1. |
- Agirre, Jon, et al.
(author)
-
The CCP4 suite: integrative software for macromolecular crystallography
- 2023
-
In: Acta Crystallographica Section D. - : INT UNION CRYSTALLOGRAPHY. - 2059-7983. ; 79, s. 449-461
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- The Collaborative Computational Project No. 4 (CCP4) is a UK-led international collective with a mission to develop, test, distribute and promote software for macromolecular crystallography. The CCP4 suite is a multiplatform collection of programs brought together by familiar execution routines, a set of common libraries and graphical interfaces. The CCP4 suite has experienced several considerable changes since its last reference article, involving new infrastructure, original programs and graphical interfaces. This article, which is intended as a general literature citation for the use of the CCP4 software suite in structure determination, will guide the reader through such transformations, offering a general overview of the new features and outlining future developments. As such, it aims to highlight the individual programs that comprise the suite and to provide the latest references to them for perusal by crystallographers around the world.
|
|
2. |
- Simpkin, Andrew J., et al.
(author)
-
Prostate-specific antigen patterns in US and European populations : comparison of six diverse cohorts
- 2016
-
In: BJU International. - : Wiley. - 1464-4096 .- 1464-410X. ; 118:6, s. 911-918
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- OBJECTIVE: To determine whether there are differences in prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels at diagnosis or changes in PSA levels between US and European populations of men with and without prostate cancer (PCa).SUBJECTS AND METHODS: We analysed repeated measures of PSA from six clinically and geographically diverse cohorts of men: two cohorts with PSA-detected PCa, two cohorts with clinically detected PCa and two cohorts without PCa. Using multilevel models, average PSA at diagnosis and PSA change over time were compared among study populations.RESULTS: The annual percentage PSA change of 4-5% was similar between men without cancer and men with PSA-detected cancer. PSA at diagnosis was 1.7 ng/mL lower in a US cohort of men with PSA-detected PCa (95% confidence interval 1.3-2.0 ng/mL), compared with a UK cohort of men with PSA-detected PCa, but there was no evidence of a different rate of PSA change between these populations.CONCLUSION: We found that PSA changes over time are similar in UK and US men diagnosed through PSA testing and even in men without PCa. Further development of PSA models to monitor men on active surveillance should be undertaken in order to take advantage of these similarities. We found no evidence that guidelines for using PSA to monitor men cannot be passed between US and European studies.
|
|
3. |
- Simpkin, Andrew J, et al.
(author)
-
Development, validation and evaluation of an instrument for active monitoring of men with clinically localised prostate cancer : systematic review, cohort studies and qualitative study
- 2015
-
In: Health Services and Delivery Research. - : National Institute for Health Research. - 2050-4349 .- 2050-4357. ; 3:30
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background:Active surveillance [(AS), sometimes called active monitoring (AM)],is a National Institute for Health and Care Excellence-recommended management option for men with clinically localised prostate cancer (PCa). It aims to target radical treatment only to those who would benefit most. Little consensus exists nationally or internationally about safe and effective protocols for AM/AS or triggers that indicate if or when men should move to radical treatment.Objective:The aims of this project were to review how prostate-specific antigen (PSA) has been used in AM/AS programmes; to develop and test the validity of a new model for predicting future PSA levels; to develop an instrument, based on PSA, that would be acceptable and effective for men and clinicians to use in clinical practice; and to design a robust study to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the instrument.Methods:A systematic review was conducted to investigate how PSA is currently used to monitor men in worldwide AM/AS studies. A model for PSA change with age was developed using Prostate testing for cancer and Treatment (ProtecT) data and validated using data from two PSA-era cohorts and two pre-PSA-era cohorts. The model was used to derive 95% PSA reference ranges (PSARRs) across ages. These reference ranges were used to predict the onset of metastases or death from PCa in one of the pre-PSA-era cohorts. PSARRs were incorporated into