Saoirse Dolly

Dr. Saoirse Dolly


Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

7Years (2020-Present)

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

Representative Publications

View All Publications
5 January 2021 in British Journal of Cancer
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
SDSaoirse Dolly
Saoirse Dolly
GJGeraint Jones
Geraint Jones
PAPaula Allchorne
Paula Allchorne
DWDaniel Wheeler
Daniel Wheeler
SASunnyath Ali
Sunnyath Ali
LMLuigi Vincenzo De Michele
Luigi Vincenzo De Michele
Background: Rapid Diagnostic Clinics (RDC) are being expanded nationally by NHS England. Guy’s RDC established a pathway for GPs and internal referrals for patients with symptoms concerning for malignancy not suitable for a site-specific 2WW referral. However, little data assessing the effectiveness of RDC models are available in an English population. Methods: We evaluated all patients referred to Guy’s RDC between December 2016 and June 2019 (n = 1341) to assess the rate of cancer diagnoses, frequency of benign conditions and effectiveness of the service. Results: There were 96 new cancer diagnoses (7.2%): lung (16%), haematological (13%) and colorectal (12%)—with stage IV being most frequent (40%). Median time to definitive cancer diagnosis was 28 days (IQR 15–47) and treatment 56 days (IQR 32–84). In all, 75% were suitable for treatment: surgery (26%), systemic (24%) and radiotherapy (14%). Over 180 serious non-neoplastic conditions were diagnosed (35.8%) of patients with no significant findings in two-third of patients (57.0%). Conclusions: RDCs provide GPs with a streamlined pathway for patients with complex non-site-specific symptoms that can be challenging for primary care. The 7% rate of cancer diagnosis exceeds many 2WW pathways and a third of patients presented with significant non-cancer diagnoses, which justifies the need for rapid diagnostics. Rapid Diagnostic Centres (RDCs) are being rolled out nationally by NHS England and NHS Improvement as part of the NHS long-term plan. The aim is for a primary care referral pathway that streamlines diagnostics, patient journey, clinical outcomes and patient experience. This pilot study of 1341 patients provides an in-depth analysis of the largest single RDC in England. Cancer was diagnosed in 7% of patients and serious non-cancer conditions in 36%—justifying the RDC approach in vague symptom patients.

16 July 2021 in Cancers
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
ASAlfred So
Alfred So
HMHarriet McGrath
Harriet McGrath
JTJonathan Ting
Jonathan Ting
KSKrishnie Srikandarajah
Krishnie Srikandarajah
SGStyliani Germanou
Styliani Germanou
DEDeborah Enting
Deborah Enting
Emergency approval of vaccines against COVID-19 provides an opportunity for us to return to pre-pandemic oncology care. However, safety data in cancer patients is lacking due to their exclusion from most phase III trials. We included all patients aged less than 65 years who received a COVID-19 vaccine from 8 December 2020 to 28 February 2021 at our London tertiary oncology centre. Solicited and unsolicited vaccine-related adverse events (VRAEs) were collected using telephone or face-to-face consultation. Within the study period, 373 patients received their first dose of vaccine: Pfizer/BioNTech (75.1%), Oxford/AstraZeneca (23.6%), Moderna (0.3%), and unknown (1.1%). Median follow-up was 25 days (5–85). Median age was 56 years (19–65). Of the patients, 94.9% had a solid malignancy and 76.7% were stage 3–4. The most common cancers were breast (34.0%), lung (13.4%), colorectal (10.2%), and gynaecological (10.2%). Of the patients, 88.5% were receiving anti-cancer treatment (36.2% parenteral chemotherapy and 15.3% immunotherapy), 76.1% developed any grade VRAE of which 2.1% were grade 3. No grade 4/5 or anaphylaxis were observed. The most common VRAEs within 7 days post-vaccination were sore arm (61.7%), fatigue (18.2%), and headaches (12.1%). Most common grade 3 VRAE was fatigue (1.1%). Our results demonstrate that COVID-19 vaccines in oncology patients have mild reactogenicity.

