The Norton - Simon hypothesis: Designing more effective and less toxic chemotherapeutic regimens

Nature Clinical Practice Oncology

Volumn 3, Issue 8, 2006, Pages 406-407

  Simon, Richard ^a   Norton, Larry ^b  

^a NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE   (United States)

^b MEMORIAL SLOAN KETTERING CANCER CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANTHRACYCLINE; ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENT; CYCLOPHOSPHAMIDE; DOXORUBICIN; EPIRUBICIN; FLUOROURACIL; GRANULOCYTE COLONY STIMULATING FACTOR RECEPTOR; METHOTREXATE; PACLITAXEL;

ANEMIA; ANTINEOPLASTIC ACTIVITY; BONE PAIN; BREAST CANCER; CANCER ADJUVANT THERAPY; CANCER COMBINATION CHEMOTHERAPY; CANCER GROWTH; CANCER REGRESSION; CANCER SIZE; CANCER STAGING; CANCER SURVIVAL; CLINICAL TRIAL; DISEASE FREE SURVIVAL; DOSE RESPONSE; DRUG EFFECT; DRUG EFFICACY; DRUG SAFETY; HUMAN; HYPOTHESIS; LEUKEMIA; NEUTROPENIA; OVERALL SURVIVAL; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; RISK BENEFIT ANALYSIS; SOLID TUMOR; SURVIVAL TIME; TREATMENT PLANNING;

ANTINEOPLASTIC COMBINED CHEMOTHERAPY PROTOCOLS; CLINICAL TRIALS; CLINICAL TRIALS AS TOPIC; DOSE-RESPONSE RELATIONSHIP, DRUG; DRUG ADMINISTRATION SCHEDULE; HUMANS; NEOPLASMS; RISK ASSESSMENT; TUMOR BURDEN;

EID: 33747007990     PISSN: 17434254     EISSN: 17434262     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/ncponc0560     Document Type: Review

References (12)

1. Norton L and Simon R (1976) Tumor size, sensitivity to therapy and the design of treatment protocols. Cancer Treat Rep 61:1307-1317
2. Norton L and Simon R (1977) The growth curve of an experimental solid tumor following radiotherapy. J Natl Cancer Inst 58:1735-1741
3. Norton L and Simon R (1986) The Norton-Simon hypothesis revisited. Cancer Treat Rep 70:163-169
4. Skipper HE (1986) Laboratory models: Some historical perspectives. Cancer Treat Rep 70: 3-7
5. Norton L et al. (1976) Predicting the course of Gompertzian growth. Nature 264: 542-545
6. Bonadonna G et al. (1995) Sequential or alternating doxorubicin and CMF regimens in breast cancer with more than three positive nodes. Ten-year results. JAMA 273:542-547
7. Bonadonna G et al. (2004) Clinical relevance of different sequencing of doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide, methotrexate and fluorouracil in operable breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 22:1614-1620
8. Goldie JH and Coldman AJ (1979) A mathematical model for relating the drug sensitivity of tumors to their spontaneous mutation rate. Cancer Treat Rep 63: 1727-1733
9. Citron ML et al. (2003) Randomized trial of dose-dense versus conventionally scheduled and sequential versus concurrent combination chemotherapy as postoperative adjuvant treatment of node-positive primary breast cancer: First report of Intergroup trial C9741/Cancer and Leukemia Group B trial 9741. J Clin Oncol 21:1431-1439
10. Venturini M et al. (2005) Dose-dense adjuvant chemotherapy in early breast cancer patients: Results from a randomized trial. J Natl Cancer Inst 97: 1724-1733
11. Norton L (2005) Conceptual and practical implications of breast tissue geometry: Toward a more effective, less toxic therapy. Oncologist 10: 370-381
12. Norton L et al. (2005) Optimizing chemotherapeutic dose-schedule by Norton-Simon modeling: Capecitabine. In 96th Annual Meeting of the American Association of Cancer Research: 2005 April 16-20; Anaheim, abstract #5007