Network


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

Hotspot


Dive into the research topics where Matthew Burnell is active.

Publication


Featured researches published by Matthew Burnell.


The Lancet | 2016

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; Aleksandra Gentry-Maharaj; Matthew Burnell; Jatinderpal Kalsi; Nazar Najib Amso; Sophia Apostolidou; Elizabeth Benjamin; Derek Cruickshank; Danielle N Crump; Susan K Davies; Anne Dawnay; Stephen Dobbs; Gwendolen Fletcher; Jeremy Ford; Keith M. Godfrey; Richard Gunu; Mariam Habib; Rachel Hallett; Jonathan Herod; Howard Jenkins; Chloe Karpinskyj; Simon Leeson; Sara Lewis; William R Liston; Alberto Lopes; Tim Mould; John Murdoch; David H. Oram

Summary 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.


BMJ | 2008

Recruitment to multicentre trials—lessons from UKCTOCS: descriptive study

Usha Menon; Aleksandra Gentry-Maharaj; Andrew M. Ryan; Aarti Sharma; Matthew Burnell; Rachel Hallett; Sara Lewis; Alberto Lopez; Keith M. Godfrey; David H. Oram; Jonathan Herod; Karin Williamson; Mourad W. Seif; Ian A. Scott; Tim Mould; Robert Woolas; John Murdoch; Stephen Dobbs; Nazar Najib Amso; Simon Leeson; Derek Cruickshank; Alistair McGuire; Stewart Campbell; Lesley Fallowfield; Steve Skates; Mahesh Parmar; Ian Jacobs

Objective To describe the factors that contributed to successful recruitment of more than 200 000 women to the UK Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening, one of the largest ever randomised controlled trials. Design Descriptive study. Setting 13 NHS trusts in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland. Participants Postmenopausal women aged 50-74; exclusion criteria included ovarian malignancy, bilateral oophorectomy, increased risk of familial ovarian cancer, active non-ovarian malignancy, and participation in other ovarian cancer screening trials. Main outcome measures Achievement of target recruitment, acceptance rates of invitation, and recruitment rates. Results The trial was set up in 13 centres with 27 adjoining local health authorities. The coordinating centre team was led by one of the senior investigators, who was closely involved in planning and day to day trial management. Of 1 243 282 women invited, 23.2% (288 955) replied that they were eligible and would like to participate. Of those sent appointments, 73.6% (205 090) attended for recruitment. The acceptance rate varied from 19% to 33% between trial centres. Measures to ensure target recruitment included named coordinating centre staff supporting and monitoring each centre, prompt identification and resolution of logistic problems, varying the volume of invitations by centre, using local non-attendance rates to determine the size of recruitment clinics, and organising large ad hoc clinics supported by coordinating centre staff. The trial randomised 202 638 women in 4.3 years. Conclusions Planning and trial management are as important as trial design and require equal attention from senior investigators. Successful recruitment needs constant monitoring by a committed proactive management team that is willing to explore individual solutions for different centres and use central resources to improve local recruitment. Automation of trial processes with web based trial management systems is crucial in large multicentre randomised controlled trials. Recruitment can be further enhanced by using information videos and group discussions. Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN22488978.


Lancet Oncology | 2011

Sensitivity of transvaginal ultrasound screening for endometrial cancer in postmenopausal women: a case-control study within the UKCTOCS cohort

Ian Jacobs; Aleksandra Gentry-Maharaj; Matthew Burnell; Ranjit Manchanda; Naveena Singh; Aarti Sharma; Andrew M. Ryan; Mourad W. Seif; Nazar Najib Amso; Gillian Turner; Carol Brunell; Gwendolen Fletcher; Rani Rangar; Kathy Ford; Keith M. Godfrey; Alberto Lopes; David H. Oram; Jonathan Herod; Karin Williamson; Ian A. Scott; Howard Jenkins; Tim Mould; Robert Woolas; John Murdoch; Stephen Dobbs; Simon Leeson; Derek Cruickshank; Steven J. Skates; Lesley Fallowfield; Mahesh Parmar

