Network


Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.

Hotspot


Dive into the research topics where Judith Offman is active.

Publication


Featured researches published by Judith Offman.


Lancet Oncology | 2016

Screen detection of ductal carcinoma in situ and subsequent incidence of invasive interval breast cancers: a retrospective population-based study

Stephen W. Duffy; Amanda Dibden; Dimitrios Michalopoulos; Judith Offman; Dharmishta Parmar; Jacquie Jenkins; Beverley Collins; Tony Robson; Suzanne Scorfield; Kathryn Green; Xiao-Hui Liao; Michael Ryan; Fiona Johnson; Guy Stevens; O Kearins; Sarah Sellars; Julietta Patnick

Summary Background The value of screen detection and treatment of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is a matter of controversy. At present, the extent to which the diagnosis and treatment of DCIS could prevent the occurrence of invasive breast cancer in the future is not clear. We sought to estimate the association between detection of DCIS at screening and invasive interval cancers subsequent to the relevant screen. Methods We obtained aggregate data for screen-detected cancers from 84 local screening units within 11 regional Quality Assurance Reference Centres in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland from the National Health Service Breast Screening Programme. Data for DCIS diagnoses were obtained for women aged 50–64 years who were invited to and attended mammographic breast screening from April 1, 2003, to March 31, 2007 (4 screening years). Patient-level data for interval cancer arising in the 36 months after each of these were analysed by Poisson regression with invasive interval cancer screen detection rate as the outcome variable; DCIS detection frequencies were fitted first as a continuous and then as a categorical variable. We repeated this analysis after adjustment with both small size and high-grade invasive screen-detected cancers. Findings We analysed data for 5 243 658 women and on interval cancers occurring in the 36 months after the relevant screen. The average frequency of DCIS detected at screening was 1·60 per 1000 women screened (median 1·50 [unit range 1·54–3·56] per 1000 women). There was a significant negative association of screen-detected DCIS cases with the rate of invasive interval cancers (Poisson regression coefficient −0·084 [95% CI −0·13 to −0·03]; p=0·002). 90% of units had a DCIS detection frequency within the range of 1·00 to 2·22 per 1000 women; in these units, for every three screen-detected cases of DCIS, there was one fewer invasive interval cancer in the next 3 years. This association remained after adjustment for numbers of small screen-detected invasive cancers and for numbers of grade 3 invasive screen-detected cancers. Interpretation The association between screen-detected DCIS and subsequent invasive interval cancers suggests that detection and treatment of DCIS is worthwhile in prevention of future invasive disease. Funding UK Department of Health Policy Research Programme and NHS Cancer Screening Programmes.


British Journal of Cancer | 2011

Mammographic density and its interaction with other breast cancer risk factors in an Asian population

C S Wong; G H Lim; Fei Gao; Rupert W Jakes; Judith Offman; Kee Seng Chia; Stephen W. Duffy

Background:Joint effects of mammographic density and other risk factors on breast cancer risk remain unclear.Methods:From The Singapore Breast Screening Project, we selected 491 cases and 982 controls. Mammographic density was measured quantitatively. Data analysis was by conditional logistic regression.Results:Density was a significant risk factor, adjusting for other factors. Density of 76–100% had an odds ratio of 5.54 (95% CI 2.38–12.90) compared with 0–10%. Density had significant interactions with body mass index and oral contraceptive use (P=0.02).Conclusions:Percent density increases breast cancer risk in addition to effects of other risk factors, and modifies the effects of BMI and OCs.


British Journal of Cancer | 2013

A randomised trial of weekend and evening breast screening appointments.

