Search

Your search keyword '"Turner, Emma L"' showing total 178 results
Start Over Author "Turner, Emma L"
178 results on '"Turner, Emma L"'

1. Incidence of diabetes after SARS-CoV-2 infection in England and the implications of COVID-19 vaccination: a retrospective cohort study of 16 million people

Author

Al Arab, Marwa, Almaghrabi, Fatima, Andrews, Colm, Badrick, Ellena, Baz, Sarah, Beckford, Chelsea, Berman, Samantha, Bolton, Tom, Booth, Charlotte, Bowyer, Ruth, Boyd, Andy, Bridger-Staatz, Charis, Brophy, Sinead, Campbell, Archie, Campbell, Kirsteen C, Carnemolla, Alisia, Carpentieri, Jd, Cezard, Genevieve, Chaturvedi, Nishi, Cheetham, Nathan, Costello, Ruth, Cowling, Thomas, Crane, Matthew, Cuitun Coronado, Jose Ignacio, Curtis, Helen, Denaxas, Spiros, Denholm, Rachel, Di Gessa, Giorgio, Dobson, Richard, Douglas, Ian, Evans, Katharine M, Fang, Chao, Ferreira, Vanessa, Finnigan, Lucy, Fisher, Louis, Flaig, Robin, Folarin, Amos, Forbes, Harriet, Foster, Diane, Fox, Laura, Freydin, Maxim, Garcia, Paz, Gibson, Andy, Glen, Fiona, Goldacre, Ben, Goncalves Soares, Ana, Greaves, Felix, Green, Amelia, Green, Mark, Green, Michael, Griffith, Gareth, Hamill Howes, Lee, Hamilton, Olivia, Herbet, Annie, Herrett, Emily, Hopcroft, Lisa, Horne, Elsie, Hou, Bo, Hughes, Alun, Hulme, William, Huntley, Lizzie, Ip, Samantha, Jacques, Wels, Jezzard, Peter, Jones, Louise, Kanagaratnam, Arun, Karthikeyan Suseeladevi, Arun, Katikireddi, Vittal, Kellas, John, Kennedy, Jonathan I, Kibble, Milla, Knight, Rochelle, Knueppel, Anika, Kopasker, Daniel, Kromydas, Theocharis, Kwong, Alex, Langan, Sinead, Lemanska, Agnieszka, Lukaschuk, Elena, Mackenna, Brain, Macleod, John, Maddock, Jane, Mahalingasivam, Viyaasan, Mansfield, Kathryn, McArdle, Fintan, McCartney, Daniel, McEachan, Rosie, McElroy, Eoin, McLachlan, Stela, Mitchell, Ruth, Moltrecht, Bettina, Morley, Jess, Nab, Linda, Neubauer, Stefan, Nigrelli, Lidia, North, Teri, Northstone, Kate, Oakley, Jacqui, Palmer, Tom, Park, Chloe, Parker, Michael, Parsons, Sam, Patalay, Praveetha, Patel, Kishan, Perez-Reche, Francisco, Piechnik, Stefan, Piehlmaier, Dominik, Ploubidis, George, Rafeti, Elena, Raman, Betty, Ranjan, Yatharth, Rapala, Alicja, Rhead, Rebecca, Roberts, Amy, Sampri, Alexia, Sanders, Zeena-Britt, Santorelli, Gillian, Saunders, Laura C, Shah, Anoop, Shah, Syed Ahmar, Sharp, Steve, Shaw, Richard, Sheard, Laura, Sheikh, Aziz, Silverwood, Richard, Smeeth, Liam, Smith, Stephen, Stafford, Jean, Steptoe, Andrew, Sterne, Jonathan, Steves, Claire, Stewart, Callum, Taylor, Kurt, Tazare, John, Teece, Lucy, Thomas, Richard, Thompson, Ellen, Tilling, Kate, Timpson, Nicholas, Tomlinson, Laurie, Toms, Renin, Tunnicliffe, Elizabeth, Turner, Emma L, Walker, Alex, Walker, Venexia, Walter, Scott, Wang, Kevin, Wei, Yinghui, Whitehorn, Rebecca, Wielgoszewska, Bozena, Wild, James M, Willan, Kathryn, Willans, Robert, Williams, Dylan, Wong, Andrew, Wood, Angela, Woodward, Hannah, Wright, John, Yang, Tiffany, Zaninotto, Paola, Zheng, Bang, Zhu, Jingmin, Eastwood, Sophie, Horne, Elsie M F, Massey, Jon, Hopcroft, Lisa E M, Cuitun Coronado, Jose, Davy, Simon, Dillingham, Iain, Morton, Caroline, and Sterne, Jonathan A C

Published
2024
Full Text
View/download PDF

2. Additional SNPs improve risk stratification of a polygenic hazard score for prostate cancer.

Author

Karunamuni, Roshan A, Huynh-Le, Minh-Phuong, Fan, Chun C, Thompson, Wesley, Eeles, Rosalind A, Kote-Jarai, Zsofia, Muir, Kenneth, Lophatananon, Artitaya, UKGPCS collaborators, Schleutker, Johanna, Pashayan, Nora, Batra, Jyotsna, APCB BioResource (Australian Prostate Cancer BioResource), Grönberg, Henrik, Walsh, Eleanor I, Turner, Emma L, Lane, Athene, Martin, Richard M, Neal, David E, Donovan, Jenny L, Hamdy, Freddie C, Nordestgaard, Børge G, Tangen, Catherine M, MacInnis, Robert J, Wolk, Alicja, Albanes, Demetrius, Haiman, Christopher A, Travis, Ruth C, Stanford, Janet L, Mucci, Lorelei A, West, Catharine ML, Nielsen, Sune F, Kibel, Adam S, Wiklund, Fredrik, Cussenot, Olivier, Berndt, Sonja I, Koutros, Stella, Sørensen, Karina Dalsgaard, Cybulski, Cezary, Grindedal, Eli Marie, Park, Jong Y, Ingles, Sue A, Maier, Christiane, Hamilton, Robert J, Rosenstein, Barry S, Vega, Ana, IMPACT Study Steering Committee and Collaborators, Kogevinas, Manolis, Penney, Kathryn L, Teixeira, Manuel R, Brenner, Hermann, John, Esther M, Kaneva, Radka, Logothetis, Christopher J, Neuhausen, Susan L, Razack, Azad, Newcomb, Lisa F, Canary PASS Investigators, Gamulin, Marija, Usmani, Nawaid, Claessens, Frank, Gago-Dominguez, Manuela, Townsend, Paul A, Roobol, Monique J, Zheng, Wei, Profile Study Steering Committee, Mills, Ian G, Andreassen, Ole A, Dale, Anders M, Seibert, Tyler M, and PRACTICAL Consortium

Subjects
UKGPCS collaborators, APCB BioResource, IMPACT Study Steering Committee and Collaborators, Canary PASS Investigators, Profile Study Steering Committee, PRACTICAL Consortium, Prevention, Urologic Diseases, Cancer, Prostate Cancer, Aging, Urology & Nephrology, Oncology and Carcinogenesis
Abstract

BackgroundPolygenic hazard scores (PHS) can identify individuals with increased risk of prostate cancer. We estimated the benefit of additional SNPs on performance of a previously validated PHS (PHS46).Materials and method180 SNPs, shown to be previously associated with prostate cancer, were used to develop a PHS model in men with European ancestry. A machine-learning approach, LASSO-regularized Cox regression, was used to select SNPs and to estimate their coefficients in the training set (75,596 men). Performance of the resulting model was evaluated in the testing/validation set (6,411 men) with two metrics: (1) hazard ratios (HRs) and (2) positive predictive value (PPV) of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing. HRs were estimated between individuals with PHS in the top 5% to those in the middle 40% (HR95/50), top 20% to bottom 20% (HR80/20), and bottom 20% to middle 40% (HR20/50). PPV was calculated for the top 20% (PPV80) and top 5% (PPV95) of PHS as the fraction of individuals with elevated PSA that were diagnosed with clinically significant prostate cancer on biopsy.Results166 SNPs had non-zero coefficients in the Cox model (PHS166). All HR metrics showed significant improvements for PHS166 compared to PHS46: HR95/50 increased from 3.72 to 5.09, HR80/20 increased from 6.12 to 9.45, and HR20/50 decreased from 0.41 to 0.34. By contrast, no significant differences were observed in PPV of PSA testing for clinically significant prostate cancer.ConclusionsIncorporating 120 additional SNPs (PHS166 vs PHS46) significantly improved HRs for prostate cancer, while PPV of PSA testing remained the same.

Published
2021

3. Ethnic differences in the indirect effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on clinical monitoring and hospitalisations for non-COVID conditions in England: a population-based, observational cohort study using the OpenSAFELY platform

