Network


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

Hotspot


Dive into the research topics where T. Andrew Lister is active.

Publication


Featured researches published by T. Andrew Lister.


Journal of Clinical Oncology | 1999

Report of an International Workshop to Standardize Response Criteria for Non-Hodgkin's Lymphomas

Bruce D. Cheson; Sandra J. Horning; Bertrand Coiffier; Margaret A. Shipp; Richard I. Fisher; Joseph M. Connors; T. Andrew Lister; Julie M. Vose; Antonio J. Grillo-Lopez; Anton Hagenbeek; Fernando Cabanillas; Donald Klippensten; Wolfgang Hiddemann; Ronald Castellino; Nancy Lee Harris; James O. Armitage; William Carter; Richard T. Hoppe; George P. Canellos

Standardized guidelines for response assessment are needed to ensure comparability among clinical trials in non-Hodgkins lymphomas (NHL). To achieve this, two meetings were convened among United States and international lymphoma experts representing medical hematology/oncology, radiology, radiation oncology, and pathology to review currently used response definitions and to develop a uniform set of criteria for assessing response in clinical trials. The criteria that were developed include anatomic definitions of response, with normal lymph node size after treatment of 1.5 cm in the longest transverse diameter by computer-assisted tomography scan. A designation of complete response/unconfirmed was adopted to include patients with a greater than 75% reduction in tumor size after therapy but with a residual mass, to include patients-especially those with large-cell NHL-who may not have residual disease. Single-photon emission computed tomography gallium scans are encouraged as a valuable adjunct to assessment of patients with large-cell NHL, but such scans require appropriate expertise. Flow cytometric, cytogenetic, and molecular studies are not currently included in response definitions. Response rates may be the most important objective in phase II trials where the activity of a new agent is important and may provide support for approval by regulatory agencies. However, the goals of most phase III trials are to identify therapies that will prolong the progression-free survival, if not the overall survival, of the treated patients. We hope that these guidelines will serve to improve communication among investigators and comparability among clinical trials until clinically relevant laboratory and imaging studies are identified and become more widely available.


Journal of Clinical Oncology | 2007

Revised Response Criteria for Malignant Lymphoma

Bruce D. Cheson; Beate Pfistner; Malik E. Juweid; Randy D. Gascoyne; Lena Specht; Sandra J. Horning; Bertrand Coiffier; Richard I. Fisher; Anton Hagenbeek; Emanuele Zucca; Steven T. Rosen; Sigrid Stroobants; T. Andrew Lister; Richard T. Hoppe; Martin Dreyling; Kensei Tobinai; Julie M. Vose; Joseph M. Connors; Massimo Federico; Volker Diehl

PURPOSE Standardized response criteria are needed to interpret and compare clinical trials and for approval of new therapeutic agents by regulatory agencies. METHODS The International Working Group response criteria (Cheson et al, J Clin Oncol 17:1244, 1999) were widely adopted, but required reassessment because of identified limitations and the increased use of [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography (PET), immunohistochemistry (IHC), and flow cytometry. The International Harmonization Project was convened to provide updated recommendations. RESULTS New guidelines are presented incorporating PET, IHC, and flow cytometry for definitions of response in non-Hodgkins and Hodgkins lymphoma. Standardized definitions of end points are provided. CONCLUSION We hope that these guidelines will be adopted widely by study groups, pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, and regulatory agencies to facilitate the development of new and more effective therapies to improve the outcome of patients with lymphoma.


Nature Medicine | 2002

Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma outcome prediction by gene- expression profiling and supervised machine learning

Margaret A. Shipp; Kenneth N. Ross; Pablo Tamayo; Andrew P. Weng; Jeffery L. Kutok; Ricardo C T Aguiar; Michelle Gaasenbeek; Michael Angelo; Michael R. Reich; Geraldine S. Pinkus; Tane S. Ray; Margaret Koval; Andrew J. Norton; T. Andrew Lister; Jill P. Mesirov; Donna Neuberg; Eric S. Lander; Todd R. Golub

Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), the most common lymphoid malignancy in adults, is curable in less than 50% of patients. Prognostic models based on pre-treatment characteristics, such as the International Prognostic Index (IPI), are currently used to predict outcome in DLBCL. However, clinical outcome models identify neither the molecular basis of clinical heterogeneity, nor specific therapeutic targets. We analyzed the expression of 6,817 genes in diagnostic tumor specimens from DLBCL patients who received cyclophosphamide, adriamycin, vincristine and prednisone (CHOP)-based chemotherapy, and applied a supervised learning prediction method to identify cured versus fatal or refractory disease. The algorithm classified two categories of patients with very different five-year overall survival rates (70% versus 12%). The model also effectively delineated patients within specific IPI risk categories who were likely to be cured or to die of their disease. Genes implicated in DLBCL outcome included some that regulate responses to B-cell–receptor signaling, critical serine/threonine phosphorylation pathways and apoptosis. Our data indicate that supervised learning classification techniques can predict outcome in DLBCL and identify rational targets for intervention.


