Neil Ryan

Dr. Neil Ryan

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

15Years (2012-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 October 2019 in Genetics in Medicine
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
NRNeil Ryan
Neil Ryan
MGM. A. Glaire
M. A. Glaire
DBD. Blake
D. Blake
MCM. Cabrera-Dandy
M. Cabrera-Dandy
DED. G. Evans
D. G. Evans
ECEmma Crosbie
Emma Crosbie
Purpose Endometrial cancer (EC) is often the sentinel cancer in women with Lynch syndrome (LS). However, efforts to implement universal LS screening in EC patients have been hampered by a lack of evidence detailing the proportion of EC patients that would be expected to screen positive for LS. Methods Studies were identified by electronic searches of Medline, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL and Web of Science. Proportions of test positivity were calculated by random and fixed-effects meta-analysis models. I2 score was used to assess heterogeneity across studies. Results Fifty-three studies, including 12,633 EC patients, met the inclusion criteria. The overall proportion of endometrial tumors with microsatellite instability or mismatch repair (MMR) deficiency by immunohistochemistry (IHC) was 0.27 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.25–0.28, I2: 71%) and 0.26 (95% CI 0.25–0.27, I2: 88%), respectively. Of those women with abnormal tumor testing, 0.29 (95% CI 0.25–0.33, I2: 83%) had LS-associated pathogenic variants on germline testing; therefore around 3% of ECs can be attributed to LS. Preselection of EC cases did increase the proportion of germline LS diagnoses. Conclusion The current study suggests that prevalence of LS in EC patients is approximately 3%, similar to that of colorectal cancer patients; therefore our data support the implementation of universal EC screening for LS.

1 December 2017 in JAMA Oncology
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
NRNeil Ryan
Neil Ryan
JMJulie Morris
Julie Morris
KGKate Green
Kate Green
FLFiona Lalloo
Fiona Lalloo
EWEmma R. Woodward
Emma R. Woodward
D. Gareth EvansD. Gareth Evans
D. Gareth Evans
Lynch syndrome (LS) is caused by germline mutations in one of the mismatch repair genes (MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, or PMS2) and is associated with increased cancer risk, including colorectal cancer (CRC), endometrial cancer (EC), and ovarian cancer (OC).1 Cancer surveillance by colonoscopy has been shown to reduce mortality from CRC.2,3 Gynecological surveillance by transvaginal ultrasonography, hysteroscopy, and endometrial biopsy is of unproven benefit.4,5 The age at initiation of cancer surveillance is also controversial.6 The debate is complicated by the rarity of LS and the lack of LS data. Specific gene mutations affect penetrance and influence the age at onset of LS-associated cancers. The aim of this study was to determine whether mutated gene and mutation type affect age at onset of LS-associated cancers.

