Molecular pathology

Molecular Oncology

Volumn 6, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 177-181

  Hamilton, Stanley R ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MD ANDERSON CANCER CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

Biomarkers; Gene sequencing; Genomics; Molecular pathology

Indexed keywords

BIOLOGICAL MARKER;

ARTICLE; CANCER CELL; CANCER THERAPY; CANCER TISSUE; CARCINOGENESIS; CHEMICAL ANALYSIS; DNA DETERMINATION; FLUORESCENCE IN SITU HYBRIDIZATION; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HUMAN; IMMUNOHISTOCHEMISTRY; LABORATORY TEST; MEDICAL DECISION MAKING; MOLECULAR BIOLOGY; MOLECULAR PATHOLOGY; PATIENT CARE; PERSONALIZED MEDICINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROGNOSIS; PROTEIN ANALYSIS; RNA ANALYSIS;

EID: 84860471673     PISSN: 15747891     EISSN: 18780261     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.molonc.2012.02.007     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Brock T.K. Diagnostic, prognostic, and predictive: the dynamic role of molecular technology in personalized medicine. Am. Lab. 2012, 21-25. January.
2. Burke W., Zmmern R.L. Ensuring the appropriate use of genetic tests. Nat. Rev. Genet. 2004, 5:955-959.
3. Cancer Genome Atlas Research Network Integrated genomic analysis of ovarian carcinoma. Nature 2011, 474:609-615.
4. Chen Q., Ye Z., Lin S.-C., et al. Recent patents and advances in genomic biomarker discovery for colorectal cancers. Recent Patents on DNA & Gene Sequences 2010, 4:86-93.
5. Evolution of Translational Omics. Lessons Learned and the Path Forward. Committee on the Review of Omics-Based Tests for Predicting Patient Outcomes in Clinical Trials. Institute of Medicine of the National Academies 2012, The National Academies Press, Washington, D.C., March 23, 2012. http://www.nap.edu, C.M. Micheel, S.J. Nass, G.S. Omenn (Eds.).
6. Green S.B., Byar D.P. Using observational data from registries to compare treatments: the fallacy of omnimetrics. Stat. Med. 1984, 3:361-370.
7. Hayes D.F., et al. Tumor marker utility grading system: a framework to evaluate clinical utility of tumor markers. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 1996, 88:1456-1466.
8. Holden M.J., Madej R.M., Minor P., et al. Harmonization through reference materials, documentary standards and proficiency testing. Expert Rev. Mol. Diagn. 2011, 11:741-755.
9. Igbokwe A., Lopez-Terrada D.H. Molecular testing of solid tumors. Arch. Patho; Lab. Med. 2011, 135:67-82.
10. Kumar A., et al. Exome sequencing identifies a spectrum of mutation frequencies in advanced and lethal prostate cancers. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2011, 108:7087-17092.
11. Lassere M.N., et al. Definitions and validation criteria for biomarkers and surrogate endpoints: development and testing of a quantitative hierarchical levels of evidence schema. J. Rheumatol. 2007, 34:607-615.
12. Louis D.N., Virgin H.W., Asa S.L. Next-generation pathology and laboratory medicine. Arch Pathol. Lab. Med. 2011, 135:1531-1532.
13. McDermott U.M., Downing J.R., Stratton M.R. Genomics and the continuum of cancer care. N. Engl. J. Med. 2011, 364:340-350.
14. National Cancer Institute Best Practices for Biospecimen Resources 2011.
15. Phillips K.A., Van Bebber S., Issa A.M. Diagnostics and biomarker development: priming the pipeline. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 2006, 5:463-469.
16. President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology Priorities for Personalized Medicine 2008, p. 13.
17. Roychowdhury S., et al. Personalized oncology through integrative high-throughput sequencing: a pilot study. Sci. Translational Med. 2011, 3:1-10.
18. Stratton M.R., Campbell P.J., Futreal P.A. The cancer genome. Nature 2009, 458:719-724.
19. The Cancer Genome Atlas Research Network Comprehensive genomic characterization defines human glioblastoma genes and core pathways. Nature 2008, 455:1061-1068.
20. Vickers A.J. Decision analysis for the evaluation of diagnostic tests, prediction models and molecular markers. Am. Stat. 2008, 62:314-320.