Author

Chaturvedi, Nishi, Park, Chloe, Carnemolla, Alisia, Williams, Dylan, Knueppel, Anika, Boyd, Andy, Turner, Emma L., Evans, Katharine M., Thomas, Richard, Berman, Samantha, McLachlan, Stela, Crane, Matthew, Whitehorn, Rebecca, Oakley, Jacqui, Foster, Diane, Woodward, Hannah, Campbell, Kirsteen C., Timpson, Nicholas, Kwong, Alex, Soares, Ana Goncalves, Griffith, Gareth, Toms, Renin, Jones, Louise, Annie, Herbert, Mitchell, Ruth, Palmer, Tom, Sterne, Jonathan, Walker, Venexia, Huntley, Lizzie, Fox, Laura, Denholm, Rachel, Knight, Rochelle, Northstone, Kate, Kanagaratnam, Arun, Horne, Elsie, Forbes, Harriet, North, Teri, Taylor, Kurt, Arab, Marwa A.L., Walker, Scott, Coronado, Jose I.C., Karthikeyan, Arun S., Ploubidis, George, Moltrecht, Bettina, Booth, Charlotte, Parsons, Sam, Wielgoszewska, Bozena, Bridger-Staatz, Charis, Steves, Claire, Thompson, Ellen, Garcia, Paz, Cheetham, Nathan, Bowyer, Ruth, Freydin, Maxim, Roberts, Amy, Goldacre, Ben, Walker, Alex, Morley, Jess, Hulme, William, Nab, Linda, Fisher, Louis, MacKenna, Brian, Andrews, Colm, Curtis, Helen, Hopcroft, Lisa, Green, Amelia, Patalay, Praveetha, Maddock, Jane, Patel, Kishan, Stafford, Jean, Jacques, Wels, Tilling, Kate, Macleod, John, McElroy, Eoin, Shah, Anoop, Silverwood, Richard, Denaxas, Spiros, Flaig, Robin, McCartney, Daniel, Campbell, Archie, Tomlinson, Laurie, Tazare, John, Zheng, Bang, Smeeth, Liam, Herrett, Emily, Cowling, Thomas, Mansfield, Kate, Costello, Ruth E., Wang, Kevin, Mansfield, Kathryn, Mahalingasivam, Viyaasan, Douglas, Ian, Langan, Sinead, Brophy, Sinead, Parker, Michael, Kennedy, Jonathan, McEachan, Rosie, Wright, John, Willan, Kathryn, Badrick, Ellena, Santorelli, Gillian, Yang, Tiffany, Hou, Bo, Steptoe, Andrew, Giorgio, Di Gessa, Zhu, Jingmin, Zaninotto, Paola, Wood, Angela, Cezard, Genevieve, Ip, Samantha, Bolton, Tom, Sampri, Alexia, Rafeti, Elena, Almaghrabi, Fatima, Sheikh, Aziz, Shah, Syed A., Katikireddi, Vittal, Shaw, Richard, Hamilton, Olivia, Green, Michael, Kromydas, Theocharis, Kopasker, Daniel, Greaves, Felix, Willans, Robert, Glen, Fiona, Sharp, Steve, Hughes, Alun, Wong, Andrew, Howes, Lee Hamill, Rapala, Alicja, Nigrelli, Lidia, McArdle, Fintan, Beckford, Chelsea, Raman, Betty, Dobson, Richard, Folarin, Amos, Stewart, Callum, Ranjan, Yatharth, Carpentieri, Jd, Sheard, Laura, Fang, Chao, Baz, Sarah, Gibson, Andy, Kellas, John, Neubauer, Stefan, Piechnik, Stefan, Lukaschuk, Elena, Saunders, Laura C., Wild, James M., Smith, Stephen, Jezzard, Peter, Tunnicliffe, Elizabeth, Sanders, Zeena-Britt, Finnigan, Lucy, Ferreira, Vanessa, Green, Mark, Rhead, Rebecca, Kibble, Milla, Wei, Yinghui, Lemanska, Agnieszka, Perez-Reche, Francisco, Piehlmaier, Dominik, Teece, Lucy, Parker, Edward, Walker, Alex J., Inglesby, Peter, Curtis, Helen J., Morton, Caroline E., Morley, Jessica, Mehrkar, Amir, Bacon, Sebastian C.J., Hickman, George, Croker, Richard, Evans, David, Ward, Tom, DeVito, Nicholas J., Green, Amelia C.A., Massey, Jon, Smith, Rebecca M., Hulme, William J., Davy, Simon, Andrews, Colm D., Hopcroft, Lisa E.M., Drysdale, Henry, Dillingham, Iain, Park, Robin Y., Higgins, Rose, Cunningham, Christine, Wiedemann, Milan, Maude, Steven, Macdonald, Orla, Butler-Cole, Ben F.C., O'Dwyer, Thomas, Stables, Catherine L., Wood, Christopher, Brown, Andrew D., Speed, Victoria, Bridges, Lucy, Schaffer, Andrea L., Walters, Caroline E., Rentsch, Christopher T., Bhaskaran, Krishnan, Schultze, Anna, Williamson, Elizabeth J., McDonald, Helen I., Tomlinson, Laurie A., Mathur, Rohini, Eggo, Rosalind M., Wing, Kevin, Wong, Angel Y.S., Grieve, Richard, Grint, Daniel J., Mansfield, Kathryn E., Douglas, Ian J., Evans, Stephen J.W., Walker, Jemma L., Cowling, Thomas E., Herrett, Emily L., Parker, Edward P.K., Bates, Christopher, Cockburn, Jonathan, Parry, John, Hester, Frank, Harper, Sam, O'Hanlon, Shaun, Eavis, Alex, Jarvis, Richard, Avramov, Dima, Griffiths, Paul, Fowles, Aaron, Parkes, Nasreen, Nicholson, Brian, Perera, Rafael, Harrison, David, Khunti, Kamlesh, Sterne, Jonathan AC., Quint, Jennifer, Henderson, Alasdair D., Carreira, Helena, Bidulka, Patrick, Warren-Gash, Charlotte, Hayes, Joseph F., Quint, Jennifer K., Katikireddi, Srinivasa Vittal, and Langan, Sinéad M.

Published
2023
Full Text
View/download PDF

5. A Genetic Risk Score to Personalize Prostate Cancer Screening, Applied to Population Data

Author

Huynh-Le, Minh-Phuong, Fan, Chun Chieh, Karunamuni, Roshan, Walsh, Eleanor I, Turner, Emma L, Lane, J Athene, Martin, Richard M, Neal, David E, Donovan, Jenny L, Hamdy, Freddie C, Parsons, J Kellogg, Eeles, Rosalind A, Easton, Douglas F, Kote-Jarai, Zsofia, Al Olama, Ali Amin, Garcia, Sara Benlloch, Muir, Kenneth, Grönberg, Henrik, Wiklund, Fredrik, Aly, Markus, Schleutker, Johanna, Sipeky, Csilla, Tammela, Teuvo LJ, Nordestgaard, Børge Grønne, Key, Timothy J, Travis, Ruth C, Pharoah, Paul DP, Pashayan, Nora, Khaw, Kay-Tee, Thibodeau, Stephen N, McDonnell, Shannon K, Schaid, Daniel J, Maier, Christiane, Vogel, Walther, Luedeke, Manuel, Herkommer, Kathleen, Kibel, Adam S, Cybulski, Cezary, Wokolorczyk, Dominika, Kluzniak, Wojciech, Cannon-Albright, Lisa A, Brenner, Hermann, Schöttker, Ben, Holleczek, Bernd, Park, Jong Y, Sellers, Thomas A, Lin, Hui-Yi, Slavov, Chavdar Kroumov, Kaneva, Radka P, Mitev, Vanio I, Batra, Jyotsna, Clements, Judith A, Spurdle, Amanda B, BioResource, for the Australian Prostate Cancer, Teixeira, Manuel R, Paulo, Paula, Maia, Sofia, Pandha, Hardev, Michael, Agnieszka, Mills, Ian G, Andreassen, Ole A, Dale, Anders M, Seibert, Tyler M, and Consortium, for the PRACTICAL

Subjects
Biomedical and Clinical Sciences, Health Sciences, Clinical Sciences, Oncology and Carcinogenesis, Aging, Prostate Cancer, Cancer, Prevention, Urologic Diseases, Good Health and Well Being, Aged, Early Detection of Cancer, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Neoplasm Grading, Population Control, Prostatic Neoplasms, Australian Prostate Cancer BioResource, PRACTICAL Consortium, Medical and Health Sciences, Epidemiology, Biomedical and clinical sciences, Health sciences
Abstract

BackgroundA polygenic hazard score (PHS), the weighted sum of 54 SNP genotypes, was previously validated for association with clinically significant prostate cancer and for improved prostate cancer screening accuracy. Here, we assess the potential impact of PHS-informed screening.MethodsUnited Kingdom population incidence data (Cancer Research United Kingdom) and data from the Cluster Randomized Trial of PSA Testing for Prostate Cancer were combined to estimate age-specific clinically significant prostate cancer incidence (Gleason score ≥7, stage T3-T4, PSA ≥10, or nodal/distant metastases). Using HRs estimated from the ProtecT prostate cancer trial, age-specific incidence rates were calculated for various PHS risk percentiles. Risk-equivalent age, when someone with a given PHS percentile has prostate cancer risk equivalent to an average 50-year-old man (50-year-standard risk), was derived from PHS and incidence data. Positive predictive value (PPV) of PSA testing for clinically significant prostate cancer was calculated using PHS-adjusted age groups.ResultsThe expected age at diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer differs by 19 years between the 1st and 99th PHS percentiles: men with PHS in the 1st and 99th percentiles reach the 50-year-standard risk level at ages 60 and 41, respectively. PPV of PSA was higher for men with higher PHS-adjusted age.ConclusionsPHS provides individualized estimates of risk-equivalent age for clinically significant prostate cancer. Screening initiation could be adjusted by a man's PHS.ImpactPersonalized genetic risk assessments could inform prostate cancer screening decisions.

Published
2020

7. Incidence of diabetes after SARS-CoV-2 infection in England and the implications of COVID-19 vaccination: a retrospective cohort study of 16 million people

Author

Taylor, Kurt, Eastwood, Sophie, Walker, Venexia, Cezard, Genevieve, Knight, Rochelle, Al Arab, Marwa, Wei, Yinghui, Horne, Elsie M F, Teece, Lucy, Forbes, Harriet, Walker, Alex, Fisher, Louis, Massey, Jon, Hopcroft, Lisa E M, Palmer, Tom, Cuitun Coronado, Jose, Ip, Samantha, Davy, Simon, Dillingham, Iain, Morton, Caroline, Greaves, Felix, Macleod, John, Goldacre, Ben, Wood, Angela, Chaturvedi, Nishi, Sterne, Jonathan A C, Denholm, Rachel, Al Arab, Marwa, Almaghrabi, Fatima, Andrews, Colm, Badrick, Ellena, Baz, Sarah, Beckford, Chelsea, Berman, Samantha, Bolton, Tom, Booth, Charlotte, Bowyer, Ruth, Boyd, Andy, Bridger-Staatz, Charis, Brophy, Sinead, Campbell, Archie, Campbell, Kirsteen C, Carnemolla, Alisia, Carpentieri, Jd, Cezard, Genevieve, Chaturvedi, Nishi, Cheetham, Nathan, Costello, Ruth, Cowling, Thomas, Crane, Matthew, Cuitun Coronado, Jose Ignacio, Curtis, Helen, Denaxas, Spiros, Denholm, Rachel, Di Gessa, Giorgio, Dobson, Richard, Douglas, Ian, Evans, Katharine M, Fang, Chao, Ferreira, Vanessa, Finnigan, Lucy, Fisher, Louis, Flaig, Robin, Folarin, Amos, Forbes, Harriet, Foster, Diane, Fox, Laura, Freydin, Maxim, Garcia, Paz, Gibson, Andy, Glen, Fiona, Goldacre, Ben, Goncalves Soares, Ana, Greaves, Felix, Green, Amelia, Green, Mark, Green, Michael, Griffith, Gareth, Hamill Howes, Lee, Hamilton, Olivia, Herbet, Annie, Herrett, Emily, Hopcroft, Lisa, Horne, Elsie, Hou, Bo, Hughes, Alun, Hulme, William, Huntley, Lizzie, Ip, Samantha, Jacques, Wels, Jezzard, Peter, Jones, Louise, Kanagaratnam, Arun, Karthikeyan Suseeladevi, Arun, Katikireddi, Vittal, Kellas, John, Kennedy, Jonathan I, Kibble, Milla, Knight, Rochelle, Knueppel, Anika, Kopasker, Daniel, Kromydas, Theocharis, Kwong, Alex, Langan, Sinead, Lemanska, Agnieszka, Lukaschuk, Elena, Mackenna, Brain, Macleod, John, Maddock, Jane, Mahalingasivam, Viyaasan, Mansfield, Kathryn, McArdle, Fintan, McCartney, Daniel, McEachan, Rosie, McElroy, Eoin, McLachlan, Stela, Mitchell, Ruth, Moltrecht, Bettina, Morley, Jess, Nab, Linda, Neubauer, Stefan, Nigrelli, Lidia, North, Teri, Northstone, Kate, Oakley, Jacqui, Palmer, Tom, Park, Chloe, Parker, Michael, Parsons, Sam, Patalay, Praveetha, Patel, Kishan, Perez-Reche, Francisco, Piechnik, Stefan, Piehlmaier, Dominik, Ploubidis, George, Rafeti, Elena, Raman, Betty, Ranjan, Yatharth, Rapala, Alicja, Rhead, Rebecca, Roberts, Amy, Sampri, Alexia, Sanders, Zeena-Britt, Santorelli, Gillian, Saunders, Laura C, Shah, Anoop, Shah, Syed Ahmar, Sharp, Steve, Shaw, Richard, Sheard, Laura, Sheikh, Aziz, Silverwood, Richard, Smeeth, Liam, Smith, Stephen, Stafford, Jean, Steptoe, Andrew, Sterne, Jonathan, Steves, Claire, Stewart, Callum, Taylor, Kurt, Tazare, John, Teece, Lucy, Thomas, Richard, Thompson, Ellen, Tilling, Kate, Timpson, Nicholas, Tomlinson, Laurie, Toms, Renin, Tunnicliffe, Elizabeth, Turner, Emma L, Walker, Alex, Walker, Venexia, Walter, Scott, Wang, Kevin, Wei, Yinghui, Whitehorn, Rebecca, Wielgoszewska, Bozena, Wild, James M, Willan, Kathryn, Willans, Robert, Williams, Dylan, Wong, Andrew, Wood, Angela, Woodward, Hannah, Wright, John, Yang, Tiffany, Zaninotto, Paola, Zheng, Bang, and Zhu, Jingmin