BACKGROUND The increase in the worldwide incidence of endometrial cancer relates to rising obesity, falling fertility, and the ageing of the population. Transvaginal ultrasound (TVS) is a possible screening test, but there have been no large-scale studies. We report the performance of TVS screening in a large cohort. METHODS We did a nested case-control study of postmenopausal women who underwent TVS in the United Kingdom Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening (UKCTOCS) following recruitment between April 17, 2001, and Sept 29, 2005. Endometrial thickness and endometrial abnormalities were recorded, and follow-up, through national registries and a postal questionnaire, documented the diagnosis of endometrial cancer. Our primary outcome measure was endometrial cancer and atypical endometrial hyperplasia (AEH). Performance characteristics of endometrial thickness and abnormalities for detection of endometrial cancer within 1 year of TVS were calculated. Epidemiological variables were used to develop a logistic regression model and assess a screening strategy for women at higher risk. Our study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00058032, and with the International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial register, number ISRCTN22488978. FINDINGS 48,230 women underwent TVS in the UKCTOCS prevalence screen. 9078 women were ineligible because they had undergone a hysterectomy and 2271 because their endometrial thickness had not been recorded; however, 157 of these women had an endometrial abnormality on TVS and were included in the analysis. Median follow-up was 5·11 years (IQR 4·05-5·95). 136 women with endometrial cancer or AEH within 1 year of TVS were included in our primary analysis. The optimum endometrial thickness cutoff for endometrial cancer or AEH was 5·15 mm, with sensitivity of 80·5% (95% CI 72·7-86·8) and specificity of 86·2% (85·8-86·6). Sensitivity and specificity at a 5 mm or greater cutoff were 80·5% (72·7-86·8) and 85·7% (85·4-86·2); for women with a 5 mm or greater cutoff plus endometrial abnormalities, the sensitivity and specificity were 85·3% (78·2-90·8) and 80·4% (80·0-80·8), respectively. For a cutoff of 10 mm or greater, sensitivity and specificity were 54·1% (45·3-62·8) and 97·2% (97·0-97·4). When our analysis was restricted to the 96 women with endometrial cancer or AEH who reported no symptoms of postmenopausal bleeding at the UKCTOCS scan before diagnosis and had an endometrial thickness measurement available, a cutoff of 5 mm achieved a sensitivity of 77·1% (67·8-84·3) and specificity of 85·8% (85·7-85·9). The logistic regression model identified 25% of the population as at high risk and 39·5% of endometrial cancer or AEH cases were identified within this high risk group. In this high-risk population, a cutoff at 6·75 mm achieved sensitivity of 84·3% (71·4-93·0) and specificity of 89·9% (89·3-90·5). INTERPRETATION Our findings show that TVS screening for endometrial cancer has good sensitivity in postmenopausal women. The burden of diagnostic procedures and false-positive results can be reduced by limiting screening to a higher-risk group. The role of population screening for endometrial cancer remains uncertain, but our findings are of immediate value in the management of increased endometrial thickness in postmenopausal women undergoing pelvic scans for reasons other than vaginal bleeding.


Journal of Clinical Oncology | 2015

Risk Algorithm Using Serial Biomarker Measurements Doubles the Number of Screen-Detected Cancers Compared With a Single-Threshold Rule in the United Kingdom Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening

Usha Menon; Andrew M. Ryan; Jatinderpal Kalsi; Aleksandra Gentry-Maharaj; Anne Dawnay; Mariam Habib; Sophia Apostolidou; Naveena Singh; Elizabeth Benjamin; Matthew Burnell; Susan Davies; Aarti Sharma; Richard Gunu; Keith M. Godfrey; Alberto Lopes; David Oram; Jonathan Herod; Karin Williamson; Mourad W. Seif; Howard Jenkins; Tim Mould; Robert Woolas; John Murdoch; Stephen Dobbs; Nazar Najib Amso; Simon Leeson; Derek Cruickshank; Ian A. Scott; Lesley Fallowfield; Martin Widschwendter

