Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorVan De Velde, C.
dc.contributor.authorMasetti, R.
dc.contributor.authorZarca, D.
dc.contributor.authorOzmen, Vahit
dc.contributor.authorMarkopoulos, C.
dc.date.accessioned2021-03-05T11:58:56Z
dc.date.available2021-03-05T11:58:56Z
dc.identifier.citationMarkopoulos C., Van De Velde C., Zarca D., Ozmen V., Masetti R., "Clinical evidence supporting genomic tests in early breast cancer: Do all genomic tests provide the same information?", European journal of surgical oncology : the journal of the European Society of Surgical Oncology and the British Association of Surgical Oncology, cilt.43, ss.909-920, 2017
dc.identifier.issn0748-7983
dc.identifier.othervv_1032021
dc.identifier.otherav_aadd3183-5afa-49ed-8261-03e9c9a85c06
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12627/114096
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejso.2016.08.012
dc.description.abstractBreast cancer (BC) has historically been treated as a single disease entity; however, in the last decade, insights into its molecular heterogeneity have underpinned the development/commercialisation of several genomic tools whose goal is to guide patient management in early BC. These include the Oncotype DX Breast Recurrence ScoreTM assay, MammaPrint, Prosigna, and EndoPredict. Although these assays are similar in that they are all multigene assays reflecting risk of recurrence, they differ substantially in the technological platform used to measure gene expression; the number and identity of genes assessed; the patient populations used for development and validation; and the level of evidence supporting clinical utility. They also differ in the amount of evidence demonstrating their impact on treatment decisions and cost effectiveness in different countries. This review discusses these 4 assays, highlighting the clinical evidence that supports each of them, while focussing on the Recurrence Score assay. This assay has the greatest body of evidence supporting its clinical utility and decision impact/effectiveness, and currently is the only one validated as a predictor of response to adjuvant chemotherapy in hormone -receptor positive early BC patients treated with endocrine therapy and to be included as such in international/national BC treatment guidelines. The review also discusses ongoing prospective trials investigating the 4 assays, recent outcome studies, as well as analyses comparing different assays on the same tumour blocks. (C) 2016 Elsevier Ltd, BASO - The Association for Cancer Surgery, and the European Society of Surgical Oncology. All rights reserved.
dc.language.isoeng
dc.subjectİç Hastalıkları
dc.subjectOnkoloji
dc.subjectCerrahi Tıp Bilimleri
dc.subjectSağlık Bilimleri
dc.subjectDahili Tıp Bilimleri
dc.subjectTıp
dc.subjectCERRAHİ
dc.subjectKlinik Tıp (MED)
dc.subjectKlinik Tıp
dc.subjectONKOLOJİ
dc.titleClinical evidence supporting genomic tests in early breast cancer: Do all genomic tests provide the same information?
dc.typeMakale
dc.relation.journalEuropean journal of surgical oncology : the journal of the European Society of Surgical Oncology and the British Association of Surgical Oncology
dc.contributor.departmentNational & Kapodistrian University of Athens , ,
dc.identifier.volume43
dc.identifier.startpage909
dc.identifier.endpage920
dc.contributor.firstauthorID2503044


Files in this item

FilesSizeFormatView

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record