Abstract

Some studies have shown that the incidence of type 2 diabetes increases after a diagnosis of COVID-19, although the evidence is not conclusive. However, the effects of the COVID-19 vaccine on this association, or the effect on other diabetes subtypes, are not clear. We aimed to investigate the association between COVID-19 and incidence of type 2, type 1, gestational and non-specific diabetes, and the effect of COVID- 19 vaccination, up to 52 weeks after diagnosis.

Published
2024
Full Text
View/download PDF

8. Prostate-Specific Antigen Screening and 15-Year Prostate Cancer Mortality: A Secondary Analysis of the CAP Randomized Clinical Trial.

Author

Martin, Richard M., Turner, Emma L., Young, Grace J., Metcalfe, Chris, Walsh, Eleanor I., Lane, J. Athene, Sterne, Jonathan A. C., Noble, Sian, Holding, Peter, Ben-Shlomo, Yoav, Williams, Naomi J., Pashayan, Nora, Bui, Mai Ngoc, Albertsen, Peter C., Seibert, Tyler M., Zietman, Anthony L., Oxley, Jon, Adolfsson, Jan, Mason, Malcolm D., and Davey Smith, George

Abstract

This secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial assesses whether screening for prostate-specific antigen reduces prostate cancer mortality at 15-year follow-up. Key Points: Question: In men aged 50 to 69 years, does a single invitation for a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening test reduce prostate cancer mortality at 15-year follow-up compared with no invitation for testing? Findings: In this secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial of 415 357 men aged 50 to 69 years randomized to a single invitation for PSA screening (n = 195 912) or a control group without PSA screening (n = 219 445) and followed up for a median of 15 years, risk of death from prostate cancer was lower in the group invited to screening (0.69% vs 0.78%; mean difference, 0.09%) compared with the control group. Meaning: Compared with no invitation for routine PSA testing, a single invitation for a PSA screening test reduced prostate cancer mortality at a median follow-up of 15 years, but the absolute mortality benefit was small. Importance: The Cluster Randomized Trial of PSA Testing for Prostate Cancer (CAP) reported no effect of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening on prostate cancer mortality at a median 10-year follow-up (primary outcome), but the long-term effects of PSA screening on prostate cancer mortality remain unclear. Objective: To evaluate the effect of a single invitation for PSA screening on prostate cancer–specific mortality at a median 15-year follow-up compared with no invitation for screening. Design, Setting, and Participants: This secondary analysis of the CAP randomized clinical trial included men aged 50 to 69 years identified at 573 primary care practices in England and Wales. Primary care practices were randomized between September 25, 2001, and August 24, 2007, and men were enrolled between January 8, 2002, and January 20, 2009. Follow-up was completed on March 31, 2021. Intervention: Men received a single invitation for a PSA screening test with subsequent diagnostic tests if the PSA level was 3.0 ng/mL or higher. The control group received standard practice (no invitation). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was reported previously. Of 8 prespecified secondary outcomes, results of 4 were reported previously. The 4 remaining prespecified secondary outcomes at 15-year follow-up were prostate cancer–specific mortality, all-cause mortality, and prostate cancer stage and Gleason grade at diagnosis. Results: Of 415 357 eligible men (mean [SD] age, 59.0 [5.6] years), 98% were included in these analyses. Overall, 12 013 and 12 958 men with a prostate cancer diagnosis were in the intervention and control groups, respectively (15-year cumulative risk, 7.08% [95% CI, 6.95%-7.21%] and 6.94% [95% CI, 6.82%-7.06%], respectively). At a median 15-year follow-up, 1199 men in the intervention group (0.69% [95% CI, 0.65%-0.73%]) and 1451 men in the control group (0.78% [95% CI, 0.73%-0.82%]) died of prostate cancer (rate ratio [RR], 0.92 [95% CI, 0.85-0.99]; P =.03). Compared with the control, the PSA screening intervention increased detection of low-grade (Gleason score [GS] ≤6: 2.2% vs 1.6%; P <.001) and localized (T1/T2: 3.6% vs 3.1%; P <.001) disease but not intermediate (GS of 7), high-grade (GS ≥8), locally advanced (T3), or distally advanced (T4/N1/M1) tumors. There were 45 084 all-cause deaths in the intervention group (23.2% [95% CI, 23.0%-23.4%]) and 50 336 deaths in the control group (23.3% [95% CI, 23.1%-23.5%]) (RR, 0.97 [95% CI, 0.94-1.01]; P =.11). Eight of the prostate cancer deaths in the intervention group (0.7%) and 7 deaths in the control group (0.5%) were related to a diagnostic biopsy or prostate cancer treatment. Conclusions and Relevance: In this secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial, a single invitation for PSA screening compared with standard practice without routine screening reduced prostate cancer deaths at a median follow-up of 15 years. However, the absolute reduction in deaths was small. Trial Registration: isrctn.org Identifier: ISRCTN92187251 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Published
2024
Full Text
View/download PDF

9. Factors associated with trial recruitment, preferences, and treatments received were elucidated in a comprehensive cohort study

Author

Holding, Peter, Mason, Malcolm, Catto, James W.F., Rosario, Derek J., Staffurth, John, Kynaston, Howard, Hughes, Owen, Bollina, Prasad, Doherty, Alan, Gnanapragasam, Vincent, Kockelbergh, Roger, Paul, Alan, Paez, Edgar, Gillatt, David, Rowe, Edward, Oxley, Jon, Donovan, Jenny L., Opmeer, Brent, Young, Grace J., Mills, Nicola, Martin, Richard M., Lane, J. Athene, Metcalfe, Chris, Peters, Tim J., Davis, Michael, Turner, Emma L., Walsh, Eleanor, Neal, David E., and Hamdy, Freddie C.

Published
2019
Full Text
View/download PDF

10. Ethnic differences in the indirect effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on clinical monitoring and hospitalisations for non-COVID conditions in England: a population-based, observational cohort study using the OpenSAFELY platform