Purpose Cancer screening strategies have commonly adopted single-biomarker thresholds to identify abnormality. We investigated the impact of serial biomarker change interpreted through a risk algorithm on cancer detection rates. Patients and Methods In the United Kingdom Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening, 46,237 women, age 50 years or older underwent incidence screening by using the multimodal strategy (MMS) in which annual serum cancer antigen 125 (CA-125) was interpreted with the risk of ovarian cancer algorithm (ROCA). Women were triaged by the ROCA: normal risk, returned to annual screening; intermediate risk, repeat CA-125; and elevated risk, repeat CA-125 and transvaginal ultrasound. Women with persistently increased risk were clinically evaluated. All participants were followed through national cancer and/or death registries. Performance characteristics of a single-threshold rule and the ROCA were compared by using receiver operating characteristic curves. Results After 296,911 women-years of annual incidence screening, 640 women underwent surgery. Of those, 133 had primary invasive epithelial ovarian or tubal cancers (iEOCs). In all, 22 interval iEOCs occurred within 1 year of screening, of which one was detected by ROCA but was managed conservatively after clinical assessment. The sensitivity and specificity of MMS for detection of iEOCs were 85.8% (95% CI, 79.3% to 90.9%) and 99.8% (95% CI, 99.8% to 99.8%), respectively, with 4.8 surgeries per iEOC. ROCA alone detected 87.1% (135 of 155) of the iEOCs. Using fixed CA-125 cutoffs at the last annual screen of more than 35, more than 30, and more than 22 U/mL would have identified 41.3% (64 of 155), 48.4% (75 of 155), and 66.5% (103 of 155), respectively. The area under the curve for ROCA (0.915) was significantly (P = .0027) higher than that for a single-threshold rule (0.869). Conclusion Screening by using ROCA doubled the number of screen-detected iEOCs compared with a fixed cutoff. In the context of cancer screening, reliance on predefined single-threshold rules may result in biomarkers of value being discarded.


British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology | 2012

Prevalence, frequency and problem rating of hot flushes persist in older postmenopausal women: impact of age, body mass index, hysterectomy, hormone therapy use, lifestyle and mood in a cross‐sectional cohort study of 10 418 British women aged 54–65

Hunter; A Gentry-Maharaj; Andrew M. Ryan; Matthew Burnell; Anne Lanceley; Lindsay Fraser; Ian Jacobs; Usha Menon

Please cite this paper as: Hunter M, Gentry‐Maharaj A, Ryan A, Burnell M, Lanceley A, Fraser L, Jacobs I, Menon U. Prevalence, frequency and problem rating of hot flushes persist in older postmenopausal women: impact of age, body mass index, hysterectomy, hormone therapy use, lifestyle and mood in a cross‐sectional cohort study of 10 418 British women aged 54–65. BJOG 2012;119:40–50.


Journal of the National Cancer Institute | 2015

Cost-effectiveness of Population Screening for BRCA Mutations in Ashkenazi Jewish Women Compared With Family History–Based Testing

Ranjit Manchanda; Rosa Legood; Matthew Burnell; Alistair McGuire; Maria Raikou; Kelly Loggenberg; Jane Wardle; Saskia C. Sanderson; Sue Gessler; Lucy Side; Nyala Balogun; Rakshit Desai; Ajith Kumar; Huw Dorkins; Yvonne Wallis; Cyril Chapman; Rohan Taylor; Chris Jacobs; Ian Tomlinson; Uziel Beller; Usha Menon; Ian Jacobs