17 September 2020 in PLOS Medicine
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
NRNeil Ryan
Neil Ryan
RMRaymond McMahon
Raymond McMahon
STSimon Tobi
Simon Tobi
TSTristan Snowsill
Tristan Snowsill
SEShona Esquibel
Shona Esquibel
ECEmma Crosbie
Emma Crosbie
Lynch syndrome (LS) predisposes to endometrial cancer (EC), colorectal cancer, and other cancers through inherited pathogenic variants affecting mismatch-repair (MMR) genes. Diagnosing LS in women with EC can reduce subsequent cancer mortality through colonoscopic surveillance and aspirin chemoprevention; it also enables cascade testing of relatives. A growing consensus supports LS screening in EC; however, the expected proportion of test positives, and optimal testing strategy is uncertain. Previous studies from insurance-based healthcare systems were limited by narrow selection criteria, failure to apply reference standard tests consistently, and poor conversion to definitive testing. The aim of this study was to establish the prevalence of LS and the diagnostic accuracy of LS testing strategies in an unselected EC population. This was a prospective cross-sectional study carried out at a large United Kingdom gynaecological cancer centre between October 2015 and January 2017. Women diagnosed with EC or atypical hyperplasia (AH) were offered LS testing. Tumours underwent MMR immunohistochemistry (IHC), microsatellite instability (MSI), and targeted MLH1-methylation testing. Women <50 years, with strong family histories and/or indicative tumour molecular features, underwent MMR germline sequencing. Somatic MMR sequencing was performed when indicative molecular features were unexplained by LS or MLH1-hypermethylation. The main outcome measures were the prevalence of LS in an unselected EC population and the diagnostic accuracy of clinical and tumour testing strategies for risk stratifying women with EC for MMR germline sequencing. In total, 500 women participated in the study; only 2 (<1%) declined. Germline sequencing was indicated and conducted for 136 and 135 women, respectively. A total of 16/500 women (3.2%, 95% CI 1.8% to 5.1%) had LS, and 11 more (2.2%) had MMR variants of uncertain significance. Restricting testing to age <50 years, indicative family history (revised Bethesda guidelines or Amsterdam II criteria) or endometrioid histology alone would have missed 9/16 (56%), 8/13 (62%) or 9/13 (69%), and 5/16 (31%) cases of LS, respectively. In total 132/500 tumours were MMR deficient by IHC of which 83/132 (63%) had MLH1-hypermethylation, and 16/49 (33%) of the remaining patients had LS (16/132 with MMR deficiency, 12%). MMR-IHC with targeted MLH1-methylation testing was more discriminatory for LS than MSI with targeted methylation testing, with 100% versus 56.3% (16/16 versus 9/16) sensitivity (p = 0.016) and equal 97.5% (468/484) specificity; 64% MSI-H and 73% MMR deficient tumours unexplained by LS or MLH1-hypermethylation had somatic MMR mutations. The main limitation of the study was failure to conduct MMR germline sequencing for the whole study population, which means that the sensitivity and specificity of tumour triage strategies for LS detection may be overestimated, although the risk of LS in women with no clinical or tumour predictors is expected to be extremely low. In this study, we observed that age, family history, and histology are imprecise clinical correlates of LS-EC. IHC outperformed MSI for tumour triage and reliably identified both germline and somatic MMR mutations. The 3.2% proportion of LS-EC is similar to colorectal cancer, supporting unselected screening of EC for LS.

1 March 2017 in Gynecologic Oncology
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
NRNeil Ryan
Neil Ryan
D. Gareth EvansD. Gareth Evans
D. Gareth Evans
KGK. Green
K. Green
ECEmma Crosbie
Emma Crosbie
Lynch syndrome (LS) is an inherited tumor predisposition condition caused by mutations in the mismatch repair (MMR) genes. Mutation carriers are at increased risk of various malignancies, including ovarian cancer (OC). Relatively little is known about the pathological features and clinical behavior of LS associated OC. We analyzed the data of 1047 proven MMR mutated individuals from a prospectively maintained database at a large referral center for genomic medicine in the North West of England. Data were crosschecked with pathology reports, the National Cancer Registry and death certificates, where appropriate. Data from gynecological surveillance and risk reducing surgery were analyzed. We identified 53 cases of LSAOC in proven MMR mutated individuals. The cumulative risk of LSAOC was 20% at age 80 in those who retained their ovaries. LSAOC presented at an earlier age (average 51, range 24-70years) than sporadic OC. The predominant histological subtype was endometrioid adenocarcinoma (53%). Most cases presented early (85% at stage I/II vs. 15% at stage III/IV, p<0.001) and overall survival was excellent (80% 5-year survival), however, patients with advanced disease had a poor prognosis (40% 5-year survival). Most women were found to have LS after their OC diagnosis, however, two were detected at Stage 1c through gynecological surveillance and a further three were detected following surgery for screen-detected synchronous endometrial pathology. The predominance of early stage disease in LSAOC is linked to its good prognosis. We support risk-reducing surgery for women whose families are complete especially if undertaking hysterectomy for endometrial risk, and ovarian surveillance as part of gynecological screening for those who have not.