Author

Costello, Ruth E., primary, Tazare, John, additional, Piehlmaier, Dominik, additional, Herrett, Emily, additional, Parker, Edward P.K., additional, Zheng, Bang, additional, Mansfield, Kathryn E., additional, Henderson, Alasdair D., additional, Carreira, Helena, additional, Bidulka, Patrick, additional, Wong, Angel Y.S., additional, Warren-Gash, Charlotte, additional, Hayes, Joseph F., additional, Quint, Jennifer K., additional, MacKenna, Brian, additional, Mehrkar, Amir, additional, Eggo, Rosalind M., additional, Katikireddi, Srinivasa Vittal, additional, Tomlinson, Laurie, additional, Langan, Sinéad M., additional, Mathur, Rohini, additional, Chaturvedi, Nishi, additional, Park, Chloe, additional, Carnemolla, Alisia, additional, Williams, Dylan, additional, Knueppel, Anika, additional, Boyd, Andy, additional, Turner, Emma L., additional, Evans, Katharine M., additional, Thomas, Richard, additional, Berman, Samantha, additional, McLachlan, Stela, additional, Crane, Matthew, additional, Whitehorn, Rebecca, additional, Oakley, Jacqui, additional, Foster, Diane, additional, Woodward, Hannah, additional, Campbell, Kirsteen C., additional, Timpson, Nicholas, additional, Kwong, Alex, additional, Soares, Ana Goncalves, additional, Griffith, Gareth, additional, Toms, Renin, additional, Jones, Louise, additional, Annie, Herbert, additional, Mitchell, Ruth, additional, Palmer, Tom, additional, Sterne, Jonathan, additional, Walker, Venexia, additional, Huntley, Lizzie, additional, Fox, Laura, additional, Denholm, Rachel, additional, Knight, Rochelle, additional, Northstone, Kate, additional, Kanagaratnam, Arun, additional, Horne, Elsie, additional, Forbes, Harriet, additional, North, Teri, additional, Taylor, Kurt, additional, Arab, Marwa A.L., additional, Walker, Scott, additional, Coronado, Jose I.C., additional, Karthikeyan, Arun S., additional, Ploubidis, George, additional, Moltrecht, Bettina, additional, Booth, Charlotte, additional, Parsons, Sam, additional, Wielgoszewska, Bozena, additional, Bridger-Staatz, Charis, additional, Steves, Claire, additional, Thompson, Ellen, additional, Garcia, Paz, additional, Cheetham, Nathan, additional, Bowyer, Ruth, additional, Freydin, Maxim, additional, Roberts, Amy, additional, Goldacre, Ben, additional, Walker, Alex, additional, Morley, Jess, additional, Hulme, William, additional, Nab, Linda, additional, Fisher, Louis, additional, Andrews, Colm, additional, Curtis, Helen, additional, Hopcroft, Lisa, additional, Green, Amelia, additional, Patalay, Praveetha, additional, Maddock, Jane, additional, Patel, Kishan, additional, Stafford, Jean, additional, Jacques, Wels, additional, Tilling, Kate, additional, Macleod, John, additional, McElroy, Eoin, additional, Shah, Anoop, additional, Silverwood, Richard, additional, Denaxas, Spiros, additional, Flaig, Robin, additional, McCartney, Daniel, additional, Campbell, Archie, additional, Smeeth, Liam, additional, Cowling, Thomas, additional, Mansfield, Kate, additional, Costello, Ruth E., additional, Wang, Kevin, additional, Mansfield, Kathryn, additional, Mahalingasivam, Viyaasan, additional, Douglas, Ian, additional, Langan, Sinead, additional, Brophy, Sinead, additional, Parker, Michael, additional, Kennedy, Jonathan, additional, McEachan, Rosie, additional, Wright, John, additional, Willan, Kathryn, additional, Badrick, Ellena, additional, Santorelli, Gillian, additional, Yang, Tiffany, additional, Hou, Bo, additional, Steptoe, Andrew, additional, Giorgio, Di Gessa, additional, Zhu, Jingmin, additional, Zaninotto, Paola, additional, Wood, Angela, additional, Cezard, Genevieve, additional, Ip, Samantha, additional, Bolton, Tom, additional, Sampri, Alexia, additional, Rafeti, Elena, additional, Almaghrabi, Fatima, additional, Sheikh, Aziz, additional, Shah, Syed A., additional, Katikireddi, Vittal, additional, Shaw, Richard, additional, Hamilton, Olivia, additional, Green, Michael, additional, Kromydas, Theocharis, additional, Kopasker, Daniel, additional, Greaves, Felix, additional, Willans, Robert, additional, Glen, Fiona, additional, Sharp, Steve, additional, Hughes, Alun, additional, Wong, Andrew, additional, Howes, Lee Hamill, additional, Rapala, Alicja, additional, Nigrelli, Lidia, additional, McArdle, Fintan, additional, Beckford, Chelsea, additional, Raman, Betty, additional, Dobson, Richard, additional, Folarin, Amos, additional, Stewart, Callum, additional, Ranjan, Yatharth, additional, Carpentieri, Jd, additional, Sheard, Laura, additional, Fang, Chao, additional, Baz, Sarah, additional, Gibson, Andy, additional, Kellas, John, additional, Neubauer, Stefan, additional, Piechnik, Stefan, additional, Lukaschuk, Elena, additional, Saunders, Laura C., additional, Wild, James M., additional, Smith, Stephen, additional, Jezzard, Peter, additional, Tunnicliffe, Elizabeth, additional, Sanders, Zeena-Britt, additional, Finnigan, Lucy, additional, Ferreira, Vanessa, additional, Green, Mark, additional, Rhead, Rebecca, additional, Kibble, Milla, additional, Wei, Yinghui, additional, Lemanska, Agnieszka, additional, Perez-Reche, Francisco, additional, Teece, Lucy, additional, Parker, Edward, additional, Walker, Alex J., additional, Inglesby, Peter, additional, Curtis, Helen J., additional, Morton, Caroline E., additional, Morley, Jessica, additional, Bacon, Sebastian C.J., additional, Hickman, George, additional, Croker, Richard, additional, Evans, David, additional, Ward, Tom, additional, DeVito, Nicholas J., additional, Green, Amelia C.A., additional, Massey, Jon, additional, Smith, Rebecca M., additional, Hulme, William J., additional, Davy, Simon, additional, Andrews, Colm D., additional, Hopcroft, Lisa E.M., additional, Drysdale, Henry, additional, Dillingham, Iain, additional, Park, Robin Y., additional, Higgins, Rose, additional, Cunningham, Christine, additional, Wiedemann, Milan, additional, Maude, Steven, additional, Macdonald, Orla, additional, Butler-Cole, Ben F.C., additional, O'Dwyer, Thomas, additional, Stables, Catherine L., additional, Wood, Christopher, additional, Brown, Andrew D., additional, Speed, Victoria, additional, Bridges, Lucy, additional, Schaffer, Andrea L., additional, Walters, Caroline E., additional, Rentsch, Christopher T., additional, Bhaskaran, Krishnan, additional, Schultze, Anna, additional, Williamson, Elizabeth J., additional, McDonald, Helen I., additional, Tomlinson, Laurie A., additional, Wing, Kevin, additional, Grieve, Richard, additional, Grint, Daniel J., additional, Douglas, Ian J., additional, Evans, Stephen J.W., additional, Walker, Jemma L., additional, Cowling, Thomas E., additional, Herrett, Emily L., additional, Bates, Christopher, additional, Cockburn, Jonathan, additional, Parry, John, additional, Hester, Frank, additional, Harper, Sam, additional, O'Hanlon, Shaun, additional, Eavis, Alex, additional, Jarvis, Richard, additional, Avramov, Dima, additional, Griffiths, Paul, additional, Fowles, Aaron, additional, Parkes, Nasreen, additional, Nicholson, Brian, additional, Perera, Rafael, additional, Harrison, David, additional, Khunti, Kamlesh, additional, Sterne, Jonathan AC., additional, and Quint, Jennifer, additional

Published
2023
Full Text
View/download PDF

11. A prospective cohort and extended comprehensive-cohort design provided insights about the generalizability of a pragmatic trial: the ProtecT prostate cancer trial

Author

Bollina, Prasad, Catto, James, Doble, Andrew, Doherty, Alan, Gillatt, David, Gnanapragasam, Vincent, Holding, Peter, Hughes, Owen, Kockelbergh, Roger, Kynaston, Howard, Mason, Malcolm, Oxley, Jon, Paul, Alan, Paez, Edgar, Rosario, Derek J., Rowe, Edward, Staffurth, John, Donovan, Jenny L., Young, Grace J., Walsh, Eleanor I., Metcalfe, Chris, Lane, J. Athene, Martin, Richard M., Tazewell, Marta K., Davis, Michael, Peters, Tim J., Turner, Emma L., Mills, Nicola, Khazragui, Hanan, Khera, Tarnjit K., Neal, David E., and Hamdy, Freddie C.

Published
2018
Full Text
View/download PDF

14. Fifteen-Year Outcomes after Monitoring, Surgery, or Radiotherapy for Prostate Cancer

Author

Hamdy, Freddie C., primary, Donovan, Jenny L., additional, Lane, J. Athene, additional, Metcalfe, Chris, additional, Davis, Michael, additional, Turner, Emma L., additional, Martin, Richard M., additional, Young, Grace J., additional, Walsh, Eleanor I., additional, Bryant, Richard J., additional, Bollina, Prasad, additional, Doble, Andrew, additional, Doherty, Alan, additional, Gillatt, David, additional, Gnanapragasam, Vincent, additional, Hughes, Owen, additional, Kockelbergh, Roger, additional, Kynaston, Howard, additional, Paul, Alan, additional, Paez, Edgar, additional, Powell, Philip, additional, Rosario, Derek J., additional, Rowe, Edward, additional, Mason, Malcolm, additional, Catto, James W.F., additional, Peters, Tim J., additional, Oxley, Jon, additional, Williams, Naomi J., additional, Staffurth, John, additional, and Neal, David E., additional

Published
2023
Full Text
View/download PDF

16. Patient-Reported Outcomes 12 Years after Localized Prostate Cancer Treatment

Author

Donovan, Jenny L., primary, Hamdy, Freddie C., additional, Lane, J. Athene, additional, Young, Grace J., additional, Metcalfe, Chris, additional, Walsh, Eleanor I., additional, Davis, Michael, additional, Steuart-Feilding, Thomas, additional, Blazeby, Jane M., additional, Avery, Kerry N. L., additional, Martin, Richard M., additional, Bollina, Prasad, additional, Doble, Andrew, additional, Doherty, Alan, additional, Gillatt, David, additional, Gnanapragasam, Vincent, additional, Hughes, Owen, additional, Kockelbergh, Roger, additional, Kynaston, Howard, additional, Paul, Alan, additional, Paez, Edgar, additional, Powell, Phillip, additional, Rosario, Derek J., additional, Rowe, Edward, additional, Mason, Malcolm, additional, Catto, James W. F., additional, Peters, Tim J., additional, Wade, Julia, additional, Turner, Emma L., additional, Williams, Naomi J., additional, Oxley, Jon, additional, Staffurth, John, additional, Bryant, Richard J., additional, and Neal, David E., additional

Published
2023
Full Text
View/download PDF

20. Effect of a Low-Intensity PSA-Based Screening Intervention on Prostate Cancer Mortality: The CAP Randomized Clinical Trial

Author

Martin, Richard M., Donovan, Jenny L., Turner, Emma L., Metcalfe, Chris, Young, Grace J., Walsh, Eleanor I., Lane, J. Athene, Noble, Sian, Oliver, Steven E., Evans, Simon, Sterne, Jonathan A. C., Holding, Peter, Ben-Shlomo, Yoav, Brindle, Peter, Williams, Naomi J., Hill, Elizabeth M., Ng, Siaw Yein, Toole, Jessica, Tazewell, Marta K., Hughes, Laura J., Davies, Charlotte F., Thorn, Joanna C., Down, Elizabeth, Davey Smith, George, Neal, David E., and Hamdy, Freddie C.

Published
2018
Full Text
View/download PDF

21. sj-docx-1-msc-10.1177_09691413221119238 - Supplemental material for Screening asymptomatic men for prostate cancer: A comparison of international guidelines on prostate-specific antigen testing

Author

Jackson, Sherena D, de la Rue, May R, Greenslade, Thomas PL, John, Anna M, Wahid, Shahida, Martin, Richard M, Williams, Naomi J, and Turner, Emma L

Subjects
111708 Health and Community Services, FOS: Clinical medicine, 111402 Obstetrics and Gynaecology, FOS: Health sciences
Abstract

Supplemental material, sj-docx-1-msc-10.1177_09691413221119238 for Screening asymptomatic men for prostate cancer: A comparison of international guidelines on prostate-specific antigen testing by Sherena D Jackson, May R de la Rue, Thomas PL Greenslade, Anna M John, Shahida Wahid, Richard M Martin, Naomi J Williams and Emma L Turner in Journal of Medical Screening

Published
2022
Full Text
View/download PDF

22. Masked Priming Is Abstract in the Left and Right Visual Fields

Author

Bowers, Jeffrey S. and Turner, Emma L.