Background: Population-based testing for BRCA1/2 mutations detects the high proportion of carriers not identified by cancer family history (FH)–based testing. We compared the cost-effectiveness of population-based BRCA testing with the standard FH-based approach in Ashkenazi Jewish (AJ) women. Methods: A decision-analytic model was developed to compare lifetime costs and effects amongst AJ women in the UK of BRCA founder-mutation testing amongst: 1) all women in the population age 30 years or older and 2) just those with a strong FH (≥10% mutation risk). The model assumes that BRCA carriers are offered risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy and annual MRI/mammography screening or risk-reducing mastectomy. Model probabilities utilize the Genetic Cancer Prediction through Population Screening trial/published literature to estimate total costs, effects in terms of quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), cancer incidence, incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), and population impact. Costs are reported at 2010 prices. Costs/outcomes were discounted at 3.5%. We used deterministic/probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) to evaluate model uncertainty. Results: Compared with FH-based testing, population-screening saved 0.090 more life-years and 0.101 more QALYs resulting in 33 days’ gain in life expectancy. Population screening was found to be cost saving with a baseline-discounted ICER of -£2079/QALY. Population-based screening lowered ovarian and breast cancer incidence by 0.34% and 0.62%. Assuming 71% testing uptake, this leads to 276 fewer ovarian and 508 fewer breast cancer cases. Overall, reduction in treatment costs led to a discounted cost savings of £3.7 million. Deterministic sensitivity analysis and 94% of simulations on PSA (threshold £20000) indicated that population screening is cost-effective, compared with current NHS policy. Conclusion: Population-based screening for BRCA mutations is highly cost-effective compared with an FH-based approach in AJ women age 30 years and older.


British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology | 2011

Outcome of risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy in BRCA carriers and women of unknown mutation status

Ranjit Manchanda; A Abdelraheim; Marcella M. Johnson; Adam N. Rosenthal; Elizabeth Benjamin; Carol Brunell; Matthew Burnell; Lucy Side; Sue Gessler; E. Saridogan; David H. Oram; Ian Jacobs; Usha Menon

Please cite this paper as: Manchanda R, Abdelraheim A, Johnson M, Rosenthal A, Benjamin E, Brunell C, Burnell M, Side L, Gessler S, Saridogan E, Oram D, Jacobs I, Menon U. Outcome of risk‐reducing salpingo‐oophorectomy in BRCA carriers and women of unknown mutation status. BJOG 2011;118:814–824.


Journal of the National Cancer Institute | 2015

Population Testing for Cancer Predisposing BRCA1/BRCA2 Mutations in the Ashkenazi-Jewish Community: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Ranjit Manchanda; Kelly Loggenberg; Saskia C. Sanderson; Matthew Burnell; Jane Wardle; Sue Gessler; Lucy Side; Nyala Balogun; Rakshit Desai; Ajith Kumar; Huw Dorkins; Yvonne Wallis; Cyril Chapman; Rohan Taylor; Chris Jacobs; Ian Tomlinson; Alistair McGuire; Uziel Beller; Usha Menon; Ian Jacobs

Background: Technological advances raise the possibility of systematic population-based genetic testing for cancer-predisposing mutations, but it is uncertain whether benefits outweigh disadvantages. We directly compared the psychological/quality-of-life consequences of such an approach to family history (FH)–based testing. Methods: In a randomized controlled trial of BRCA1/2 gene-mutation testing in the Ashkenazi Jewish (AJ) population, we compared testing all participants in the population screening (PS) arm with testing those fulfilling standard FH-based clinical criteria (FH arm). Following a targeted community campaign, AJ participants older than 18 years were recruited by self-referral after pretest genetic counseling. The effects of BRCA1/2 genetic testing on acceptability, psychological impact, and quality-of-life measures were assessed by random effects regression analysis. All statistical tests were two-sided. Results: One thousand, one hundred sixty-eight AJ individuals were counseled, 1042 consented, 1034 were randomly assigned (691 women, 343 men), and 1017 were eligible for analysis. Mean age was 54.3 (SD = 14.66) years. Thirteen BRCA1/2 carriers were identified in the PS arm, nine in the FH arm. Five more carriers were detected among FH-negative FH-arm participants following study completion. There were no statistically significant differences between the FH and PS arms at seven days or three months on measures of anxiety, depression, health anxiety, distress, uncertainty, and quality-of-life. Contrast tests indicated that overall anxiety (P = .0001) and uncertainty (P = .005) associated with genetic testing decreased; positive experience scores increased (P = .0001); quality-of-life and health anxiety did not change with time. Overall, 56% of carriers did not fulfill clinical criteria for genetic testing, and the BRCA1/2 prevalence was 2.45%. Conclusion: Compared with FH-based testing, population-based genetic testing in Ashkenazi Jews doesn’t adversely affect short-term psychological/quality-of-life outcomes and may detect 56% additional BRCA carriers.


