Harriet Wylie
Current Organizations / Institutes
The organizations/institutes from the scholar's latest article
Research Interests
Harriet Wylie has a total of 89 co-authors. Here are the top co-authors by number of shared publications:
- Anna Haire
Translational Oncology and Urology Research (TOUR), School of Cancer and Pharmaceutical Sciences, King’s College London, London SE1 9RT, UK
4 shared publications - Charlotte Moss
Transforming Cancer Research Outcomes Through Research (TOUR), King’s College London, London, UK
4 shared publications - Mieke Van Hemelrijck
King's College London London UK
4 shared publications - Beth Russell
Transforming Cancer Outcomes Through Research (TOUR) King's College London London UK
3 shared publications - Debra H. Josephs
Department of Oncology, Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
3 shared publications - Ailsa Sita-Lumsden
Medical Oncology, Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust (GSTT), London SE1 9RT, UK
2 shared publications
Latest Publications
- Open Access
- 11 November 2022
- Published by Elsevier in Journal of Cancer Policy
- Vol. 34, 100370
Cancer care for Ukrainian refugees: Strategic impact assessments in the early days of the conflict
- 11 November 2022
- Published by Elsevier in Journal of Cancer Policy
- Vol. 34, 100370
Open AccessCancer care for Ukrainian refugees: Strategic impact assessments in the early days of the conflict
- Open Access
The Impact of COVID-19 on the Delivery of Systemic Anti-Cancer Treatment at Guy’s Cancer Centre
Background: This study aimed to assess the outcome of cancer patients undergoing systemic anti-cancer treatment (SACT) at our centre to help inform future clinical decision-making around SACT during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: Patients receiving at least one episode of SACT for solid tumours at Guy’s Cancer Centre between 1 March and 31 May 2020 and the same period in 2019 were included in the study. Data were collected on demographics, tumour type/stage, treatment type (chemotherapy, immunotherapy, biological-targeted) and SARS-CoV2 infection. Results: A total of 2120 patients received SACT in 2020, compared to 2449 in 2019 (13% decrease). From 2019 to 2020, there was an increase in stage IV disease (62% vs. 72%), decrease in chemotherapy (42% vs. 34%), increase in immunotherapy (6% vs. 10%), but similar rates of biologically targeted treatments (37% vs. 38%). There was a significant increase in 1st and 2nd line treatments in 2020 (68% vs. 81%; p < 0.0001) and reduction in 3rd and subsequent lines (26% vs. 15%; p = 0.004) compared to 2019. Of the 2020 cohort, 2% patients developed SARS-CoV2 infections. Conclusions: These real-world data from a tertiary Cancer Centre suggest that despite the challenges faced due to the COVID-19 pandemic, SACT was able to be continued without any significant effects on the mortality of solid-tumour patients. There was a low rate (2%) of SARS-CoV-2 infection which is comparable to the 1.4%-point prevalence in our total cancer population.
Open AccessThe Impact of COVID-19 on the Delivery of Systemic Anti-Cancer Treatment at Guy’s Cancer Centre
Background: This study aimed to assess the outcome of cancer patients undergoing systemic anti-cancer treatment (SACT) at our centre to help inform future clinical decision-making around SACT during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: Patients receiving at least one episode of SACT for solid tumours at Guy’s Cancer Centre between 1 March and 31 May 2020 and the same period in 2019 were included in the study. Data were collected on demographics, tumour type/stage, treatment type (chemotherapy, immunotherapy, biological-targeted) and SARS-CoV2 infection. Results: A total of 2120 patients received SACT in 2020, compared to 2449 in 2019 (13% decrease). From 2019 to 2020, there was an increase in stage IV disease (62% vs. 72%), decrease in chemotherapy (42% vs. 34%), increase in immunotherapy (6% vs. 10%), but similar rates of biologically targeted treatments (37% vs. 38%). There was a significant increase in 1st and 2nd line treatments in 2020 (68% vs. 81%; p < 0.0001) and reduction in 3rd and subsequent lines (26% vs. 15%; p = 0.004) compared to 2019. Of the 2020 cohort, 2% patients developed SARS-CoV2 infections. Conclusions: These real-world data from a tertiary Cancer Centre suggest that despite the challenges faced due to the COVID-19 pandemic, SACT was able to be continued without any significant effects on the mortality of solid-tumour patients. There was a low rate (2%) of SARS-CoV-2 infection which is comparable to the 1.4%-point prevalence in our total cancer population.