Judith Offman; Mary E. Wilson; M Lamont; Hanna Birke; E Kutt; S Marriage; Y Loughrey; Sue Hudson; A Hartley; J Smith; B Eckersley; F Dungey; Dharmishta Parmar; Julietta Patnick; Stephen W. Duffy

Background:There is a need to research interventions that improve access to and convenience of breast cancer screening services.Methods:We conducted a randomised trial comparing invitations to out-of-hours appointments with standard office hour appointments. Women who were to be invited for routine breast screening were randomised (3 : 1 : 1 : 1) to one of these screening invitations: standard office hour appointment, office hour appointment with the option to change to an out-of-hours appointment, weekday evening appointment, or weekend appointment.Results:A total of 9410 women were invited to an office hour, 3519 to an office hour with the option to change, 3271 to a weekday evening, and 3162 to a weekend appointment. The offer of an initial out-of-hours appointment was associated with a non-significant decrease in attendance rates (73.7% vs 74.1%). The highest attendance was observed in the group offered an initial office hour appointment with the option to change to out-of-hours (76.1% vs 73.3% for standard office hour, P=0.001), with 7% of invitees exercising the option to change.Conclusion:The optimum strategy for improving attendance at breast screening is to offer a traditional office hour appointment and including in the letter of invitation an option to change to an evening or weekend appointment if wished.


BMJ Open | 2017

Acceptability of the Cytosponge procedure for detecting Barrett’s oesophagus: A qualitative study

Madeleine Freeman; Judith Offman; Fiona M Walter; Peter Sasieni; Samuel G. Smith

Objective To investigate the acceptability of the Cytosponge, a novel sampling device to detect Barretts oesophagus (BE), a precursor to oesophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC), among people with risk factors for this condition. Design A qualitative study using semistructured interviews and focus group discussions. Data were explored by three researchers using thematic analysis. Setting Community setting in London, UK. Participants A recruitment company identified 33 adults (17 men, 16 women) aged 50–69 years with gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GERD), a risk factor for BE. The majority of participants were white British (73%). The focus groups were stratified by gender and education. 10 individuals were interviewed and 23 participated in four focus groups. Results 3 key themes emerged from the data: the anticipated physical experience, preferences for the content of information materials and comparisons with the current gold-standard test. Overall acceptability was high, but there was initial concern about the physical experience of taking the test, including swallowing and extracting the Cytosponge. These worries were reduced after handling the device and a video demonstration of the procedure. Knowledge of the relationship between GERD, BE and EAC was poor, and some suggested they would prefer not to know about the link when being offered the Cytosponge. Participants perceived the Cytosponge to be more comfortable, practical and economical than endoscopy. Conclusions These qualitative data suggest the Cytosponge was acceptable to the majority of participants with risk factors for BE, and could be used as a first-line test to investigate GERD symptoms. Concerns about the physical experience of the test were alleviated through multimedia resources. The development of patient information materials is an important next step to ensuring patients are adequately informed and reassured about the procedure. Patient stakeholders should be involved in this process to ensure their concerns and preferences are considered. Trial registration number ISRCTN68382401; pre-results.


British Journal of Cancer | 2016

A randomised trial of the effect of postal reminders on attendance for breast screening.

Prue C Allgood; A Maxwell; Sue Hudson; Judith Offman; Gillian Hutchison; Cathryn Beattie; Raquel Tuano-Donnelly; Anthony Threlfall; Tina Summersgill; Lesley Bellis; Collette Robinson; Samantha Heaton; Julietta Patnick; Stephen W. Duffy

Background:Some women make an informed choice not to attend breast screening, whereas others may have forgotten about the appointment. We report on a randomised trial that investigates whether a reminder letter affects attendance.Methods:Women scheduled for a breast screening appointment were randomised to either receive a reminder letter a few days before their breast screening appointment in addition to the standard invitation letter (intervention) or not (control). The primary outcome was attendance within 30 days of the first offered appointment. Secondary outcomes were attendance within 90 and 180 days.Results:In all, 11 383 (49.9%) women were randomised to the intervention and 11 445 (50.1%) to the control. In the intervention arm, 7759 (68.2%) attended within 30 days of the first offered appointment compared with 7349 (64.2%) in the control arm. This difference was significant (P<0.001). The odds ratio (OR) (95% confidence interval) for the primary end point was 1.19 (1.13–1.26). This was not significantly affected by age, socioeconomic status or type of screen (prevalent or incident). Secondary endpoint analyses supported these results. Results did differ, however, between the different centres studied.Conclusions:This study found that postal reminders increase breast screening uptake, and could be practicable to implement in the NHS Breast Screening Programme.