Journal of Clinical Oncology | 2003

Revised Recommendations of the International Working Group for Diagnosis, Standardization of Response Criteria, Treatment Outcomes, and Reporting Standards for Therapeutic Trials in Acute Myeloid Leukemia

Bruce D. Cheson; John M. Bennett; Kenneth J. Kopecky; Thomas Büchner; Cheryl L. Willman; Elihu H. Estey; Charles A. Schiffer; Hartmut Doehner; Martin S. Tallman; T. Andrew Lister; Francesco Lo-Coco; R. Willemze; Andrea Biondi; Wolfgang Hiddemann; Richard A. Larson; Bob Löwenberg; Miguel A. Sanz; David R. Head; Ryuzo Ohno; Clara D. Bloomfield

An International Working Group met to revise the diagnostic and response criteria for acute myelogenous leukemia originally published in 1990, as well as to provide definitions of outcomes and reporting standards to improve interpretability of data and comparisons among trials. Since the original publication, there have been major advances in our understanding of the biology and molecular genetics of acute leukemia that are clinically relevant and warrant incorporation into response definitions. Differences from the 1990 recommendations included a category of leukemia-free state, new criteria for complete remission, including cytogenetic and molecular remissions and remission duration. Storage of viable blasts for correlative studies is important for future progress in the therapy of these disorders.


The New England Journal of Medicine | 1998

A Prognostic Score for Advanced Hodgkin's Disease

Dirk Hasenclever; Volker Diehl; James O. Armitage; David Assouline; Magnus Björkholm; Ercole Brusamolino; George P. Canellos; Patrice Carde; Derek Crowther; David Cunningham; Houchingue Eghbali; Christophe Ferm; Richard I. Fisher; John H. Glick; Bengt Glimelius; Paolo G. Gobbi; Harald Holte; Sandra J. Horning; T. Andrew Lister; Dan L. Longo; Franco Mandelli; Aaron Polliack; Stephen J. Proctor; Lena Specht; John Sweetenham; Gillian Vaughan Hudson

BACKGROUND Two thirds of patients with advanced Hodgkins disease are cured with current approaches to treatment. Prediction of the outcome is important to avoid overtreating some patients and to identify others in whom standard treatment is likely to fail. METHODS Data were collected from 25 centers and study groups on a total of 5141 patients treated with combination chemotherapy for advanced Hodgkins disease, with or without radiotherapy. The data included the outcome and 19 demographic and clinical characteristics at diagnosis. The end point was freedom from progression of disease. Complete data were available for 1618 patients; the final Cox model was fitted to these data. Data from an additional 2643 patients were used for partial validation. RESULTS The prognostic score was defined as the number of adverse prognostic factors present at diagnosis. Seven factors had similar independent prognostic effects: a serum albumin level of less than 4 g per deciliter, a hemoglobin level of less than 10.5 g per deciliter, male sex, an age of 45 years or older, stage IV disease (according to the Ann Arbor classification), leukocytosis (a white-cell count of at least 15,000 per cubic millimeter), and lymphocytopenia (a lymphocyte count of less than 600 per cubic millimeter, a count that was less than 8 percent of the white-cell count, or both). The score predicted the rate of freedom from progression of disease as follows: 0, or no factors (7 percent of the patients), 84 percent; 1 (22 percent of the patients), 77 percent; 2 (29 percent of the patients), 67 percent; 3 (23 percent of the patients), 60 percent; 4 (12 percent of the patients), 51 percent; and 5 or higher (7 percent of the patients), 42 percent. CONCLUSIONS The prognostic score we developed may be useful in designing clinical trials for the treatment of advanced Hodgkins disease and in making individual therapeutic decisions, but a distinct group of patients at very high risk could not be identified on the basis of routinely documented demographic and clinical characteristics.