Journal of Proteome Research | 2013

Microarray Glycoprofiling of CA125 Improves Differential Diagnosis of Ovarian Cancer

Kowa Chen; Aleksandra Gentry-Maharaj; Matthew Burnell; Catharina Steentoft; Lara Marcos-Silva; Ulla Mandel; Ian Jacobs; Anne Dawnay; Usha Menon; Ola Blixt

The CA125 biomarker assay plays an important role in the diagnosis and management of primary invasive epithelial ovarian/tubal cancer (iEOC). However, a fundamental problem with CA125 is that it is not cancer-specific and may be elevated in benign gynecological conditions such as benign ovarian neoplasms and endometriosis. Aberrant O-glycosylation is an inherent and specific property of cancer cells and could potentially aid in differentiating cancer from these benign conditions, thereby improving specificity of the assay. We report on the development of a novel microarray-based platform for profiling specific aberrant glycoforms, such as Neu5Acα2,6GalNAc (STn) and GalNAc (Tn), present on CA125 (MUC16) and CA15-3 (MUC1). In a blinded cohort study of patients with an elevated CA125 levels (30-500 kU/L) and a pelvic mass from the UK Ovarian Cancer Population Study (UKOPS), we measured STn-CA125, ST-CA125 and STn-CA15-3. The combined glycoform profile was able to distinguish benign ovarian neoplasms from invasive epithelial ovarian/tubule cancer (iEOCs) with a specificity of 61.1% at 90% sensitivity. The findings suggest that microarray glycoprofiling could improve differential diagnosis and significantly reduce the number of patients elected for further testing. The approach warrants further investigation in other cancers.


British Journal of Cancer | 2013

Early detection of cancer in the general population: a blinded case-control study of p53 autoantibodies in colorectal cancer.

Johannes W. Pedersen; A Gentry-Maharaj; Evangelia-Ourania Fourkala; Anne Dawnay; Matthew Burnell; Alexey Zaikin; Anders Elm Pedersen; Ian Jacobs; Usha Menon; Hans H. Wandall

Background:Recent reports from cancer screening trials in high-risk populations suggest that autoantibodies can be detected before clinical diagnosis. However, there is minimal data on the role of autoantibody signatures in cancer screening in the general population.Methods:Informative p53 peptides were identified in sera from patients with colorectal cancer using an autoantibody microarray with 15-mer overlapping peptides covering the complete p53 sequence. The selected peptides were evaluated in a blinded case–control study using stored serum from the multimodal arm of the United Kingdom Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening where women gave annual blood samples. Cases were postmenopausal women who developed colorectal cancer following recruitment, with 2 or more serum samples preceding diagnosis. Controls were age-matched women with no history of cancer.Results:The 50 640 women randomised to the multimodal group were followed up for a median of 6.8 (inter-quartile range 5.9–8.4) years. Colorectal cancer notification was received in 101 women with serial samples of whom 97 (297 samples) had given consent for secondary studies. They were matched 1 : 1 with 97 controls (296 serial samples). The four most informative peptides identified 25.8% of colorectal cancer patients with a specificity of 95%. The median lead time was 1.4 (range 0.12–3.8) years before clinical diagnosis.Conclusion:Our findings suggest that in the general population, autoantibody signatures are detectable during preclinical disease and may be of value in cancer screening. In colorectal cancer screening in particular, where the current need is to improve compliance, it suggests that p53 autoantibodies may contribute towards risk stratification.

Collaboration


Dive into the Matthew Burnell's collaboration.

Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Usha Menon

St Bartholomew's Hospital

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Ian Jacobs

University of New South Wales

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Aleksandra Gentry-Maharaj

Leiden University Medical Center

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Ranjit Manchanda

Queen Mary University of London

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Andy Ryan

University College London

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Aarti Sharma

University College London

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Anne Dawnay

University College London

View shared research outputs
Researchain Logo
Decentralizing Knowledge