Abstract

Two experiments assessed masked priming for words presented to the left and right visual fields in a lexical decision task. In both Experiments, the same magnitude and pattern of priming was obtained for visually similar ("kiss"-"KISS") and dissimilar ("read"-"READ") prime-target pairs. These findings provide no support for the hypothesis that word identification is mediated by separate and lateralized abstract and specific visual form systems. Strikingly, equivalent priming was observed when primes and targets were presented to the same or opposite visual fields, suggesting that priming occurs after visual information from the two hemispheres is integrated.

Published
2005
Full Text
View/download PDF

26. Functional and quality of life outcomes of localised prostate cancer treatments (Prostate Testing for Cancer and Treatment [ProtecT] study).

Author

Lane, Janet Athene, Donovan, Jenny L., Young, Grace J., Davis, Michael, Walsh, Eleanor I., Avery, Kerry N.L., Blazeby, Jane M., Mason, Malcolm D., Martin, Richard M., Peters, Tim J., Turner, Emma L., Wade, Julia, Bollina, Prasad, Catto, James W.F., Doherty, Alan, Gillatt, David, Gnanapragasam, Vincent, Hughes, Owen, Kockelbergh, Roger, and Kynaston, Howard

Subjects
PROSTATE cancer, CANCER treatment, PATIENT reported outcome measures, RADICAL prostatectomy, QUALITY of life, FECAL incontinence
Abstract

Objective: To investigate the functional and quality of life (QoL) outcomes of treatments for localised prostate cancer and inform treatment decision‐making. Patients and Methods: Men aged 50–69 years diagnosed with localised prostate cancer by prostate‐specific antigen testing and biopsies at nine UK centres in the Prostate Testing for Cancer and Treatment (ProtecT) trial were randomised to, or chose one of, three treatments. Of 2565 participants, 1135 men received active monitoring (AM), 750 a radical prostatectomy (RP), 603 external‐beam radiotherapy (EBRT) with concurrent androgen‐deprivation therapy (ADT) and 77 low‐dose‐rate brachytherapy (BT, not a randomised treatment). Patient‐reported outcome measures (PROMs) completed annually for 6 years were analysed by initial treatment and censored for subsequent treatments. Mixed effects models were adjusted for baseline characteristics using propensity scores. Results: Treatment‐received analyses revealed different impacts of treatments over 6 years. Men remaining on AM experienced gradual declines in sexual and urinary function with age (e.g., increases in erectile dysfunction from 35% of men at baseline to 53% at 6 years and nocturia similarly from 20% to 38%). Radical treatment impacts were immediate and continued over 6 years. After RP, 95% of men reported erectile dysfunction persisting for 85% at 6 years, and after EBRT this was reported by 69% and 74%, respectively (P < 0.001 compared with AM). After RP, 36% of men reported urinary leakage requiring at least 1 pad/day, persisting for 20% at 6 years, compared with no change in men receiving EBRT or AM (P < 0.001). Worse bowel function and bother (e.g., bloody stools 6% at 6 years and faecal incontinence 10%) was experienced by men after EBRT than after RP or AM (P < 0.001) with lesser effects after BT. No treatment affected mental or physical QoL. Conclusion: Treatment decision‐making for localised prostate cancer can be informed by these 6‐year functional and QoL outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Published
2022
Full Text
View/download PDF

27. Ten-year mortality, disease progression, and treatment-related side effects in men with localised prostate cancer from the ProtecT randomised controlled trial according to treatment received

Author

Neal, David E., Metcalfe, Chris, Donovan, Jenny L., Lane, J. Athene, Davis, Michael, Young, Grace J., Dutton, Susan J., Walsh, Eleanor I., Martin, Richard M., Peters, Tim. J., Turner, Emma L., Mason, Malcolm, Bryant, Richard, Bollina, Prasad, Catto, James, Doherty, Alan, Gillatt, David, Gnanapragasam, Vincent, Holding, Peter, Hughes, Owen, Kockelbergh, Roger, Kynaston, Howard, Oxley, Jon, Paul, Alan, Paez, Edgar, Rosario, Derek J., Rowe, Edward, Staffurth, John, Altman, Doug G., Hamdy, Freddie C., Peters, Tim J., Doble, Andrew, Powell, Philip, Prescott, Stephen, Rosario, Derek, Anderson, John B., Aning, Jonathan, Durkan, Garett, Koupparis, Anthony, Leung, Hing, Mariappan, Param, McNeill, Alan, Persad, Raj, Schwaibold, Hartwig, Tulloch, David, Wallace, Michael, Bonnington, Susan, Bradshaw, Lynne, Cooper, Deborah, Elliott, Emma, Herbert, Phillipa, Howson, Joanne, Jones, Amanda, Lennon, Teresa, Lyons, Norma, Moody, Hilary, Plumb, Claire, O'Sullivan, Tricia, Salter, Elizabeth, Thompson, Pauline, Tidball, Sarah, Blaikie, Jan, Gray, Catherine, Adam, Tonia, Askew, Sarah, Atkinson, Sharon, Baynes, Tim, Brain, Carole, Breen, Viv, Brunt, Sarah, Bryne, Sean, Bythem, Jo, Clarke, Jenny, Cloete, Jenny, Dark, Susan, Davis, Gill, Rue, Rachael De La, Denizot, Jane, Dewhurst, Elspeth, Dimes, Anna, Dixon, Nicola, Ebbs, Penny, Emmerson, Ingrid, Ferguson, Jill, Gadd, Ali, Geoghegan, Lisa, Grant, Alison, Grant, Collette, Godfrey, Rosemary, Goodwin, Louise, Hall, Susie, Hart, Liz, Harvey, Andrew, Hoult, Chloe, Hawkins, Sarah, Holling, Sharon, Innes, Alastair, Kilner, Sue, Marshall, Fiona, Mellen, Louise, Moore, Andrea, Napier, Sally, Needham, Julie, Pearse, Kevin, Pisa, Anna, Rees, Mark, Richards, Ellie, Robson, Lindsay, Roxburgh, Janet, Samuel, Nikki, Sharkey, Irene, Slater, Michael, Smith, Donna, Taggart, Pippa, Taylor, Helen, Taylor, Vicky, Thomas, Ayesha, Tomkies, Briony, Trewick, Nicola, Ward, Claire, Walker, Christy, Williams, Ayesha, Woodhouse, Colin, Wyber, Elizabeth, Bahl, Amit, Benson, Richard, Beresford, Mark, Ferguson, Catherine, Graham, John, Herbert, Chris, Howard, Grahame, James, Nick, Kirkbride, Peter, Law, Alastair, Loughrey, Carmel, McClaren, Duncan, Patterson, Helen, Pedley, Ian, Roberts, Trevor, Robinson, Angus, Russell, Simon, Symonds, Paul, Thanvi, Narottam, Vasanthan, Subramaniam, Wilson, Paula, Robinson, Mary, Bhattarai, Selina, Deshmukh, Neeta, Dormer, John, Fernando, Malee, Goepel, John, Griffiths, David, Grigor, Ken, Mayer, Nick, Varma, Murali, Warren, Anne, Appleby, Helen, Ash, Dominic, Aston, Dean, Bolton, Steven, Chalmers, Graham, Conway, John, Early, Nick, Geater, Tony, Goddall, Lynda, Heymann, Claire, Hicks, Deborah, Jones, Liza, Lamb, Susan, Lambert, Geoff, Lawrence, Gill, Lewis, Geraint, Lilley, John, MacLeod, Aileen, Massey, Pauline, McQueen, Alison, Moore, Rollo, Penketh, Lynda, Potterton, Janet, Roberts, Neil, Showler, Helen, Shuttleworth, Pam, Slade, Stephen, Steele, Alasdair, Swinscoe, James, Tiffany, Marie, Townley, John, Treeby, Jo, Weston, Michael, Wilkinson, Joyce, Williams, Lorraine, Wills, Lucy, Woodley, Owain, Yarrow, Sue, Brindle, Lucy, Davies, Linda, Dedman, Dan, Down, Elizabeth, Khazragui, Hanan, Noble, Sian, Taylor, Hilary, Tazewell, Marta, Wade, Julia, Walsh, Eleanor, Baker, Susan, Bellis-Sheldon, Elizabeth, Bougard, Chantal, Bowtell, Joanne, Brewer, Catherine, Burton, Chris, Charlton, Jennie, Christoforou, Nicholas, Clark, Rebecca, Coull, Susan, Croker, Christine, Currer, Rosemary, Daisey, Claire, Delaney, Gill, Donohue, Rose, Drew, Jane, Farmer, Rebecca, Fry, Susan, Haddow, Jean, Hale, Alex, Halpin, Susan, Harris, Belle, Hattrick, Barbara, Holmes, Sharon, Hunt, Helen, Jackson, Vicky, Johnson, Donna, Le Butt, Mandy, Leworthy, Jo, Liddiatt, Tanya, Martin, Alex, Mauree, Jainee, Moore, Susan, Moulam, Gill, Mutch, Jackie, Parker, Kathleen, Pawsey, Christopher, Purdie, Michelle, Robson, Teresa, Smith, Lynne, Stenton, Carole, Steuart-Feilding, Tom, Stott, Beth, Sully, Chris, Sutton, Caroline, Torrington, Carol, Wilkins, Zoe, Williams, Sharon, Wilson, Andrea, Weaver, Ashleigh, Albertsen, Peter, Adolfsson, Jan, Baum, Michael, McFarlane, Jon, Reid, Colette, Turner, Emma, Zietman, Anthony, Hill, Elizabeth, Ng, Siaw Yein, Williams, Naomi, Toole, Jessica, Davies, Charlotte, Hughes, Laura, Rowlands, Mari-Anne, Bell, Lindsey, Harrison, Sean, Mauree, Jainnee, Grant, Adrian, Roberts, Ian, Ashby, Deborah, Cowan, Richard, Fayers, Peter, Mellon, Killian, N’Dow, James, O’Brien, Tim, Sokhal, Michael, Dearnaley, David, Schröder, Fritz, Roberts, Tracy, and for the ProtecT Study Group, .