an active monitoring system (AMS) and demonstrated to 18 clinicians and 20 men with PCa from four NHS trusts. Qualitative interviews investigated patients’ and clinicians’ views about current AM/AS protocols and the acceptability of the AMS within current practice.Results:The systematic review found that the most commonly used triggers for clinical review of PCa were PSA doubling time (PSADT) < 3 years or PSA velocity (PSAv) > 1 ng/ml/year. The model for PSA change (developed using ProtecT study data) predicted PSA values in AM/AS cohorts within 2 ng/ml of observed PSA in up to 79% of men. Comparing the three PSA markers, there was no clear optimal approach to alerting men to worsening cancer. The PSARR and PSADT markers improved the model c-statistic for predicting death from PCa by 0.11 (21%) and 0.13 (25%), respectively, compared with using diagnostic information alone [PSA, age, tumour stage (T-stage)]. Interviews revealed variation in clinical practice regarding eligibility and follow-up protocols. Patients and clinicians perceive current AM/AS practice to be framed by uncertainty, ranging from uncertainty about selection of eligible AM/AS candidates to uncertainty about optimum follow-up protocols and thresholds for clinical review/radical treatment. Patients and clinicians generally responded positively to the AMS. The impact of the AMS on clinicians’ decision-making was limited by a lack of data linking AMS values to long-term outcomes and by current clinical practice, which viewed PSA measures as one of several tools guiding clinical decisions in AM/AS. Patients reported that they would look to clinicians, rather than to a tool, to direct decision-making.Limitations:The quantitative findings were severely hampered by a lack of clinical outcomes or events (such as metastases). The qualitative findings were limited through reliance on participants’ reports of practices and recollections of events rather than observations of actual interactions.Conclusions:Patients and clinicians found that the instrument provided additional, potentially helpful, information but were uncertain about the current usefulness of the risk model we developed for routine management. Comparison of the model with other monitoring strategies will require clinical outcomes from ongoing AM/AS studies.Funding:The National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme.
|
|
4. |
- Simpkin, Andrew J, et al.
(author)
-
Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Factors Determining Change to Radical Treatment in Active Surveillance for Localized Prostate Cancer.
- 2015
-
In: European Urology. - : Elsevier BV. - 0302-2838 .- 1873-7560. ; 67:6
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- CONTEXT: Many men with clinically localized prostate cancer are being monitored as part of active surveillance (AS) programs, but little is known about reasons for receiving radical treatment.OBJECTIVES: A systematic review of the evidence about AS was undertaken, with a meta-analysis to identify predictors of radical treatment.EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A comprehensive search of the Embase, MEDLINE and Web of Knowledge databases to March 2014 was performed. Studies reporting on men with localized prostate cancer followed by AS or monitoring were included. AS was defined where objective eligibility criteria, management strategies, and triggers for clinical review or radical treatment were reported.EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: The 26 AS cohorts included 7627 men, with a median follow-up of 3.5 yr (range of medians 1.5-7.5 yr). The cohorts had a wide range of inclusion criteria, monitoring protocols, and triggers for radical treatment. There were eight prostate cancer deaths and five cases of metastases in 24,981 person-years of follow-up. Each year, 8.8% of men (95% confidence interval 6.7-11.0%) received radical treatment, most commonly because of biopsy findings, prostate-specific antigen triggers, or patient choice driven by anxiety. Studies in which most men changed treatment were those including only low-risk Gleason score 6 disease and scheduled rebiopsies.CONCLUSIONS: The wide variety of AS protocols and lack of robust evidence make firm conclusions difficult. Currently, patients and clinicians have to make judgments about the balance of risks and benefits in AS protocols. The publication of robust evidence from randomized trials and longer-term follow-up of cohorts is urgently required.PATIENT SUMMARY: We reviewed 26 studies of men on active surveillance for prostate cancer. There was evidence that studies including men with the lowest risk disease and scheduled rebiopsy had higher rates of radical treatment.
|
|