J

Jeremy Ford

Massachusetts General Hospital

Publishes on Advanced Proteomics Techniques and Applications, Ovarian cancer diagnosis and treatment, BRCA gene mutations in cancer. 19 papers and 1.7k citations.

19Publications
1.7kTotal Citations

Is this you? Claim your profile.

Add your photo, update your bio, and get notified when your ranking changes.

Top publicationsby citations

Ovarian cancer screening and mortality in the UK Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening (UKCTOCS): a randomised controlled trial
Ian Jacobs, Usha Menon, Andy Ryan et al.|The Lancet|2015
Cited by 1.1kOpen Access

BACKGROUND: Ovarian cancer has a poor prognosis, with just 40% of patients surviving 5 years. We designed this trial to establish the effect of early detection by screening on ovarian cancer mortality. METHODS: In this randomised controlled trial, we recruited postmenopausal women aged 50-74 years from 13 centres in National Health Service Trusts in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland. Exclusion criteria were previous bilateral oophorectomy or ovarian malignancy, increased risk of familial ovarian cancer, and active non-ovarian malignancy. The trial management system confirmed eligibility and randomly allocated participants in blocks of 32 using computer-generated random numbers to annual multimodal screening (MMS) with serum CA125 interpreted with use of the risk of ovarian cancer algorithm, annual transvaginal ultrasound screening (USS), or no screening, in a 1:1:2 ratio. The primary outcome was death due to ovarian cancer by Dec 31, 2014, comparing MMS and USS separately with no screening, ascertained by an outcomes committee masked to randomisation group. All analyses were by modified intention to screen, excluding the small number of women we discovered after randomisation to have a bilateral oophorectomy, have ovarian cancer, or had exited the registry before recruitment. Investigators and participants were aware of screening type. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00058032. FINDINGS: Between June 1, 2001, and Oct 21, 2005, we randomly allocated 202,638 women: 50,640 (25·0%) to MMS, 50,639 (25·0%) to USS, and 101,359 (50·0%) to no screening. 202,546 (>99·9%) women were eligible for analysis: 50,624 (>99·9%) women in the MMS group, 50,623 (>99·9%) in the USS group, and 101,299 (>99·9%) in the no screening group. Screening ended on Dec 31, 2011, and included 345,570 MMS and 327,775 USS annual screening episodes. At a median follow-up of 11·1 years (IQR 10·0-12·0), we diagnosed ovarian cancer in 1282 (0·6%) women: 338 (0·7%) in the MMS group, 314 (0·6%) in the USS group, and 630 (0·6%) in the no screening group. Of these women, 148 (0·29%) women in the MMS group, 154 (0·30%) in the USS group, and 347 (0·34%) in the no screening group had died of ovarian cancer. The primary analysis using a Cox proportional hazards model gave a mortality reduction over years 0-14 of 15% (95% CI -3 to 30; p=0·10) with MMS and 11% (-7 to 27; p=0·21) with USS. The Royston-Parmar flexible parametric model showed that in the MMS group, this mortality effect was made up of 8% (-20 to 31) in years 0-7 and 23% (1-46) in years 7-14, and in the USS group, of 2% (-27 to 26) in years 0-7 and 21% (-2 to 42) in years 7-14. A prespecified analysis of death from ovarian cancer of MMS versus no screening with exclusion of prevalent cases showed significantly different death rates (p=0·021), with an overall average mortality reduction of 20% (-2 to 40) and a reduction of 8% (-27 to 43) in years 0-7 and 28% (-3 to 49) in years 7-14 in favour of MMS. INTERPRETATION: Although the mortality reduction was not significant in the primary analysis, we noted a significant mortality reduction with MMS when prevalent cases were excluded. We noted encouraging evidence of a mortality reduction in years 7-14, but further follow-up is needed before firm conclusions can be reached on the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of ovarian cancer screening. FUNDING: Medical Research Council, Cancer Research UK, Department of Health, The Eve Appeal.

Evidence of Stage Shift in Women Diagnosed With Ovarian Cancer During Phase II of the United Kingdom Familial Ovarian Cancer Screening Study
Adam N. Rosenthal, Lindsay Fraser, Susan Philpott et al.|Journal of Clinical Oncology|2017
Cited by 210Open Access

