Editorial: Comparative effectiveness research and genomic personalized medicine

Personalized Medicine

Volumn 7, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 223-227

  Lyman, Gary H ^a,b   Hirsch, Bradford ^c  

^a DUKE CANCER INSTITUTE   (United States)

^b DUKE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c DUKE UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CLINICAL DECISION MAKING; CLINICAL EFFECTIVENESS; COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS; COMPARATIVE STUDY; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; COST UTILITY ANALYSIS; EDITORIAL; GENE EXPRESSION; GENOMICS; HEALTH CARE COST; HEALTH CARE DELIVERY; LIFE EXPECTANCY; MEDICAL RESEARCH; MEDICINE; MONTE CARLO METHOD; PERSONALIZED MEDICINE; PREDICTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROGNOSIS;

EID: 77951862352     PISSN: 17410541     EISSN: 1744828X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2217/pme.10.18     Document Type: Editorial

References (14)

1. Meropol NJ, Schulman KA: Cost of cancer care: issues and implications. J. Clin. Oncol. 25, 180-186 (2007). (Pubitemid 350003031)
2. Davis K: Slowing the growth of healthcare costs - learning from international experience. N. Engl. J. Med. 359, 1751-1755 (2008).
3. Sox HC, Greenfeld S: Comparative effectiveness research: a report from the Institute of Medicine. Ann. Intern. Med. 151, 203-205 (2009).
4. Riley RD, Sauerbrei W, Altman DG: Prognostic markers in cancer: the evolution of evidence from single studies to meta-analysis, and beyond. Br. J. Cancer 100, 1219-1229 (2009).
5. Altman DG, Lyman GH: Methodological challenges in the evaluation of prognostic factors in breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 52, 289-303 (1998). (Pubitemid 29056101)
6. Paik S, Shak S, Tang G et al.: A multigene assay to predict recurrence of tamoxifen-treated, node-negative breast cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 351, 2817-2826 (2004). (Pubitemid 40051905)
7. Paik S, Tang G, Shak S et al.: Gene expression and benefit of chemotherapy in women with node-negative, estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer. J. Clin. Oncol. 24, 3726-3734 (2006). (Pubitemid 46622311)
8. Lyman GH, Kuderer NM: Gene expression profile assays as predictors of recurrence-free survival in early-stage breast cancer: a metaanalysis. Clin. Breast Cancer 7, 372-379 (2006).
9. Hornberger J, Cosler LE, Lyman GH: Economic analysis of targeting chemotherapy using a 21-gene RT-PCR assay in lymph-nodenegative, estrogen-receptor-positive, early-stage breast cancer. Am. J. Manag. Care 11, 313-324 (2005). (Pubitemid 40646936)
10. Lyman GH, Cosler LE, Kuderer NM et al.: Impact of a 21-gene RT-PCR assay on treatment decisions in early-stage breast cancer: an economic ana lysis based on prognostic and predictive validation studies. Cancer 109, 1011-1018 (2007).
11. McShane LM, Altman DG, Sauerbrei W et al.: Reporting recommendations for tumor marker prognostic studies (REMARK). J. Natl Cancer Inst. 97, 1180-1184 (2005). (Pubitemid 41258223)
12. Allegra CJ, Jessup JM, Somerfield MR et al.: American Society of Clinical Oncology provisional clinical opinion: testing for KRAS gene mutations in patients with metastatic colorectal carcinoma to predict response to anti-epidermal growth factor receptor monoclonal antibody therapy. J. Clin. Oncol. 27, 2091-2096 (2009).
13. Lyman GH: Comparative effectiveness research in oncology: the need for clarity, transparency and vision. Cancer Invest. 27, 593-597 (2009).
14. Teutsch SM, Bradley LA, Palomaki GE et al.: The Evaluation of Genomic Applications in Practice and Prevention (EGAPP) Initiative: methods of the EGAPP Working Group. Genet. Med. 11, 3-14 (2009).