Journal of Clinical Oncology | 2014

Recommendations for Initial Evaluation, Staging, and Response Assessment of Hodgkin and Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma: The Lugano Classification

Bruce D. Cheson; Richard I. Fisher; Sally Barrington; Franco Cavalli; Lawrence H. Schwartz; Emanuele Zucca; T. Andrew Lister

The purpose of this work was to modernize recommendations for evaluation, staging, and response assessment of patients with Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) and non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL). A workshop was held at the 11th International Conference on Malignant Lymphoma in Lugano, Switzerland, in June 2011, that included leading hematologists, oncologists, radiation oncologists, pathologists, radiologists, and nuclear medicine physicians, representing major international lymphoma clinical trials groups and cancer centers. Clinical and imaging subcommittees presented their conclusions at a subsequent workshop at the 12th International Conference on Malignant Lymphoma, leading to revised criteria for staging and of the International Working Group Guidelines of 2007 for response. As a result, fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET)–computed tomography (CT) was formally incorporated into standard staging for FDG-avid lymphomas. A modification of the Ann Arbor descriptive terminology will be used for anatomic distribution of disease extent, but the suffixes A or B for symptoms will only be included for HL. A bone marrow biopsy is no longer indicated for the routine staging of HL and most diffuse large B-cell lymphomas. However, regardless of stage, general practice is to treat patients based on limited (stages I and II, nonbulky) or advanced (stage III or IV) disease, with stage II bulky disease considered as limited or advanced disease based on histology and a number of prognostic factors. PET-CT will be used to assess response in FDG-avid histologies using the 5-point scale. The product of the perpendicular diameters of a single node can be used to identify progressive disease. Routine surveillance scans are discouraged. These recommendations should improve evaluation of patients with lymphoma and enhance the ability to compare outcomes of clinical trials.


Journal of Clinical Oncology | 2000

European Phase II Study of Rituximab (Chimeric Anti-CD20 Monoclonal Antibody) for Patients With Newly Diagnosed Mantle-Cell Lymphoma and Previously Treated Mantle-Cell Lymphoma, Immunocytoma, and Small B-Cell Lymphocytic Lymphoma

James M. Foran; A. Z. S. Rohatiner; David Cunningham; Razvan A. Popescu; Philippe Solal-Celigny; Michele Ghielmini; Bertrand Coiffier; Peter Johnson; Christian Gisselbrecht; Felix Reyes; John Radford; Eric M. Bessell; Bertrand Souleau; Aziz Benzohra; T. Andrew Lister

PURPOSE Mantle-cell lymphoma (MCL), immunocytoma (IMC), and small B-cell lymphocytic lymphoma (SLL) are B-cell malignancies that express CD20 and are incurable with standard therapy. A multicenter phase II study was conducted to assess the toxicity and the overall response rates (RR) and complete response (CR) rates to rituximab (chimeric anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody). PATIENTS AND METHODS Between January 1997 and January 1998, 131 patients with newly diagnosed MCL (MCL1; n = 34) and previously treated MCL (MCL2; n = 40), IMC (n = 28), and SLL (n = 29) received rituximab 375 mg/m(2)/wk for 4 weeks via intravenous infusion. Restaging studies were performed 1 and 2 months after treatment. An analysis of the duration of response was conducted in December 1998. RESULTS Eleven patients were unassessable, including one who died of splenic rupture after the first infusion. The RR among the 120 assessable patients was 30% (36 of 120 patients). The RR by histology was as follows: MCL1, 38%; MCL2, 37%; IMC, 28%; and SLL, 14%. Ten patients, all with MCL, achieved CR. The median duration of response in MCL was 1.2 years. Immediate side effects were common and usually responded to adjustments in the infusion rate. There were 31 episodes of infection after treatment; most cases were mild. Cardiac arrhythmia and ophthalmologic side effects occurred in 10 and nine patients, respectively, including one case of severe loss of visual acuity. CONCLUSION Single-agent rituximab has moderate activity in MCL and IMC but only limited activity in SLL. The duration of response in MCL was similar to that previously reported in follicular lymphoma. Its use in combination with cytotoxic chemotherapy to increase the CR rate is warranted in MCL and IMC.


Modern Pathology | 2000

The World Health Organization Classification of Hematological Malignancies Report of the Clinical Advisory Committee Meeting, Airlie House, Virginia, November 1997

Nancy Lee Harris; Elaine S. Jaffe; Jacques Diebold; G. Flandrin; H. Konrad Muller-Hermelink; James W. Vardiman; T. Andrew Lister; Clara D. Bloomfield

Since 1995, the European Association of Pathologists and the Society for Hematopathology have been developing a new World Health Organization (WHO) classification of hematologic malignancies. The classification includes lymphoid, myeloid, histiocytic, and mast cell neoplasms.The WHO project involves 10 committees of pathologists, who have developed lists and definitions of disease entities. A Clinical Advisory Committee of international hematologists and oncologists was formed to ensure that the classification will be useful to clinicians. A meeting was held in November 1997 to discuss clinical issues related to the classification. The WHO has adopted the Revised European-American Classification of Lymphoid Neoplasms, published in 1994 by the International Lymphoma Study Group, as the classification of lymphoid neoplasms. This approach to classification is based on the principle that a classification is a list of “real” disease entities, which are defined by a combination of morphology, immunophenotype, genetic features, and clinical features. The relative importance of each of these features varies among diseases, and there is no one “gold standard.” The WHO classification has applied the principles of the Revised European-American Classification of Lymphoid Neoplasms to myeloid and histiocytic neoplasms. The classification of myeloid neoplasms recognizes distinct entities defined by a combination of morphology and cytogenetic abnormalities.The Clinical Advisory Committee meeting, which was organized around a series of clinical questions, was able to reach a consensus on most of the questions posed. The questions and the consensus are discussed in detail in this article. Among other things, the Clinical Advisory Committee concluded that clinical grouping of lymphoid neoplasms was neither necessary nor desirable. Patient treatment is determined by the specific type of lymphoma, with the addition of grade within the tumor type, if applicable, and clinical prognostic factors such as the international prognostic index.The experience of developing the WHO classification has produced a new and exciting degree of cooperation and communication between oncologists and pathologists from around the world. This should facilitate progress in the understanding and treatment of hematologic malignancies.