- Open Access
COVID-19 Risk Factors for Cancer Patients: A First Report with Comparator Data from COVID-19 Negative Cancer Patients
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.
Open AccessCOVID-19 Risk Factors for Cancer Patients: A First Report with Comparator Data from COVID-19 Negative Cancer Patients
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.
- Open Access
- 25 September 2020
- Published by Springer Nature in BMC Cancer
- Vol. 20 (1) , 1-9
Cohort profile: King’s Health Partners bladder cancer biobank
Background: Bladder cancer (BC) is the 9th most common cancer worldwide, but little progress has been made in improving patient outcomes over the last 25 years. The King’s Health Partners (KHP) BC biobank was established to study unanswered, clinically relevant BC research questions. Donors are recruited from the Urology or Oncology departments of Guy’s Hospital (UK) and can be approached for consent at any point during their treatment pathway. At present, patients with bladder cancer are approached to provide their consent to provide blood, urine and bladder tissue. They also give access to medical records and linkage of relevant clinical and pathological data across the course of their disease. Between June 2017 and June 2019, 531 out of 997 BC patients (53.3%) gave consent to donate samples and data to the Biobank. During this period, the Biobank collected fresh frozen tumour samples from 90/178 surgical procedures (of which 73 were biopsies) and had access to fixed, paraffin embedded samples from all patients who gave consent. Blood and urine samples have been collected from 38 patients, all of which were processed into component derivatives within 1 to 2 h of collection. This equates to 193 peripheral blood mononuclear cell vials; 238 plasma vials, 224 serum vials, 414 urine supernatant vials and 104 urine cell pellets. This biobank population is demographically and clinically representative of the KHP catchment area. Conclusion: The King’s Health Partners BC Biobank has assembled a rich data and tissue repository which is clinically and demographically representative of the local South East London BC population, making it a valuable resource for future BC research.
- 25 September 2020
- Published by Springer Nature in BMC Cancer
- Vol. 20 (1) , 1-9
Open AccessCohort profile: King’s Health Partners bladder cancer biobank
Background: Bladder cancer (BC) is the 9th most common cancer worldwide, but little progress has been made in improving patient outcomes over the last 25 years. The King’s Health Partners (KHP) BC biobank was established to study unanswered, clinically relevant BC research questions. Donors are recruited from the Urology or Oncology departments of Guy’s Hospital (UK) and can be approached for consent at any point during their treatment pathway. At present, patients with bladder cancer are approached to provide their consent to provide blood, urine and bladder tissue. They also give access to medical records and linkage of relevant clinical and pathological data across the course of their disease. Between June 2017 and June 2019, 531 out of 997 BC patients (53.3%) gave consent to donate samples and data to the Biobank. During this period, the Biobank collected fresh frozen tumour samples from 90/178 surgical procedures (of which 73 were biopsies) and had access to fixed, paraffin embedded samples from all patients who gave consent. Blood and urine samples have been collected from 38 patients, all of which were processed into component derivatives within 1 to 2 h of collection. This equates to 193 peripheral blood mononuclear cell vials; 238 plasma vials, 224 serum vials, 414 urine supernatant vials and 104 urine cell pellets. This biobank population is demographically and clinically representative of the KHP catchment area. Conclusion: The King’s Health Partners BC Biobank has assembled a rich data and tissue repository which is clinically and demographically representative of the local South East London BC population, making it a valuable resource for future BC research.