Subjects
Male, medicine.medical_specialty, Time Factors, Urology, medicine.medical_treatment, 030232 urology & nephrology, Urinary incontinence, Active monitoring, BTC (Bristol Trials Centre), Metastasis, law.invention, 03 medical and health sciences, Prostate cancer, 0302 clinical medicine, ProtecT trial, Randomized controlled trial, law, Internal medicine, Humans, Medicine, External beam radiotherapy, Watchful Waiting, Aged, Prostatectomy, Disease progression, Radiotherapy, business.industry, Prostatic Neoplasms, Middle Aged, medicine.disease, Radical prostatectomy, Treatment Outcome, 030220 oncology & carcinogenesis, Propensity score matching, Cohort, Disease Progression, BRTC, medicine.symptom, Sexual function, business, Literatur Kommentiert
Abstract

Background: The ProtecT trial reported intention-to-treat analysis of men with localised prostate cancer (PCa) randomly allocated to active monitoring (AM), radical prostatectomy, and external beam radiotherapy. Objective: To determine report outcomes according to treatment received in men in randomised and treatment choice cohorts. Design, Setting, and Participants: This study focuses on secondary care. Men with clinically localised prostate cancer at one of nine UK centres were invited to participate in the treatment trial comparing AM, radical prostatectomy, and radiotherapy. Intervention: Two cohorts included 1643 men who agreed to be randomised; 997 declined randomisation and chose treatment. Outcome Measurements and Statistical Analysis: Health-related quality of life impacts on urinary, bowel, and sexual function were assessed using patient-reported outcome measures. Analysis was carried out based on treatment received for each cohort and on pooled estimates using meta-analysis. Differences were estimated with adjustment for known prognostic factors using propensity scores. Results and Limitations: According to treatment received, more men receiving AM died of PCa (AM 1.85%, surgery 0.67%, radiotherapy 0.73%), whilst this difference remained consistent with chance in the randomised cohort (p = 0.08); stronger evidence was found in the exploratory analyses (randomised plus choice cohort) when AM was compared with the combined radical treatment group (p = 0.003). There was also strong evidence that metastasis (AM 5.6%, surgery 2.4%, radiotherapy 2.7%) and disease progression (AM 20.35%, surgery 5.87%, radiotherapy 6.62%) were more common in the AM group. Compared with AM, there were higher risks of sexual dysfunction (95% at 6 mo) and urinary incontinence (55% at 6 mo) after surgery, and of sexual dysfunction (88% at 6 mo) and bowel dysfunction (5% at 6 mo) after radiotherapy. The key limitations are the potential for bias when comparing groups defined by treatment received and outdating of the interventions being evaluated during the lengthy follow-up required in trials of screen-detected PCa. Conclusions: Analyses according to treatment received showed increased rates of disease-related events and lower rates of patient-reported harms in men managed by AM compared with men managed by radical treatment, and stronger evidence of greater PCa mortality in the AM group. Patient Summary: More than 90 out of every 100 men with localised prostate cancer do not die of prostate cancer within 10 yr, irrespective of whether treatment is by means of monitoring, surgery, or radiotherapy. Side effects on sexual and bladder function are much better after active monitoring, but the risks of spreading of prostate cancer are more common.

Published
2020

28. In search of perceptual priming in a semantic classification task

Author

Bowers, Jeffrey S. and Turner, Emma L.

Subjects
Psychology, Experimental -- Research, Language and languages -- Research, Semantics -- Research, Psychology and mental health
Abstract

Four experiments tested for perceptual priming for written words in a semantic categorization task. Repetition priming was obtained for low-frequency words when unrelated categorizations were performed at study and test (Experiment 1), but it was not orthographically mediated given that written-to-written and spoken-to-written word priming was equivalent (Experiments 2 and 3). Furthermore, no priming was obtained between pictures and words (Experiment 4), suggesting that the nonorthographic priming was largely phonological rather than semantic. These results pose a challenge to standard perceptual theories of priming that should expect orthographic priming when words are presented in a visual format at study and test.

Published
2003

31. Erratum to ‘Ten-year Mortality, Disease Progression, and Treatment-related Side Effects in Men with Localised Prostate Cancer from the ProtecT Randomised Controlled Trial According to Treatment Received’ [European Urology 77 (2020) 320–330]

Author

Neal, David E., primary, Metcalfe, Chris, additional, Donovan, Jenny L., additional, Lane, J. Athene, additional, Davis, Michael, additional, Young, Grace J., additional, Dutton, Susan J., additional, Walsh, Eleanor I., additional, Martin, Richard M., additional, Peters, Tim. J., additional, Turner, Emma L., additional, Mason, Malcolm, additional, Bryant, Richard, additional, Bollina, Prasad, additional, Catto, James, additional, Doherty, Alan, additional, Gillatt, David, additional, Gnanapragasam, Vincent, additional, Holding, Peter, additional, Hughes, Owen, additional, Kockelbergh, Roger, additional, Kynaston, Howard, additional, Oxley, Jon, additional, Paul, Alan, additional, Paez, Edgar, additional, Rosario, Derek J., additional, Rowe, Edward, additional, Staffurth, John, additional, Altman, Doug G., additional, and Hamdy, Freddie C., additional

Published
2020
Full Text
View/download PDF

32. Active monitoring, radical prostatectomy and radical radiotherapy in PSA-detected clinically localised prostate cancer: the ProtecT three-arm RCT

Author

Hamdy, Freddie C, primary, Donovan, Jenny L, additional, Lane, J Athene, additional, Mason, Malcolm, additional, Metcalfe, Chris, additional, Holding, Peter, additional, Wade, Julia, additional, Noble, Sian, additional, Garfield, Kirsty, additional, Young, Grace, additional, Davis, Michael, additional, Peters, Tim J, additional, Turner, Emma L, additional, Martin, Richard M, additional, Oxley, Jon, additional, Robinson, Mary, additional, Staffurth, John, additional, Walsh, Eleanor, additional, Blazeby, Jane, additional, Bryant, Richard, additional, Bollina, Prasad, additional, Catto, James, additional, Doble, Andrew, additional, Doherty, Alan, additional, Gillatt, David, additional, Gnanapragasam, Vincent, additional, Hughes, Owen, additional, Kockelbergh, Roger, additional, Kynaston, Howard, additional, Paul, Alan, additional, Paez, Edgar, additional, Powell, Philip, additional, Prescott, Stephen, additional, Rosario, Derek, additional, Rowe, Edward, additional, and Neal, David, additional

Published
2020
Full Text
View/download PDF

33. The ProtecT randomised trial cost-effectiveness analysis comparing active monitoring, surgery, or radiotherapy for prostate cancer

Author

Noble, Sian M., primary, Garfield, Kirsty, additional, Lane, J. Athene, additional, Metcalfe, Chris, additional, Davis, Michael, additional, Walsh, Eleanor I., additional, Martin, Richard M., additional, Turner, Emma L., additional, Peters, Tim J., additional, Thorn, Joanna C., additional, Mason, Malcolm, additional, Bollina, Prasad, additional, Catto, James W. F., additional, Doherty, Alan, additional, Gnanapragasam, Vincent, additional, Hughes, Owen, additional, Kockelbergh, Roger, additional, Kynaston, Howard, additional, Paul, Alan, additional, Paez, Edgar, additional, Rosario, Derek J., additional, Rowe, Edward, additional, Oxley, Jon, additional, Staffurth, John, additional, Neal, David E., additional, Hamdy, Freddie C., additional, and Donovan, Jenny L., additional

Published
2020
Full Text
View/download PDF

35. Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Associations Between Body Mass Index, Prostate Cancer, Advanced Prostate Cancer and Prostate Specific Antigen

Author

Harrison, Sean, primary, Tilling, Kate, additional, Turner, Emma L., additional, Martin, Richard M., additional, Lennon, Rosie, additional, Lane, J. Athene, additional, Donovan, Jenny L., additional, Hamdy, Freddie C., additional, Neal, David E., additional, Bosch, J.L.H. Ruud, additional, and Jones, Hayley E., additional

Published
2019
Full Text
View/download PDF

36. Factors associated with trial recruitment, preferences, and treatments received were elucidated in a comprehensive cohort study

Author

Donovan, Jenny L., primary, Opmeer, Brent, additional, Young, Grace J., additional, Mills, Nicola, additional, Martin, Richard M., additional, Lane, J. Athene, additional, Metcalfe, Chris, additional, Peters, Tim J., additional, Davis, Michael, additional, Turner, Emma L., additional, Walsh, Eleanor, additional, Neal, David E., additional, Hamdy, Freddie C., additional, Holding, Peter, additional, Mason, Malcolm, additional, Catto, James W.F., additional, Rosario, Derek J., additional, Staffurth, John, additional, Kynaston, Howard, additional, Hughes, Owen, additional, Bollina, Prasad, additional, Doherty, Alan, additional, Gnanapragasam, Vincent, additional, Kockelbergh, Roger, additional, Paul, Alan, additional, Paez, Edgar, additional, Gillatt, David, additional, Rowe, Edward, additional, and Oxley, Jon, additional

Published
2019
Full Text
View/download PDF

37. Antagonistic Gcn5-Hda1 interactions revealed by mutations to the Anaphase Promoting Complex in yeast

Author

Malo Mackenzie E, Menzel Johannes, Turner Emma L, Islam Azharul, and Harkness Troy AA

Subjects
Neoplasms. Tumors. Oncology. Including cancer and carcinogens, RC254-282, Cytology, QH573-671
Abstract

Abstract Background Histone post-translational modifications are critical for gene expression and cell viability. A broad spectrum of histone lysine residues have been identified in yeast that are targeted by a variety of modifying enzymes. However, the regulation and interaction of these enzymes remains relatively uncharacterized. Previously we demonstrated that deletion of either the histone acetyltransferase (HAT) GCN5 or the histone deacetylase (HDAC) HDA1 exacerbated the temperature sensitive (ts) mutant phenotype of the Anaphase Promoting Complex (APC) apc5CA allele. Here, the apc5CA mutant background is used to study a previously uncharacterized functional antagonistic genetic interaction between Gcn5 and Hda1 that is not detected in APC5 cells. Results Using Northerns, Westerns, reverse transcriptase PCR (rtPCR), chromatin immunoprecipitation (ChIP), and mutant phenotype suppression analysis, we observed that Hda1 and Gcn5 appear to compete for recruitment to promoters. We observed that the presence of Hda1 can partially occlude the binding of Gcn5 to the same promoter. Occlusion of Gcn5 recruitment to these promoters involved Hda1 and Tup1. Using sequential ChIP we show that Hda1 and Tup1 likely form complexes at these promoters, and that complex formation can be increased by deleting GCN5. Conclusions Our data suggests large Gcn5 and Hda1 containing complexes may compete for space on promoters that utilize the Ssn6/Tup1 repressor complex. We predict that in apc5CA cells the accumulation of an APC target may compensate for the loss of both GCN5 and HDA1.