30 March 2021 in Cancers
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
MMMaria Jose Monroy-Iglesias
Maria Jose Monroy-Iglesias
MTMarta Tagliabue
Marta Tagliabue
HDHarvey Dickinson
Harvey Dickinson
GRGraham Roberts
Graham Roberts
RBRita De Berardinis
Rita De Berardinis
Mieke Van HemelrijckMieke Van Hemelrijck
Mieke Van Hemelrijck
The SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) pandemic is having a large effect on the management of cancer patients. This study reports on the approach and outcomes of cancer patients receiving radical surgery with curative intent between March and September 2020 (in comparison to 2019) in the European Institute of Oncology, IRCCS (IEO) in Milan and the South East London Cancer Alliance (SELCA). Both institutions implemented a COVID-19 minimal pathway where patients were required to self-isolate prior to admission and were swabbed for COVID-19 within 72 h of surgery. Positive patients had surgery deferred until a negative swab. At IEO, radical surgeries declined by 6% as compared to the same period in 2019 (n = 1477 vs. 1560, respectively). Readmissions were required for 3% (n = 41), and <1% (n = 9) developed COVID-19, of which only one had severe disease and died. At SELCA, radical surgeries declined by 34% (n = 1553 vs. 2336). Readmissions were required for 11% (n = 36), <1% (n = 7) developed COVID-19, and none died from it. Whilst a decline in number of surgeries was observed in both centres, the implemented COVID-19 minimal pathways have shown to be safe for cancer patients requiring radical treatment, with limited complications and almost no COVID-19 infections.

13 April 2021 in Journal of Clinical Medicine
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
MMMaria Jose Monroy-Iglesias
Maria Jose Monroy-Iglesias
SDSaoirse Dolly
Saoirse Dolly
DSDebashis Sarker
Debashis Sarker
KTKiruthikah Thillai
Kiruthikah Thillai
Mieke Van HemelrijckMieke Van Hemelrijck
Mieke Van Hemelrijck
ASaida santaolalla
aida santaolalla
Pancreatic cancer (PCa) is associated with a poor prognosis and high mortality rate. The causes of PCa are not fully elucidated yet, although certain exposome factors have been identified. The exposome is defined as the sum of all environmental factors influencing the occurrence of a disease during a life span. The development of an exposome approach for PCa has the potential to discover new disease-associated factors to better understand the carcinogenesis of PCa and help with early detection strategies. Our systematic review of the literature identified several exposome factors that have been associated with PCa alone and in combination with other exposures. A potential inflammatory signature has been observed among the interaction of several exposures (i.e., smoking, alcohol consumption, diabetes mellitus, obesity, and inflammatory markers) that further increases the incidence and progression of PCa. A large number of exposures have been identified such as genetic, hormonal, microorganism infections and immune responses that warrant further investigation. Future early detection strategies should utilize this information to assess individuals’ risk for PCa.

19 May 2021 in Cancers
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
BRBeth Russell
Beth Russell
CMCharlotte L. Moss
Charlotte L. Moss
KPKieran Palmer
Kieran Palmer
RSRushan Sylva
Rushan Sylva
ADAndrea D’souza
Andrea D’souza
SDSaoirse Dolly
Saoirse Dolly
Very few studies investigating COVID-19 in cancer patients have included cancer patients as controls. We aimed to identify factors associated with the risk of testing positive for SARS CoV2 infection in a cohort of cancer patients. We analyzed data from all cancer patients swabbed for COVID-19 between 1st March and 31st July 2020 at Guy’s Cancer Centre. We conducted logistic regression analyses to identify which factors were associated with a positive COVID-19 test. Results: Of the 2152 patients tested for COVID-19, 190 (9%) tested positive. Male sex, black ethnicity, and hematological cancer type were positively associated with risk of COVID-19 (OR = 1.85, 95%CI:1.37–2.51; OR = 1.93, 95%CI:1.31–2.84; OR = 2.29, 95%CI:1.45–3.62, respectively) as compared to females, white ethnicity, or solid cancer type, respectively. Male, Asian ethnicity, and hematological cancer type were associated with an increased risk of severe COVID-19 (OR = 3.12, 95%CI:1.58–6.14; OR = 2.97, 95%CI:1.00–8.93; OR = 2.43, 95%CI:1.00–5.90, respectively). This study is one of the first to compare the risk of COVID-19 incidence and severity in cancer patients when including cancer patients as controls. Results from this study have echoed those of previous reports, that patients who are male, of black or Asian ethnicity, or with a hematological malignancy are at an increased risk of COVID-19.

1 November 2020 in Annals of Oncology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
GDG. Dettorre
G. Dettorre
NDN. Diamantis
N. Diamantis
ALA. Loizidou
A. Loizidou
MPM. Piccart
M. Piccart
JCJ. Chester
J. Chester
David James PinatoDavid James Pinato
David James Pinato