9 January 2020 in Frontiers in Immunology
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
NRNeal C. Ramchander
Neal C. Ramchander
NRNeil Ryan
Neil Ryan
TWThomas Walker
Thomas Walker
LHLauren Harries
Lauren Harries
JBJames Bolton
James Bolton
ECEmma Crosbie
Emma Crosbie
Around 30% of endometrial cancers (EC) are mismatch repair (MMR) deficient, mostly as a consequence of mutations acquired during tumorigenesis, but a significant minority is caused by Lynch syndrome (LS). This inherited cancer predisposition syndrome primes an anti-cancer immune response, even in healthy carriers. We sought to explore the intra-tumoral immunological differences between genetically confirmed LS-associated MMR-deficient (MMRd), sporadic MMR-deficient, and MMR-proficient (MMRp) EC. Endometrial tumors from women with known LS were identified (n = 25). Comparator tumors were recruited prospectively and underwent microsatellite instability (MSI) testing, immunohistochemistry (IHC) for MMR expression and MLH1 methylation testing. Those found to have MLH1 hypermethylation formed the sporadic MMR-deficient group (n = 33). Those found to be mismatch repair proficient and microsatellite stable formed the MMR-proficient group (n = 35). A fully automated monoplex IHC panel was performed on sequential formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tumor sections to identify CD3+, CD8+, CD45RO+, FoxP3+, and PD-1+ immune cells, and PD-L1 expression by tumor/immune cells. Two independent observers quantified immune marker expression at the tumor center and invasive margin. Mean and overall compartmental T-cell counts generated standard (binary: Low/High) and higher resolution (quaternary: 0–25, 25–50, 50–75, 75–100%) immune scores, which were used as explanatory features in neural network, support vector machine, and discriminant predictive modeling. Overall T-cell counts were significantly different between the three cohorts: CD3+ (p = <0.0001), CD8+ (p = <0.0001), CD45RO+ (<0.0001), FoxP3+ (p = <0.0001), and PD1+ (p = <0.0001), with LS-associated MMR-deficient tumors having highest infiltrations. There were significant differences in CD8+ (p = 0.02), CD45RO+ (p = 0.007), and PD-1+ (p = 0.005) T-cell counts at the invasive margin between LS-associated and sporadic MMR-deficient tumors, but not between sporadic MMR-deficient and MMR-proficient tumors. Predictive modeling could accurately determine MMR status based on CD8+ T-cell counts within the tumor center alone. This study shows that LS-associated and sporadic MMR-deficient EC are distinct immunological entities, which has important implications for treatment and prognosis.

7 March 2018 in Advances in Therapy
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
GFGarth Funston
Garth Funston
HOHelena O’flynn
Helena O’flynn
NRNeil Ryan
Neil Ryan
WHWillie Hamilton
Willie Hamilton
ECEmma Crosbie
Emma Crosbie
Early diagnosis of symptomatic gynecological cancer is likely to improve patient outcomes, including survival. The primary care practitioner has a key role to play in this—they must recognize the symptoms and signs of gynecological cancer and make prompt evidence-based decisions regarding further investigation and referral. However, this is often difficult as many of the symptoms of gynecological cancers are nonspecific and are more likely to be caused by benign rather than malignant disease. As primary care is generally the first point of patient contact, those working in this setting usually encounter cancer patients at an earlier, and possibly less symptomatic, stage than practitioners in secondary care. Despite these challenges, research has improved our understanding of the symptoms patients present to primary care with, and a range of tests and referral pathways now exist in the UK and other countries to aid early diagnosis. Primary care practitioners can also play a key role in gynecological cancer prevention. A significant proportion of gynecological cancer is preventable either through lifestyle changes such as weight loss, or, for cervical cancer, vaccination and/or engagement with screening programs. Primary care provides an excellent opportunity to discuss cancer risk with patients and to promote risk reduction strategies and lifestyle change. In this article, the first in a series discussing cancer detection in primary care, we concentrate on gynecological cancer and focus on the three most common forms that a primary care practitioner is likely to encounter: ovarian, endometrial, and cervical cancer. We outline key risk factors, briefly discuss prevention and screening strategies, and offer practical guidance on the recognition of symptoms and signs and the investigation and referral of women with suspected cancer. While this article is written from a UK primary care perspective, much of what is discussed will be of relevance to those working in other healthcare systems.