publications

@article{9b13f3c6d25842a9bd3efe7343c24a41,

title = {Systematic review of patients’ and healthcare professionals’ views on patient‐initiated follow‐up in treated cancer patients},

author = {Janine Dretzke and Ava Lorenc and Ada Adriano and Clare Herd and Hisham Mehanna and Paul Nankivell and David J. Moore and Andreas Karwath and Barry Main and Charlotte Firth and Claire Gaunt and Colin Greaves and Eila Watson and Georgios Gkoutos and Gozde Ozakinci and Jane Wolstenholme and Jo Brett and Joan Duda and Lauren Matheson and Louise‐Rae Cherrill and Melanie Calvert and Philip Kiely and Piers Gaunt and Saisakul Chernbumroong and Saloni Mittal and Steve Thomas and Stuart Winter and Wai Lup Wong and PETNECK2 Research Team },

doi = {10.1002/cam4.6243},

issn = {2045-7634},

year  = {2023},

date = {2023-06-16},

urldate = {2023-06-16},

journal = {Cancer Medicine},

publisher = {John Wiley & Sons},

abstract = {Background: Current follow‐up models in cancer are seen to be unsustainable and inflexible, and there is growing interest in alternative models, such as patient‐initiated follow‐up (PIFU). It is therefore important to understand whether PIFU is acceptable to patients and healthcare professionals (HCPs). Methods: Standard systematic review methodology aimed at limiting bias was used for study identification (to January 2022), selection and data extraction. Thematic synthesis was undertaken for qualitative data, and survey findings were tabulated and described. Results: Nine qualitative studies and 22 surveys were included, mainly in breast and endometrial cancer. Women treated for breast or endometrial cancer and HCPs were mostly supportive of PIFU. Facilitators for PIFU included convenience, control over own health and avoidance of anxiety‐inducing clinic appointments. Barriers included loss of reassurance from scheduled visits and lack of confidence in self‐management. HCPs were supportive of PIFU but concerned about resistance to change, unsuitability of PIFU for some patients and costs. Conclusion: PIFU is viewed mostly positively by women treated for breast or endometrial cancer, and by HCPs, but further evidence is needed from a wider range of cancers, men, and more representative samples. A protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020181412).},

keywords = {cancer, health data science, medicine, systematic review},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Lorenc_2022,

title = {Clinicians' Views of Patient-initiated Follow-up in Head and Neck Cancer: a Qualitative Study to Inform the PETNECK2 Trial},

author = {A Lorenc and M Wells and T Fulton-Lieuw and P Nankivell and H Mehanna and M Jepson and Andreas Karwath and B Main and C Firth and C Gaunt and C Greaves and D Moore and E Watson and G Gkoutos and G Ozakinci and J Wolstenholme and J Dretzke and J Brett and J Duda and L Matheson and L -R Cherrill and M Calvert and P Kiely and P Gaunt and S Chernbumroong and S. Mittal and S. Thomas and S. Winter and W. Wong},

url = {https://doi.org/10.1016%2Fj.clon.2021.11.010},

doi = {10.1016/j.clon.2021.11.010},

year  = {2022},

date = {2022-04-01},

urldate = {2022-04-01},

journal = {Clinical Oncology},

volume = {34},

number = {4},

pages = {230--240},

publisher = {Elsevier BV},

keywords = {cancer, medicine},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{RN16,

title = {Ontology-based prediction of cancer driver genes},

author = {Sara Althubaiti and Andreas Karwath and Ashraf Dallol and Adeeb Noor and Shadi Salem Alkhayyat and Rolina Alwassia and Katsuhiko Mineta and Takashi Gojobori and Andrew D Beggs and Paul N Schofield and Georgios V Gkoutos and Robert Hoehndorf},

url = {https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-53454-1},

doi = {10.1038/s41598-019-53454-1},

issn = {2045-2322},

year  = {2019},

date = {2019-01-01},

urldate = {2019-01-01},

journal = {Scientific Reports},

volume = {9},

number = {1},

pages = {17405},

keywords = {bioinformatics, cancer, health data science},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}