Is gene array testing to be considered routine now?

Breast

Volumn 20, Issue SUPPL. 3, 2011, Pages

  Paik, Soonmyung ^a,b  

^a NSAB Foundation   (United States)

^b Samsung Advanced Institute of Technology (SAIT)   (South Korea)

Author keywords

Breast cancer; Gene expression profiling; Prognosis

Indexed keywords

ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENT; EPIDERMAL GROWTH FACTOR RECEPTOR 2; ESTROGEN RECEPTOR; KI 67 ANTIGEN; TAMOXIFEN;

ARTICLE; BREAST BIOPSY; BREAST CANCER; CANCER ADJUVANT THERAPY; CANCER CHEMOTHERAPY; CANCER GRADING; CLINICAL DECISION MAKING; GENE EXPRESSION PROFILING; HUMAN; IMMUNOHISTOCHEMISTRY; PREDICTIVE VALUE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROGNOSIS; REPRODUCIBILITY;

EID: 79960996989     PISSN: 09609776     EISSN: 15323080     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0960-9776(11)70301-0     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Perou CM, Sorlie T, Eisen MB, et al. Molecular portraits of human breast tumours. Nature 2000, 406:747-752.
2. Parker JS, Mullins M, Cheang MC, et al. Supervised risk predictor of breast cancer based on intrinsic subtypes. J Clin Oncol 2009, 27:1160-1167.
3. Glas AM, Floore A, Delahaye LJ, et al. Converting a breast cancer microarray signature into a high-throughput diagnostic test. BMC Genomics 2006, 7:278.
4. Loi S, Haibe-Kains B, Desmedt C, et al. Definition of clinically distinct molecular subtypes in estrogen receptor-positive breast carcinomas through genomic gradej. Clin Oncol 2007, 25:1239-1246.
5. 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 2004, 351:2817-2826.
6. Ma XJ, Salunga R, Dahiya S, et al. A five-gene molecular grade index and HOXB13:IL17BR are complementary prognostic factors in early stage breast cancer. Clin Cancer Res 2008, 14:2601-2608.
7. Rakha EA, Reis-Filho JS, Baehner F, et al. Breast cancer prognostic classification in the molecular era: the role of histological grade. Breast Cancer Res 2010, 12:207.
8. Hammond ME, Hayes DF, Dowsett M, et al. American Society of Clinical Oncology/College Of American Pathologists guideline recommendations for immunohistochemical testing of estrogen and progesterone receptors in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2010, 28:2784-2795.
9. Wolff AC, Hammond ME, Schwartz JN, et al. American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists guideline recommendations for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 testing in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2007, 25:118-145.
10. Paik S, Bryant J, Tan-Chiu E, et al. Real-world performance of HER2 testing-National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project experience. J Natl Cancer Inst 2002, 94:852-854.
11. Allison KH, Kandalaft PL, Sitlani CM, Dintzis SM, Gown AM Routine pathologic parameters can predict Oncotype DX(TM) recurrence scores in subsets of ER positive patients: who does not always need testing?. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2011 March 3, [Epub ahead of print].
12. Auerbach J, Kim M, Fineberg S Can features evaluated in the routine pathologic assessment of lymph node-negative estrogen receptor-positive stage I or II invasive breast cancer be used to predict the Oncotype DX recurrence score?. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2010, 134:1697-1701.
13. Geradts J, Bean SM, Bentley RC, Barry WT The oncotype DX recurrence score is correlated with a composite index including routinely reported pathobiologic features. Cancer Invest 2010, 28:969-977.
14. Desmedt C, Haibe-Kains B, Wirapati P, et al. Biological processes associated with breast cancer clinical outcome depend on the molecular subtypes. Clin Cancer Res 2008, 14:5158-5165.
15. Wirapati P, Sotiriou C, Kunkel S, et al. Meta-analysis of gene expression profiles in breast cancer: toward a unified understanding of breast cancer subtyping and prognosis signatures. Breast Cancer Res 2008, 10:R65.
16. Fan C, Oh DS, Wessels L, et al. Concordance among gene-expression-based predictors for breast cancer. N EnglJ Med 2006, 355:560-569.
17. Simon JA, Szankasi R, Nguyen DK, et al. Differential toxicities of anticancer agents among DNA repair and checkpoint mutants of Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Cancer Res 2000, 60:328-333.
18. Gianni L, Zambetti M, Clark K, et al. Gene expression profiles in paraffin-embedded core biopsy tissue predict response to chemotherapy in women with locally advanced breast cancer. J C/in. Oncol 2005, 23:7265-7277.
19. Liedtke C, Hatzis C, Symmans WF, et al. Genomic grade index is associated with response to chemotherapy in patients with breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2009, 27:3185-3191.
20. Bonnefoi H, Potti A, Delorenzi M, et al. Retraction-Validation of gene signatures that predict the response of breast cancer to neoadjuvant chemotherapy: a substudyoftheEORTC10994/BIG 00-01 clinical trial. Lancet Oncol 2011, 12:116.
21. Bonnefoi H, Potti A, Delorenzi M, et al. Validation of gene signatures that predict the response of breast cancer to neoadjuvant chemotherapy: a substudy of the EORTC 10994/BIG 00-01 clinical trial. Lancet Oncol 2007, 8:1071-1078.
22. 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 2006, 24:3726-3734.
23. Cronin M, Sangli C, Liu ML, et al. Analytical validation of the Oncotype DX genomic diagnostic test for recurrence prognosis and therapeutic response prediction in node-negative, estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer. Clin Chem 2007, 53:1084-1091.
24. Schroeder A, Mueller O, Stocker S, et al. The RIN: an RNA integrity number for assigning integrity values to RNA measurements. BMC Mol Biol 2006, 7:3.
25. Cronin M, Pho M, Dutta D, et al. Measurement of gene expression in archival paraffin-embedded tissues: development and performance of a 92-gene reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction assay. Am J Pathol 2004, 164:35-42.
26. Mullins M, Perreard L, Quackenbush JF, et al. Agreement in breast cancer classification between microarray and quantitative reverse transcription PCR from fresh-frozen and formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tissues. Clin Chem 2007, 53:1273-1279.
27. Drury S, Salter J, Baehner FL, Shak S, Dowsett M Feasibility of using tissue microarray cores of paraffin-embedded breast cancer tissue for measurement of gene expression: a proof-of-concept study. J Clin Pathol 2010, 63:513-517.
28. Kim C, Paik S Gene-expression-based prognostic assays for breast cancer. Nat Rev Clin Oncol 2010, 7:340-347.
29. Hayes DF, Bast RC, Desch CE, et al. Tumor marker utility grading system: a framework to evaluate clinical utility of tumor markers. J Natl Cancer Inst 1996, 88:1456-1466.
30. Simon RM, Paik S, Hayes DF Use of archived specimens in evaluation of prognostic and predictive biomarkers. J. Natl Cancer Inst 2009, 101:1446-1452.
31. Albain KS, Barlow WE, Shak S, et al. Prognostic and predictive value of the 21-gene recurrence score assay in postmenopausal women with node-positive, oestrogen-receptor-positive breast cancer on chemotherapy: a retrospective analysis of a randomised trial. Lancet Oncol 2010, 11:55-65.
32. Bogaerts J, Cardoso F, Buyse M, et al. Gene signature evaluation as a prognostic tool: challenges in the design of the MINDACT trial. Nat Clin Pract Oncol 2006, 3:540-551.
33. Sparano JA TAILORx: trial assigning individualized options for treatment (Rx). Clin Breast Cancer 2006, 7:347-350.