Purpose To establish the performance of screening with serum cancer antigen 125 (CA-125), interpreted using the risk of ovarian cancer algorithm (ROCA), and transvaginal sonography (TVS) for women at high risk of ovarian cancer (OC) or fallopian tube cancer (FTC). Patients and Methods Women whose estimated lifetime risk of OC/FTC was ≥ 10% were recruited at 42 centers in the United Kingdom and underwent ROCA screening every 4 months. TVS occurred annually if ROCA results were normal or within 2 months of an abnormal ROCA result. Risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) was encouraged throughout the study. Participants were observed via cancer registries, questionnaires, and notification by centers. Performance was calculated after censoring 365 days after prior screen, with modeling of occult cancers detected at RRSO. Results Between June 14, 2007, and May 15, 2012, 4,348 women underwent 13,728 women-years of screening. The median follow-up time was 4.8 years. Nineteen patients were diagnosed with invasive OC/FTC within 1 year of prior screening (13 diagnoses were screen-detected and six were occult at RRSO). No symptomatic interval cancers occurred. Ten (52.6%) of the total 19 diagnoses were stage I to II OC/FTC (CI, 28.9% to 75.6%). Of the 13 screen-detected cancers, five (38.5%) were stage I to II (CI, 13.9% to 68.4%). Of the six occult cancers, five (83.3%) were stage I to II (CI, 35.9% to 99.6%). Modeled sensitivity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value for OC/FTC detection within 1 year were 94.7% (CI, 74.0% to 99.9%), 10.8% (6.5% to 16.5%), and 100% (CI, 100% to 100%), respectively. Seven (36.8%) of the 19 cancers diagnosed < 1 year after prior screen were stage IIIb to IV (CI, 16.3% to 61.6%) compared with 17 (94.4%) of 18 cancers diagnosed > 1 year after screening ended (CI, 72.7% to 99.9%; P < .001). Eighteen (94.8%) of 19 cancers diagnosed < 1 year after prior screen had zero residual disease (with lower surgical complexity, P = .16) (CI, 74.0% to 99.9%) compared with 13 (72.2%) of 18 cancers subsequently diagnosed (CI, 46.5% to 90.3%; P = .09). Conclusion ROCA-based screening is an option for women at high risk of OC/FTC who defer or decline RRSO, given its high sensitivity and significant stage shift. However, it remains unknown whether this strategy would improve survival in screened high-risk women.

Preanalytic Influence of Sample Handling on SELDI-TOF Serum Protein Profiles
Cited by 148

BACKGROUND: High-throughput proteomic methods for disease biomarker discovery in human serum are promising, but concerns exist regarding reproducibility of results and variability introduced by sample handling. This study investigated the influence of different preanalytic handling methods on surface-enhanced laser desorption/ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometry (SELDI-TOF MS) protein profiles of prefractionated serum. We investigated whether older collections with longer sample transit times yield useful protein profiles, and sought to establish the most feasible collection methods for future clinical proteomic studies. METHODS: To examine the effect of tube type, clotting time, transport/incubation time, temperature, and storage method on protein profiles, we used 6 different handling methods to collect sera from 25 healthy volunteers. We used a high-throughput, prefractionation strategy to generate anion-exchange fractions and examined their protein profiles on CM10, IMAC30-Cu, and H50 arrays by using surface-enhanced laser desorption/ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometry. RESULTS: Prolonged transport and incubation at room temperature generated low mass peaks, resulting in distinctions among the protocols. The most and least stringent methods gave the lowest overall peak variances, indicating that proteolysis in the latter may have been nearly complete. For samples transported on ice there was little effect of clotting time, storage method, or transit time. Certain proteins (TTR, ApoCI, and transferrin) were unaffected by handling, but others (ITIH4 and hemoglobin beta) displayed significant variability. CONCLUSIONS: Changes in preanalytical handling variables affect profiles of serum proteins, including proposed disease biomarkers. Proteomic analysis of samples from serum banks collected using less stringent protocols is applicable if all samples are handled identically.

Association of serum sex steroid receptor bioactivity and sex steroid hormones with breast cancer risk in postmenopausal women
Evangelia‐Ourania Fourkala, Alexey Zaikin, Matthew Burnell et al.|Endocrine Related Cancer|2011
Cited by 42Open Access

Postmenopausal women with elevated serum sex steroids have an increased risk of breast cancer. Most of this risk is believed to be exerted through binding of the sex steroids to their receptors. For the first time, we investigate the association of estrogen receptor (ER) and androgen receptor (AR) serum bioactivity (SB) in addition to hormone levels in samples from women with breast cancer collected before diagnosis. Two hundred postmenopausal women participating in the UK Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening who developed ER-positive breast cancer 0.6-5 years after sample donation were identified and matched to 400 controls. ER and AR bioassays were used to measure ERα, ERβ, and AR SB. Androgen and estrogen levels were measured with immunoassays. Subjects were classified according to quintiles of the respective marker among controls and the associations between SB and hormones with breast cancer risk were determined by logistic regression analysis. ERα and ERβ SB were significantly higher before diagnosis compared with controls, while estrogens showed no difference. Women had a twofold increased breast cancer risk if ERα SB (odds ratio (OR), 2.114; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.050-4.425; P=0.040) was in the top quintile >2 years before diagnosis or estrone (OR, 2.205; 95% CI, 1.104-4.586; P=0.029) was in the top quintile <2 years before diagnosis. AR showed no significant association with breast cancer while androstenedione (OR, 3.187; 95% CI, 1.738-6.044; P=0.0003) and testosterone (OR, 2.145; 95% CI, 1.256-3.712; P=0.006) were significantly higher compared with controls and showed a strong association with an almost threefold increased breast cancer risk independent of time to diagnosis. This study provides further evidence on the association of androgens and estrogens with breast cancer. In addition, it reports that high ER but not AR SB is associated with increased breast risk >2 years before diagnosis.