Published
2011
Full Text
View/download PDF

38. Cross-sectional study evaluating data quality of the National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service (NCRAS) prostate cancer registry data using the Cluster randomised trial of PSA testing for Prostate cancer (CAP)

Author

Merriel, Samuel William David, Turner, Emma L, Walsh, Eleanor, Young, Grace J, Metcalfe, Chris, Hounsome, Luke, Tudge, Isobel, Donovan, Jenny, Hamdy, Freddie, Neal, David, and Martin, Richard M

Subjects
Male, urological tumours, Epidemiology, Research, Prostate, Prostatic Neoplasms, Middle Aged, Prostate-Specific Antigen, BTC (Bristol Trials Centre), Data Accuracy, Cross-Sectional Studies, REGISTRY, Lymphatic Metastasis, Humans, Registries, Neoplasm Grading, Cancer, prostate disease, Aged, Neoplasm Staging, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
Abstract

ObjectivesTo compare the completeness and agreement of prostate cancer data recorded by the National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service (NCRAS) with research-level data specifically abstracted from medical records from the Cluster randomised trial of PSA testing for Prostate cancer (CAP) trial.DesignCross-sectional comparison studyParticipantsWe included 1,356 men from the CAP trial cohort who were linked to the NCRASregistry.Primary and secondary outcome measuresCompleteness of prostate cancer data in NCRAS and CAP and agreement for TNMstage (T1/T2; T3; T4/N1/M1) and Gleason grade (4-6; 7; 8-10), measured bydifferences in proportions and Cohen’s Kappa statistic. Data were also stratified by year and pre- versus post-2010, when NCRAS reporting standards changed.ResultsCompared to CAP, completeness was lower in NCRAS for Gleason grade (41.2% vs 76.7%, difference 35.5 95% CI 32.1, 39.0) and TNM stage (29.9% vs 67.6%, difference 37.6 95% CI 34.1, 41.1). NCRAS completeness for Gleason grade (pre- versus post-2010 31.69% vs 64%; difference 32.31 95% CI 26.76, 37.87) and TNM stage (19.31% vs 55.50%; difference 36.19 95% CI 30.72, 41.67) improved over time. Agreement for Gleason grade was high (Cohen’s Kappa, κ=0.90 95% CI 0.88, 0.93), but lower for TNM stage (κ=0.41 95% CI 0.37, 0.51) overall. There was a trend towards improved agreement on Gleason grade, but not TNM stage, when comparing pre- and post-2010.ConclusionNCRAS case identification was very high, however data on prostate cancer grade was less complete than CAP, and agreement for TNM stage was modest. Although the completeness of NCRAS data has improved since 2010, the higher completeness rate in CAP demonstrate that gains could potentially be achieved in routine registry data. This study’s findings highlight a need for improved recording of stage and grade data in the source medical records.

Published
2017

39. Validating the use of Hospital Episode Statistics data and comparison of costing methodologies for economic evaluation: an end-of-life case study from the Cluster randomised triAl of PSA testing for Prostate cancer (CAP)

Author

Thorn, Joanna C, Turner, Emma L, Hounsome, Luke, Walsh, Eleanor, Down, Liz, Verne, Julia, Donovan, Jenny L, Neal, David E, Hamdy, Freddie C, Martin, Richard M, and Noble, Sian M

Subjects
Male, economic evaluation, Databases, Factual, Cost-Benefit Analysis, costing methodology, Medical Records, State Medicine, Health Economics, Reference Values, ConDuCT-II, Humans, Hospital Costs, health care economics and organizations, Aged, validation, Inpatients, Terminal Care, Research, cost-effectiveness analysis, Prostatic Neoplasms, Middle Aged, Prostate-Specific Antigen, hospital episode statistics, Financial Management, Hospital, Hospitals, United Kingdom, resource use, Centre for Surgical Research, Costs and Cost Analysis, Health Resources
Abstract

Objectives To evaluate the accuracy of routine data for costing inpatient resource use in a large clinical trial and to investigate costing methodologies. Design Final-year inpatient cost profiles were derived using (1) data extracted from medical records mapped to the National Health Service (NHS) reference costs via service codes and (2) Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) data using NHS reference costs. Trust finance departments were consulted to obtain costs for comparison purposes. Setting 7 UK secondary care centres. Population A subsample of 292 men identified as having died at least a year after being diagnosed with prostate cancer in Cluster randomised triAl of PSA testing for Prostate cancer (CAP), a long-running trial to evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing. Results Both inpatient cost profiles showed a rise in costs in the months leading up to death, and were broadly similar. The difference in mean inpatient costs was £899, with HES data yielding ∼8% lower costs than medical record data (differences compatible with chance, p=0.3). Events were missing from both data sets. 11 men (3.8%) had events identified in HES that were all missing from medical record review, while 7 men (2.4%) had events identified in medical record review that were all missing from HES. The response from finance departments to requests for cost data was poor: only 3 of 7 departments returned adequate data sets within 6 months. Conclusions Using HES routine data coupled with NHS reference costs resulted in mean annual inpatient costs that were very similar to those derived via medical record review; therefore, routinely available data can be used as the primary method of costing resource use in large clinical trials. Neither HES nor medical record review represent gold standards of data collection. Requesting cost data from finance departments is impractical for large clinical trials. Trial registration number ISRCTN92187251; Pre-results.

Published
2017

40. Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA) testing of men in UK general practice::a 10-year longitudinal cohort study

Author

Young, Grace J, Harrison, Sean, Turner, Emma L, I Walsh, Eleanor, Oliver, Steven E, Ben-Shlomo, Yoav, Evans, Simon, Lane, J Athene, Neal, David E., Hamdy, Freddie C., Donovan, Jenny L., Martin, Richard M, and Metcalfe, Chris

Subjects
Male, Urologic Diseases, Biopsy, General Practice, psa testing, urologic and male genital diseases, BTC (Bristol Trials Centre), Cohort Studies, Diagnosis, Humans, Mass Screening, CPRD, Longitudinal Studies, Early Detection of Cancer, Aged, PSA testing, Primary Health Care, Research, screening, Prostate Cancer, Age Factors, Prostate, Prostatic Neoplasms, Middle Aged, Prostate-Specific Antigen, prostate cancer, primary health care, Cross-Sectional Studies, Centre for Surgical Research, Screening, BRTC, Public Health, ICEP, Family Practice, Men's Health
Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Cross-sectional studies suggest that around 6% of men undergo prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing each year in UK general practice (GP). This longitudinal study aims to determine the cumulative testing pattern of men over a 10-year period and whether this testing can be considered equivalent to screening for prostate cancer (PCa). SETTING, PARTICIPANTS AND OUTCOME MEASURES: Patient-level data on PSA tests, biopsies and PCa diagnoses were obtained from the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) for the years 2002 to 2011. The cumulative risks of PSA testing and of being diagnosed with PCa were estimated for the 10-year study period. Associations of a man's age, region and index of multiple deprivation with the cumulative risk of PSA testing and PCa diagnosis were investigated. Rates of biopsy and diagnosis, following a high test result, were compared with those from the programme of PSA testing in the Prostate Testing for Cancer and Treatment (ProtecT) study. RESULTS: The 10-year risk of exposure to at least one PSA test in men aged 45 to 69 years in UK GP was 39.2% (95% CI 39.0 to 39.4%). The age-specific risks ranged from 25.2% for men aged 45-49 years to 53.0% for men aged 65-69 years (p for trend

Published
2017

41. Contemporary accuracy of death certificates for coding prostate cancer as a cause of death: Is reliance on death certification good enough? A comparison with blinded review by an independent cause of death evaluation committee

Author

Turner, Emma L, Metcalfe, Chris, Donovan, Jenny L, Noble, Sian, Sterne, Jonathan A C, Lane, J Athene, I Walsh, Eleanor, Hill, Elizabeth M, Down, Liz, Ben-Shlomo, Yoav, Oliver, Steven E, Evans, Simon, Brindle, Peter, Williams, Naomi J, Hughes, Laura J, Davies, Charlotte F, Ng, Siaw Yein, Neal, David E, Hamdy, Freddie C, Albertsen, Peter, Reid, Colette M, Oxley, Jon, McFarlane, John, Robinson, Mary C, Adolfsson, Jan, Zietman, Anthony, Baum, Michael, Koupparis, Anthony, and Martin, Richard M

Subjects
Male, prostate cancer mortality, Short Communication, screening, death certification, Prostate, specificity, Prostatic Neoplasms, prostate cancer, sensitivity, BTC (Bristol Trials Centre), Sensitivity and Specificity, Death Certificates, cause of death, Centre for Surgical Research, Cluster randomised controlled trial, Humans, cluster randomised controlled trial, Aged
Abstract

Background: Accurate cause of death assignment is crucial for prostate cancer epidemiology and trials reporting prostate cancer-specific mortality outcomes. Methods: We compared death certificate information with independent cause of death evaluation by an expert committee within a prostate cancer trial (2002-2015). Results: Of 1,236 deaths assessed, expert committee evaluation attributed 523 (42%) to prostate cancer, agreeing with death certificate cause of death in 1,134 cases (92%, 95% CI: 90%, 93%). The sensitivity of death certificates in identifying prostate cancer deaths as classified by the committee was 91% (95% CI: 89%, 94%); specificity was 92% (95% CI: 90%, 94%). Sensitivity and specificity were lower where death occurred within one year of diagnosis, and where there was another primary cancer diagnosis.Conclusion: UK death certificates accurately identify cause of death in men with prostate cancer, supporting their use in routine statistics. Possible differential misattribution by trial arm supports independent evaluation in randomised trials.

Published
2017

42. Characteristics of men responding to an invitation to undergo testing for prostate cancer as part of a randomised trial

Author

Walsh, Eleanor I., Turner, Emma L., Lane, J. Athene, Donovan, Jenny L., Neal, David E., Hamdy, Freddie C., Martin, Richard M., Metcalfe, Chris, Sterne, Jonathan, Noble, Sian, Hill, Elizabeth, Ng, Siaw Yein, Williams, Naomi J, Down, Elizabeth A, Walsh, Eleanor, Thorn, Joanna, Davies, Charlotte, Hughes, Laura, Rowlands, Mari Anne, Bell, Lindsey, Ben-Shlomo, Yoav, Oliver, Steven E, Brindle, Peter, Evans, Simon, Baum, Michael, Albertsen, Peter, Roberts, Tracy, Robinson, Mary, Adolfsson, Jan, Dearnaley, David, Zeitman, Anthony, Schröder, Fritz, Peters, Tim, Holding, Peter, Lennon, Teresa, Bonnington, Sue, Mason, Malcolm, Oxley, Jon D, Holmberg, Lars, Pickard, Robert, Thompson, Simon, Menon, Usha, Reid, Colette, McFarlane, Jon, Bahl, Amit, Koupparis, Anthony, Tazewell, Marta, and Hatton-Brown, Genevieve

Subjects
Randomised controlled trial, Prostate cancer, Prostate specific antigen testing, Centre for Surgical Research, Screening, BRTC, BTC (Bristol Trials Centre), PSA testing
Abstract

BackgroundSocio-demographic characteristics are associated with participating in cancer screening and trials. We compared the characteristics of those responding with those not responding to a single invitation for PSA testing for prostate cancer as part of the Cluster randomised triAl of PSA testing for Prostate cancer (CAP).MethodsAge, rurality and deprivation among 197,763 men from 271 cluster-randomised primary care centres in the UK were compared between those responding (n=90,300) and not responding (n=100,953) to a prostate cancer testing invitation.Results There was little difference in age between responders and non-responders. Responders were slightly more likely to come from urban rather than rural areas and were slightly less deprived than those who did not respond. ConclusionThese data indicate similarities in age and only minor differences in deprivation and urban location between responders and non-responders. These differences were smaller, but in the same direction as observed in other screening trials.