Blood | 2010

Leukemia-initiating cells from some acute myeloid leukemia patients with mutated nucleophosmin reside in the CD34− fraction

David Taussig; Jacques Vargaftig; Farideh Miraki-Moud; Emmanuel Griessinger; Kirsty Sharrock; Tina Luke; Debra M. Lillington; Heather Oakervee; Jamie Cavenagh; Samir G. Agrawal; T. Andrew Lister; John G. Gribben; Dominique Bonnet

Leukemia-initiating cells (LICs) in acute myeloid leukemia (AML) are believed to be restricted to the CD34(+) fraction. However, one of the most frequently mutated genes in AML is nucleophosmin (NPM), and this is associated with low CD34 expression. We, therefore, investigated whether NPM-mutated AMLs have LICs restricted to the CD34(+) fraction. We transplanted sorted fractions of primary NPM-mutated AML into immunodeficient mice to establish which fractions initiate leukemia. Approximately one-half of cases had LICs exclusively within the CD34(-) fraction, whereas the CD34(+) fraction contained normal multilineage hematopoietic repopulating cells. Most of the remaining cases had LICs in both CD34(+) and CD34(-) fractions. When samples were sorted based on CD34 and CD38 expression, multiple fractions initiated leukemia in primary and secondary recipients. The data indicate that the phenotype of LICs is more heterogeneous than previously realized and can vary even within a single sample. This feature of LICs may make them particularly difficult to eradicate using therapies targeted against surface antigens.


Journal of Clinical Oncology | 2007

Risk and Clinical Implications of Transformation of Follicular Lymphoma to Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma

Silvia Montoto; Andrew Davies; Janet Matthews; Maria Calaminici; A. J. Norton; J. Amess; Sarah Vinnicombe; Rachel Waters; A. Z. S. Rohatiner; T. Andrew Lister

PURPOSE To study the clinical significance of transformation to diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) in patients with follicular lymphoma (FL). PATIENTS AND METHODS From 1972 to 1999, 325 patients were diagnosed with FL at St Bartholomews Hospital (London, United Kingdom). With a median follow-up of 15 years, progression occurred in 186 patients and biopsy-proven transformation in 88 of the 325. The overall repeat biopsy rate was 70%. RESULTS The risk of histologic transformation (HT) by 10 years was 28%, HT not yet having been observed after 16.2 years. The risk was higher in patients with advanced stage (P = .02), high-risk Follicular Lymphoma International Prognostic Index (FLIPI; P = .01), and International Prognostic Index (IPI; P = .04) scores at diagnosis. Expectant management (as opposed to treatment being initiated at diagnosis) also predicted for a higher risk of HT (P = .008). Older age (P = .005), low hemoglobin level (P = .03), high lactate dehydrogenase (P < .0001), and high-risk FLIPI (P = .01) or IPI (P = .003) score at the time of first recurrence were associated with the diagnosis of HT in a biopsy performed at that time. The median survival from transformation was 1.2 years. Patients with HT had a shorter overall survival (P < .0001) and a shorter survival from progression (P < .0001) than did those in whom it was not diagnosed. CONCLUSION Advanced stage and high-risk FLIPI and IPI scores at diagnosis correlate with an increased risk of HT. This event strongly influences the outcome of patients with FL by shortening their survival. There may be a subgroup of patients in whom HT does not occur.

Collaboration


Dive into the T. Andrew Lister's collaboration.

Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Jude Fitzgibbon

Queen Mary University of London

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Janet Matthews

Queen Mary University of London

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

John G. Gribben

Queen Mary University of London

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Bryan D. Young

Queen Mary University of London

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Andrew Davies

Queen Mary University of London

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Silvia Montoto

St Bartholomew's Hospital

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Lindsey K. Goff

St Bartholomew's Hospital

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

J. Amess

St Bartholomew's Hospital

View shared research outputs
Researchain Logo
Decentralizing Knowledge