelium (14 smears) and small three-dimensional or papillary clusters (16 smears) were the most frequent clues to invasion. Tumor necrosis/diathesis was present in eight smears, but easily seen in only four, while marked nuclear pleomorphism and macronucleoli were seen in three and one smears respectively. In cases with a discrepancy between the initial and the review findings, very small amounts of abnormal material (three smears), a resemblance to endometrial cells (one smear), and an unusual appearance of folded monolayered sheets (three smears) contributed to the difficulty of diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS There were significant sampling and screening/diagnostic errors (22.2% and 19.4%, respectively). Screening and diagnostic errors could perhaps be reduced by a greater awareness of the range of cytologic changes, but these may be subtle. Heavy bloodstaining with abundant abnormal glandular material may be a useful clue to invasive, rather than in situ, adenocarcinoma, even in the absence of tumor diathesis or fully malignant nuclear criteria. Cancer (Cancer Cytopathol) 2002;96:5–13. © 2002 American Cancer Society. DOI 10.1002/cncr.10313
- Published
- 2002
7. Adenocarcinoma in situ of the cervix
- Author
-
Meike, Schoolland, Amanda, Segal, Stephen, Allpress, Alina, Miranda, Felicity A, Frost, and Gregory F, Sterrett
- Subjects
Vaginal Smears ,Humans ,Uterine Cervical Neoplasms ,Female ,Adenocarcinoma ,Diagnostic Errors ,Uterine Cervical Dysplasia ,Sensitivity and Specificity ,Carcinoma in Situ ,Papanicolaou Test - Abstract
The current study examines 1) the sensitivity of detection and 2) sampling and screening/diagnostic error in the cytologic diagnosis of adenocarcinoma in situ (AIS) of the cervix. The data were taken from public and private sector screening laboratories reporting 25,000 and 80,000 smears, respectively, each year.The study group was comprised of women with a biopsy diagnosis of AIS or AIS combined with a high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (HSIL) who were accessioned by the Western Australian Cervical Cytology Registry (WACCR) between 1993-1998. Cervical smears reported by the Western Australia Centre for Pathology and Medical Research (PathCentre) or Western Diagnostic Pathology (WDP) in the 36 months before the index biopsy was obtained were retrieved. A true measure of the sensitivity of detection could not be determined because to the authors' knowledge the exact prevalence of disease is unknown at present. For the current study, sensitivity was defined as the percentage of smears reported as demonstrating a possible or definite high-grade epithelial abnormality (HGEA), either glandular or squamous. Sampling error was defined as the percentage of smears found to have no HGEA on review. Screening/diagnostic error was defined as the percentage of smears in which HGEA was not diagnosed initially but review demonstrated possible or definite HGEA. Sensitivity also was calculated for a randomly selected control group of biopsy proven cases of Grade 3 cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN 3) accessioned at the WACCR in 1999.For biopsy findings of AIS alone, the diagnostic "sensitivity" of a single smear was 47.6% for the PathCentre and 54.3% for WDP. Nearly all the abnormalities were reported as glandular. The sampling and screening/diagnostic errors were 47.6% and 4.8%, respectively, for the PathCentre and 33.3% and 12.3%, respectively, for WDP. The results from the PathCentre were better for AIS plus HSIL than for AIS alone, but the results from WDP were similar for both groups. For the CIN 3 control cases, the "sensitivity" of a single smear was 42.5%.To the authors' knowledge epidemiologic studies published to date have not demonstrated a benefit from screening for precursors of cervical adenocarcinoma. However, in the study laboratories as in many others, reasonable expertise in diagnosing AIS has been acquired only within the last 10-15 years, which may be too short a period in which to demonstrate a significant effect. The results of the current study provide some encouraging baseline data regarding the sensitivity of the Papanicolaou smear in detecting AIS. Further improvements in sampling and cytodiagnosis may be possible.
- Published
- 2002
8. Adenocarcinoma of the cervix
- Author
-
Meike, Schoolland, Stephen, Allpress, and Gregory F, Sterrett
- Subjects
Adenoma ,Adult ,Vaginal Smears ,Biopsy ,Uterine Cervical Neoplasms ,Epithelial Cells ,Middle Aged ,Sensitivity and Specificity ,Diagnosis, Differential ,Humans ,Mass Screening ,Female ,Neoplasm Invasiveness ,Registries ,Diagnostic Errors ,Aged ,Retrospective Studies - Abstract
The current study examines 1) the sensitivity of detection of invasive adenocarcinoma of the cervix in a routine cervical screening service, and 2) the frequency in smears of cytologic criteria previously found to be useful in diagnosis.Data on women with diagnoses of adenocarcinoma of the cervix accessioned at the Western Australian Cervical Cytology Registry during the period 1993-1998 were examined, where smears had been reported by Western Diagnostic Pathology within three years of the biopsy diagnosis. Smears and biopsy material were reviewed.Thirty-six smears from 24 women were reviewed. Of those, 58.3% had been reported as a possible or definite high grade epithelial abnormality (HGEA). On review it was thought that this could be improved to 77.8%. The screening or diagnostic error was thus 19.4% and the sampling error 22.2%. The likelihood of an individual woman receiving a report of a possible or definite HGEA in the three years before biopsy was 83.3%. In retrospect this could have been improved to 91.7%. Heavy bloodstaining with abundant abnormal glandular epithelium (14 smears) and small three-dimensional or papillary clusters (16 smears) were the most frequent clues to invasion. Tumor necrosis/diathesis was present in eight smears, but easily seen in only four, while marked nuclear pleomorphism and macronucleoli were seen in three and one smears respectively. In cases with a discrepancy between the initial and the review findings, very small amounts of abnormal material (three smears), a resemblance to endometrial cells (one smear), and an unusual appearance of folded monolayered sheets (three smears) contributed to the difficulty of diagnosis.There were significant sampling and screening/diagnostic errors (22.2% and 19.4%, respectively). Screening and diagnostic errors could perhaps be reduced by a greater awareness of the range of cytologic changes, but these may be subtle. Heavy bloodstaining with abundant abnormal glandular material may be a useful clue to invasive, rather than in situ, adenocarcinoma, even in the absence of tumor diathesis or fully malignant nuclear criteria.
- Published
- 2002
Catalog
Discovery Service for Jio Institute Digital Library
For full access to our library's resources, please sign in.