Mark Rutherford

Dr. Mark Rutherford


Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

30Years (1997-Present)

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

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 November 2019 in The Lancet Oncology
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
MAMelina Arnold
Melina Arnold
MRMark Rutherford
Mark Rutherford
ABAude Bardot
Aude Bardot
JFJacques Ferlay
Jacques Ferlay
TATherese M-L Andersson
Therese M-L Andersson
FBFreddie Bray
Freddie Bray
Population-based cancer survival estimates provide valuable insights into the effectiveness of cancer services and can reflect the prospects of cure. As part of the second phase of the International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership (ICBP), the Cancer Survival in High-Income Countries (SURVMARK-2) project aims to provide a comprehensive overview of cancer survival across seven high-income countries and a comparative assessment of corresponding incidence and mortality trends. In this longitudinal, population-based study, we collected patient-level data on 3·9 million patients with cancer from population-based cancer registries in 21 jurisdictions in seven countries (Australia, Canada, Denmark, Ireland, New Zealand, Norway, and the UK) for seven sites of cancer (oesophagus, stomach, colon, rectum, pancreas, lung, and ovary) diagnosed between 1995 and 2014, and followed up until Dec 31, 2015. We calculated age-standardised net survival at 1 year and 5 years after diagnosis by site, age group, and period of diagnosis. We mapped changes in incidence and mortality to changes in survival to assess progress in cancer control. In 19 eligible jurisdictions, 3 764 543 cases of cancer were eligible for inclusion in the study. In the 19 included jurisdictions, over 1995-2014, 1-year and 5-year net survival increased in each country across almost all cancer types, with, for example, 5-year rectal cancer survival increasing more than 13 percentage points in Denmark, Ireland, and the UK. For 2010-14, survival was generally higher in Australia, Canada, and Norway than in New Zealand, Denmark, Ireland, and the UK. Over the study period, larger survival improvements were observed for patients younger than 75 years at diagnosis than those aged 75 years and older, and notably for cancers with a poor prognosis (ie, oesophagus, stomach, pancreas, and lung). Progress in cancer control (ie, increased survival, decreased mortality and incidence) over the study period was evident for stomach, colon, lung (in males), and ovarian cancer. The joint evaluation of trends in incidence, mortality, and survival indicated progress in four of the seven studied cancers. Cancer survival continues to increase across high-income countries; however, international disparities persist. While truly valid comparisons require differences in registration practice, classification, and coding to be minimal, stage of disease at diagnosis, timely access to effective treatment, and the extent of comorbidity are likely the main determinants of patient outcomes. Future studies are needed to assess the impact of these factors to further our understanding of international disparities in cancer survival. Canadian Partnership Against Cancer; Cancer Council Victoria; Cancer Institute New South Wales; Cancer Research UK; Danish Cancer Society; National Cancer Registry Ireland; The Cancer Society of New Zealand; National Health Service England; Norwegian Cancer Society; Public Health Agency Northern Ireland, on behalf of the Northern Ireland Cancer Registry; The Scottish Government; Western Australia Department of Health; and Wales Cancer Network.

15 July 2019 in Clinical Cancer Research
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
RCRaoul Charles Coombes
Raoul Charles Coombes
KPKaren Page
Karen Page
RSRaheleh Salari
Raheleh Salari
RHRobert K. Hastings
Robert K. Hastings
AAAnne C Armstrong
Anne C Armstrong
JSJacqui Shaw
Jacqui Shaw
Purpose: Up to 30% of patients with breast cancer relapse after primary treatment. There are no sensitive and reliable tests to monitor these patients and detect distant metastases before overt recurrence. Here, we demonstrate the use of personalized circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) profiling for detection of recurrence in breast cancer. Experimental Design: Forty-nine primary patients with breast cancer were recruited following surgery and adjuvant therapy. Plasma samples (n = 208) were collected every 6 months for up to 4 years. Personalized assays targeting 16 variants selected from primary tumor whole-exome data were tested in serial plasma for the presence of ctDNA by ultradeep sequencing (average >100,000X). Results: Plasma ctDNA was detected ahead of clinical or radiologic relapse in 16 of the 18 relapsed patients (sensitivity of 89%); metastatic relapse was predicted with a lead time of up to 2 years (median, 8.9 months; range, 0.5–24.0 months). None of the 31 nonrelapsing patients were ctDNA-positive at any time point across 156 plasma samples (specificity of 100%). Of the two relapsed patients who were not detected in the study, the first had only a local recurrence, whereas the second patient had bone recurrence and had completed chemotherapy just 13 days prior to blood sampling. Conclusions: This study demonstrates that patient-specific ctDNA analysis can be a sensitive and specific approach for disease surveillance for patients with breast cancer. More importantly, earlier detection of up to 2 years provides a possible window for therapeutic intervention.