British Journal of Cancer | 2014

Reduction in interval cancer rates following the introduction of two-view mammography in the UK breast screening programme.

Amanda Dibden; Judith Offman; Dharmishta Parmar; Jacquie Jenkins; Slater J; K. Binysh; McSorley J; Scorfield S; Cumming P; Liao Xh; Ryan M; Harker D; Stevens G; Rogers N; Blanks R; Sarah Sellars; Julietta Patnick; Stephen W. Duffy

Background:The introduction of two-view mammography at incident (subsequent) screens in the National Health Service Breast Screening Programme (NHSBSP) has led to an increased number of cancers detected at screen. However, the effect of two-view mammography on interval cancer rates has yet to be assessed.Methods:Routine screening and interval cancer data were collated from all screening programmes in the United Kingdom for women aged 50–64, screened between 1 April 2003 and 31 March 2005. Interval cancer rates were compared based on whether two-view mammography was in use at the last routine screen.Results:The reduction in interval cancers following screening using two-view mammography compared with one view was 0.68 per 1 000 women screened. Overall, this suggests the introduction of two-view mammography at incident screen was accompanied by a 15–20% reduction in interval cancer rates in the NHSBSP.Conclusion:The introduction of two-view mammography at incident screens is associated with a reduction in incidence of interval cancers. This is consistent with previous publications on a contemporaneous increase in screen-detected cancers. The results provide further evidence of the benefit of the use of two-view mammography at incident screens.


Archive | 2012

Radiotherapy After Surgery for Small Breast Cancers of Stellate Appearance

László Tabár; Nadja Lindhe; Amy Ming Fang Yen; Tony Hsiu-Hsi Chen; Sherry Y.‐H. Chiu; Jean Ching Yuan Fann; Sam Li Sheng Chen; Grace Hui-Min Wu; Rex Chih-Chung Huang; Judith Offman; Fiona A. Dungey; Wendy Yi Ying Wu; Robert A. Smith; Stephen W. Duffy

Radiotherapy is widely used in breast cancer treatment, particularly in patients undergoing breast conserving surgery, principally in order to reduce risk of local recurrence (Liljegren et al. 1999; Fisher et al. 2002). Although radiation therapy has been observed in a major metaanalysis to confer a net survival benefit (Clarke et al. 2005), it is not without side-effects. It has been observed to confer increased risks of cardiovascular events and lung tumours (Clarke et al. 2005; Darby et al. 2005). The fact that radiation therapy confers both benefits and harms raises issues pertinent to all treatments, i.e., the importance of selecting patient populations for which the balance of benefits to harms is optimised, and of excluding those patients who will not benefit from the treatment, or at least not sufficiently to outweigh the risk of adverse effects. Given the current lack of confidence that the prognostic indicators for such selection exist, conservative therapy includes post-surgical radiotherapy as a standard of care.


Lancet Oncology | 2017

Effect of second timed appointments for non-attenders of breast cancer screening in England: a randomised controlled trial

Prue C Allgood; Roberta Maroni; Sue Hudson; Judith Offman; Anne Turnbull; Lesley Peacock; Jim Steel; Geraldine Kirby; Christine E. Ingram; Julie Somers; Clare Fuller; Anthony Threlfall; Rhian Gabe; A Maxwell; Julietta Patnick; Stephen W. Duffy