Published
2016

43. A Genetic Risk Score to Personalize Prostate Cancer Screening, Applied to Population Data.

Author

Minh-Phuong Huynh-Le, Chun Chieh Fan, Karunamuni, Roshan, Walsh, Eleanor I., Turner, Emma L., Lane, J. Athene, Martin, Richard M., Neal, David E., Donovan, Jenny L., Hamdy, Freddie C., Parsons, J. Kellogg, Eeles, Rosalind A., Easton, Douglas F., Kote-Jarai, Zsofia, Olama, Ali Amin Al, Garcia, Sara Benlloch, Muir, Kenneth, Grönberg, Henrik, Wiklund, Fredrik, and Aly, Markus

Abstract

Background: A polygenic hazard score (PHS), the weighted sum of 54 SNP genotypes, was previously validated for association with clinically significant prostate cancer and for improved prostate cancer screening accuracy. Here, we assess the potential impact of PHS-informed screening. Methods: United Kingdom population incidence data (Cancer Research United Kingdom) and data from the Cluster Randomized Trial of PSA Testing for Prostate Cancer were combined to estimate age-specific clinically significant prostate cancer incidence (Gleason score =7, stage T3-T4, PSA =10, or nodal/distant metastases). Using HRs estimated from the ProtecT prostate cancer trial, age-specific incidence rates were calculated for various PHS risk percentiles. Risk-equivalent age, when someone with a given PHS percentile has prostate cancer risk equivalent to an average 50-year-old man (50-year-standard risk), was derived from PHS and incidence data. Positive predictive value (PPV) of PSA testing for clinically significant prostate cancer was calculated using PHS-adjusted age groups. Results: The expected age at diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer differs by 19 years between the 1st and 99th PHS percentiles: men with PHS in the 1st and 99th percentiles reach the 50-year-standard risk level at ages 60 and 41, respectively. PPV of PSA was higher for men with higher PHS-adjusted age. Conclusions: PHS provides individualized estimates of risk-equivalent age for clinically significant prostate cancer. Screening initiation could be adjusted by a man's PHS. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Published
2020
Full Text
View/download PDF

44. The ProtecT trial: analysis of the patient cohort, baseline risk stratification and disease progression.

Author

Bryant, Richard J., Oxley, Jon, Young, Grace J., Lane, Janet A., Metcalfe, Chris, Davis, Michael, Turner, Emma L., Martin, Richard M., Goepel, John R., Varma, Murali, Griffiths, David F., Grigor, Ken, Mayer, Nick, Warren, Anne Y., Bhattarai, Selina, Dormer, John, Mason, Malcolm, Staffurth, John, Walsh, Eleanor, and Rosario, Derek J.

Subjects
DISEASE progression, PROPORTIONAL hazards models, COHORT analysis
Abstract

Objective: To test the hypothesis that the baseline clinico‐pathological features of the men with localized prostate cancer (PCa) included in the ProtecT (Prostate Testing for Cancer and Treatment) trial who progressed (n = 198) at a 10‐year median follow‐up were different from those of men with stable disease (n = 1409). Patients and Methods: We stratified the study participants at baseline according to risk of progression using clinical disease stage, pathological grade and PSA level, using Cox proportional hazard models. Results: The findings showed that 34% of participants (n = 505) had intermediate‐ or high‐risk PCa, and 66% (n = 973) had low‐risk PCa. Of 198 participants who progressed, 101 (51%) had baseline International Society of Urological Pathology Grade Group 1, 59 (30%) Grade Group 2, and 38 (19%) Grade Group 3 PCa, compared with 79%, 17% and 5%, respectively, for 1409 participants without progression (P < 0.001). In participants with progression, 38% and 62% had baseline low‐ and intermediate‐/high‐risk disease, compared with 69% and 31% of participants with stable disease (P < 0.001). Treatment received, age (65–69 vs 50–64 years), PSA level, Grade Group, clinical stage, risk group, number of positive cores, tumour length and perineural invasion were associated with time to progression (P ≤ 0.005). Men progressing after surgery (n = 19) were more likely to have a higher Grade Group and pathological stage at surgery, larger tumours, lymph node involvement and positive margins. Conclusions: We demonstrate that one‐third of the ProtecT cohort consists of people with intermediate‐/high‐risk disease, and the outcomes data at an average of 10 years' follow‐up are generalizable beyond men with low‐risk PCa. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Published
2020
Full Text
View/download PDF

45. A prospective cohort and extended comprehensive-cohort design provided insights about the generalizability of a pragmatic trial: the ProtecT prostate cancer trial

Author

Donovan, Jenny L., primary, Young, Grace J., additional, Walsh, Eleanor I., additional, Metcalfe, Chris, additional, Lane, J. Athene, additional, Martin, Richard M., additional, Tazewell, Marta K., additional, Davis, Michael, additional, Peters, Tim J., additional, Turner, Emma L., additional, Mills, Nicola, additional, Khazragui, Hanan, additional, Khera, Tarnjit K., additional, Neal, David E., additional, Hamdy, Freddie C., additional, Bollina, Prasad, additional, Catto, James, additional, Doble, Andrew, additional, Doherty, Alan, additional, Gillatt, David, additional, Gnanapragasam, Vincent, additional, Holding, Peter, additional, Hughes, Owen, additional, Kockelbergh, Roger, additional, Kynaston, Howard, additional, Mason, Malcolm, additional, Oxley, Jon, additional, Paul, Alan, additional, Paez, Edgar, additional, Rosario, Derek J., additional, Rowe, Edward, additional, and Staffurth, John, additional

Published
2018
Full Text
View/download PDF

47. Patient-Reported Outcomes after Monitoring, Surgery, or Radiotherapy for Prostate Cancer

Author

Donovan, Jenny L., primary, Hamdy, Freddie C., additional, Lane, J. Athene, additional, Mason, Malcolm, additional, Metcalfe, Chris, additional, Walsh, Eleanor, additional, Blazeby, Jane M., additional, Peters, Tim J., additional, Holding, Peter, additional, Bonnington, Susan, additional, Lennon, Teresa, additional, Bradshaw, Lynne, additional, Cooper, Deborah, additional, Herbert, Phillipa, additional, Howson, Joanne, additional, Jones, Amanda, additional, Lyons, Norma, additional, Salter, Elizabeth, additional, Thompson, Pauline, additional, Tidball, Sarah, additional, Blaikie, Jan, additional, Gray, Catherine, additional, Bollina, Prasad, additional, Catto, James, additional, Doble, Andrew, additional, Doherty, Alan, additional, Gillatt, David, additional, Kockelbergh, Roger, additional, Kynaston, Howard, additional, Paul, Alan, additional, Powell, Philip, additional, Prescott, Stephen, additional, Rosario, Derek J., additional, Rowe, Edward, additional, Davis, Michael, additional, Turner, Emma L., additional, Martin, Richard M., additional, and Neal, David E., additional

Published
2016
Full Text
View/download PDF

48. 10-Year Outcomes after Monitoring, Surgery, or Radiotherapy for Localized Prostate Cancer

Author

Hamdy, Freddie C., primary, Donovan, Jenny L., additional, Lane, J. Athene, additional, Mason, Malcolm, additional, Metcalfe, Chris, additional, Holding, Peter, additional, Davis, Michael, additional, Peters, Tim J., additional, Turner, Emma L., additional, Martin, Richard M., additional, Oxley, Jon, additional, Robinson, Mary, additional, Staffurth, John, additional, Walsh, Eleanor, additional, Bollina, Prasad, additional, Catto, James, additional, Doble, Andrew, additional, Doherty, Alan, additional, Gillatt, David, additional, Kockelbergh, Roger, additional, Kynaston, Howard, additional, Paul, Alan, additional, Powell, Philip, additional, Prescott, Stephen, additional, Rosario, Derek J., additional, Rowe, Edward, additional, and Neal, David E., additional

Published
2016
Full Text
View/download PDF

49. Contemporary accuracy of death certificates for coding prostate cancer as a cause of death: Is reliance on death certification good enough? A comparison with blinded review by an independent cause of death evaluation committee

Author

Turner, Emma L, primary, Metcalfe, Chris, additional, Donovan, Jenny L, additional, Noble, Sian, additional, Sterne, Jonathan A C, additional, Lane, J Athene, additional, I Walsh, Eleanor, additional, Hill, Elizabeth M, additional, Down, Liz, additional, Ben-Shlomo, Yoav, additional, Oliver, Steven E, additional, Evans, Simon, additional, Brindle, Peter, additional, Williams, Naomi J, additional, Hughes, Laura J, additional, Davies, Charlotte F, additional, Ng, Siaw Yein, additional, Neal, David E, additional, Hamdy, Freddie C, additional, Albertsen, Peter, additional, Reid, Colette M, additional, Oxley, Jon, additional, McFarlane, John, additional, Robinson, Mary C, additional, Adolfsson, Jan, additional, Zietman, Anthony, additional, Baum, Michael, additional, Koupparis, Anthony, additional, and Martin, Richard M, additional

Published
2016
Full Text
View/download PDF

50. Validating the use of Hospital Episode Statistics data and comparison of costing methodologies for economic evaluation: an end-of-life case study from the Cluster randomised triAl of PSA testing for Prostate cancer (CAP)

Author

Thorn, Joanna C, primary, Turner, Emma L, additional, Hounsome, Luke, additional, Walsh, Eleanor, additional, Down, Liz, additional, Verne, Julia, additional, Donovan, Jenny L, additional, Neal, David E, additional, Hamdy, Freddie C, additional, Martin, Richard M, additional, and Noble, Sian M, additional

Published
2016
Full Text
View/download PDF

Catalog

Books, media, physical & digital resources
See catalog results