1 April 2014 in Lung Cancer
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
JLJ. Lortet-Tieulent
J. Lortet-Tieulent
ISI. Soerjomataram
I. Soerjomataram
JFJ. Ferlay
J. Ferlay
MRMark Rutherford
Mark Rutherford
EWElisabete Weiderpass
Elisabete Weiderpass
FBF. Bray
F. Bray

2 December 2017 in Journal of the American Heart Association
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
OAOras A Alabas
Oras A Alabas
CGChris P Gale
Chris P Gale
MHMarlous Hall
Marlous Hall
MRMark Rutherford
Mark Rutherford
KSKarolina Szummer
Karolina Szummer
TJTomas Jernberg
Tomas Jernberg
Background: This study assessed sex differences in treatments, all‐cause mortality, relative survival, and excess mortality following acute myocardial infarction. Methods and Results: A population‐based cohort of all hospitals providing acute myocardial infarction care in Sweden (SWEDEHEART [Swedish Web System for Enhancement and Development of Evidence‐Based Care in Heart Disease Evaluated According to Recommended Therapies]) from 2003 to 2013 was included in the analysis. Excess mortality rate ratios (EMRRs), adjusted for clinical characteristics and guideline‐indicated treatments after matching by age, sex, and year to background mortality data, were estimated. Although there were no sex differences in all‐cause mortality adjusted for age, year of hospitalization, and comorbidities for ST‐segment–elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and non‐STEMI at 1 year (mortality rate ratio: 1.01 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.96–1.05] and 0.97 [95% CI, 0.95–0.99], respectively) and 5 years (mortality rate ratio: 1.03 [95% CI, 0.99–1.07] and 0.97 [95% CI, 0.95–0.99], respectively), excess mortality was higher among women compared with men for STEMI and non‐STEMI at 1 year (EMRR: 1.89 [95% CI, 1.66–2.16] and 1.20 [95% CI, 1.16–1.24], respectively) and 5 years (EMRR: 1.60 [95% CI, 1.48–1.72] and 1.26 [95% CI, 1.21–1.32], respectively). After further adjustment for the use of guideline‐indicated treatments, excess mortality among women with non‐STEMI was not significant at 1 year (EMRR: 1.01 [95% CI, 0.97–1.04]) and slightly higher at 5 years (EMRR: 1.07 [95% CI, 1.02–1.12]). For STEMI, adjustment for treatments attenuated the excess mortality for women at 1 year (EMRR: 1.43 [95% CI, 1.26–1.62]) and 5 years (EMRR: 1.31 [95% CI, 1.19–1.43]). Conclusions: Women with acute myocardial infarction did not have statistically different all‐cause mortality, but had higher excess mortality compared with men that was attenuated after adjustment for the use of guideline‐indicated treatments. This suggests that improved adherence to guideline recommendations for the treatment of acute myocardial infarction may reduce premature cardiovascular death among women. Clinical Trial Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT02952417.

19 December 2019 in Breast Cancer Research
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
DFDaniel Fernandez-Garcia
Daniel Fernandez-Garcia
AHAllison Hills
Allison Hills
KPKaren Page
Karen Page
RHRobert K. Hastings
Robert K. Hastings
BTBradley Toghill
Bradley Toghill
JSJacqui Shaw
Jacqui Shaw
Background: Breast cancer (BC) is the most common cancer in women, and despite the introduction of new screening programmes, therapies and monitoring technologies, there is still a need to develop more useful tests for monitoring treatment response and to inform clinical decision making. The purpose of this study was to compare circulating cell-free DNA (cfDNA) and circulating tumour cells (CTCs) with conventional breast cancer blood biomarkers (CA15-3 and alkaline phosphatase (AP)) as predictors of response to treatment and prognosis in patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Methods: One hundred ninety-four female patients with radiologically confirmed MBC were recruited to the study. Total cfDNA levels were determined by qPCR and compared with CELLSEARCH® CTC counts and CA15-3 and alkaline phosphatase (AP) values. Blood biomarker data were compared with conventional tumour markers, treatment(s) and response as assessed by RECIST and survival. Non-parametric statistical hypothesis tests were used to examine differences, correlation analysis and linear regression to determine correlation and to describe its effects, logistic regression and receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC curve) to estimate the strength of the relationship between biomarkers and clinical outcomes and value normalization against standard deviation to make biomarker values comparable. Kaplan–Meier estimator and Cox regression models were used to assess survival. Univariate and multivariate models were performed where appropriate. Results: Multivariate analysis showed that both the amount of total cfDNA (p value = 0.024, HR = 1.199, CI = 1.024–1.405) and the number of CTCs (p value = 0.001, HR = 1.243, CI = 1.088–1.421) are predictors of overall survival (OS), whereas total cfDNA levels is the sole predictor for progression-free survival (PFS) (p value = 0.042, HR = 1.193, CI = 1.007–1.415) and disease response when comparing response to non-response to treatment (HR = 15.917, HR = 12.481 for univariate and multivariate analysis, respectively). Lastly, combined analysis of CTCs and cfDNA is more informative than the combination of two conventional biomarkers (CA15-3 and AP) for prediction of OS. Conclusion: Measurement of total cfDNA levels, which is a simpler and less expensive biomarker than CTC counts, is associated with PFS, OS and response in MBC, suggesting potential clinical application of a cheap and simple blood-based test.

11 September 2013 in Journal of Statistical Computation and Simulation
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
MRMark Rutherford
Mark Rutherford
MCMichael J. Crowther
Michael J. Crowther
PLPaul C. Lambert
Paul C. Lambert
If interest lies in reporting absolute measures of risk from time-to-event data then obtaining an appropriate approximation to the shape of the underlying hazard function is vital. It has previously been shown that restricted cubic splines can be used to approximate complex hazard functions in the context of time-to-event data. The degree of complexity for the spline functions is dictated by the number of knots that are defined. We highlight through the use of a motivating example that complex hazard function shapes are often required when analysing time-to-event data. Through the use of simulation, we show that provided a sufficient number of knots are used, the approximated hazard functions given by restricted cubic splines fit closely to the true function for a range of complex hazard shapes. The simulation results also highlight the insensitivity of the estimated relative effects (hazard ratios) to the correct specification of the baseline hazard.