Summary Background In England, participation in breast cancer screening has been decreasing in the past 10 years, approaching the national minimum standard of 70%. Interventions aimed at improving participation need to be investigated and put into practice to stop this downward trend. We assessed the effect on participation of sending invitations for breast screening with a timed appointment to women who did not attend their first offered appointment within the NHS Breast Screening Programme (NHSBSP). Methods In this open, randomised controlled trial, women in six centres in the NHSBSP in England who were invited for routine breast cancer screening were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive an invitation to a second appointment with fixed date and time (intervention) or an invitation letter with a telephone number to call to book their new screening appointment (control) in the event of non-attendance at the first offered appointment. Randomisation was by SX number, a sequential unique identifier of each woman within the NHSBSP, and at the beginning of the study a coin toss decided whether women with odd or even SX numbers would be allocated to the intervention group. Women aged 50–70 years who did not attend their first offered appointment were eligible for the analysis. The primary endpoint was participation (ie, attendance at breast cancer screening) within 90 days of the date of the first offered appointment; we used Poisson regression to compare the proportion of women who participated in screening in the study groups. All analyses were by intention to treat. This trial is registered with Barts Health, number 009304QM. Findings We obtained 33 146 records of women invited for breast cancer screening at the six centres between June 2, 2014, and Sept 30, 2015, who did not attend their first offered appointment. 26 054 women were eligible for this analysis (12 807 in the intervention group and 13 247 in the control group). Participation within 90 days of the first offered appointment was significantly higher in the intervention group (2861 [22%] of 12 807) than in the control group (1632 [12%] of 13 247); relative risk of participation 1·81 (95% CI 1·70–1·93; p<0·0001). Interpretation These findings show that a policy of second appointments with fixed date and time for non-attenders of breast screening is effective in improving participation. This strategy can be easily implemented by the screening sites and, if combined with simple interventions, could further increase participation and ensure an upward shift in the participation trend nationally. Whether the policy should vary by time since last attended screen will have to be considered. Funding National Health Service Cancer Screening Programmes and Department of Health Policy Research Programme.


Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Clinics of North America | 2017

Alternatives to Traditional Per-Oral Endoscopy for Screening

Judith Offman; Rebecca C. Fitzgerald

Barretts esophagus (BE) predisposes patients to esophageal adenocarcinoma. 3 to 6% of individuals with gastro-esophageal reflux disease are estimated to have BE but only 20 to 25% of BE patients are currently diagnosed. The current gold standard for diagnosis of BE is per-oral upper GI endoscopy. As this is not suitable for large-scale screening, a number of alternative methods are currently being investigated: transnasal and video capsule endoscopy, endomicroscopy, cell collection devices like the cytosponge and biomarkers. Some of these are promising, however, well powered studies carried out in relevant screening populations are needed.


British Journal of Cancer | 2018

Trends and projections in adenocarcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma of the oesophagus in England from 1971 to 2037

Judith Offman; Francesca Pesola; Peter Sasieni

BackgroundThe aim of this study was to assess the incidence and trends of oesophageal adenocarcinomas (OACs) and squamous cell carcinomas (OSCCs) in England from 1971 to 2037.MethodsData on 220,026 oesophageal cancers diagnosed in England between 1971 and 2013 were extracted. Multiple imputation was used to predict morphology data were missing. Incidence rates were modelled and extrapolated to 2037 using age–period-cohort models.ResultsThe OAC age-standardised incidence rate (ASRs) increase was greatest from 1972 to 1992 (from 4.8 to 12.3 for men and 1.1 to 3 per 100,000 for women) and slowed from 1992 to 2012 (with an increase to 17 for men and 3.8 per 100,000 for women). OSCCs rates decreased from 7.5 to 4.9 from 1972 to 2012 for men. For women, ASRs increased from 5.5 to 5.9 between 1972 and 1992 and then decreased to 4.7 per 100,000 until 2012. Rates until 2032 are predicted to stay stable for OACs and further decrease for OSCCs.ConclusionsImputing missing morphology allowed accurate and up-to-date estimates of trends and projections. We observed a slowing down of the increase in OAC ASRs and an overall decrease in OSCC ASRs.

Collaboration


Dive into the Judith Offman's collaboration.

Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Stephen W. Duffy

Queen Mary University of London

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Peter Sasieni

Queen Mary University of London

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Dharmishta Parmar

Queen Mary University of London

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

A Maxwell

University of Manchester

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Amanda Dibden

Queen Mary University of London

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Benoit Aigret

Queen Mary University of London

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Beth Muldrew

Queen Mary University of London

View shared research outputs
Researchain Logo
Decentralizing Knowledge