Abstract
In the last 20 years, more than 200 papers have been published in the English literature assessing either the prognostic or predictive abilities of several different putative tumor markers. In spite of this plethora of publications, very few factors have been accepted for routine use in clinical practice. In 1995, the American Society of Clinical Oncology convened an Expert Panel to develop evidence-based practice guidelines for the use of tumor markers in breast cancer (ASCO Expert Panel 1996). This panel considered several tissue-based factors, including estrogen receptor (ER), cathepsin D, p53, HER-2/c-neu/erbB-2, and flow cytometrically determined S-phase fraction. After careful deliberation, they concluded that the data were insufficient to recommend the use of any biologically based marker to determine prognosis. Furthermore, the Panel recommended that ER could be used to reliably predict response/benefit from hormone therapy, but that no other predictive factor was sufficiently well-established to be considered for routine clinical use.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
American Joint Committee on Cancer (1988) Breast. In: Beahrs OH, Henson DE, Hutter RVP, Myers MH (eds) Manual for staging of cancer, 3rd edn. Lippincott, Philadelphia, pp 145–150
ASCO Expert Panel (1996) Clinical practice guidelines for the use of tumor markers in breast and colorectal cancer: report of the American Society of Clinical Oncology Expert Panel J Clin Oncol 14:2843–2877
Canadian Task Force on the Periodic Health Examination (1979) The periodic health examination. Can Med Assoc J 121:1193–1254
Carney W, Petit D, Hamer P, LaVecchio J, McKenzie S, Ng S (1989) Quantitation of ras and neu oncogene proteins in plasma and carcinoma cells using ELISA formats. Breast Cancer Res Treat 14:187a
Clark GM, Dressler LG, Owens MA, Pounds G, Oldaker T, McGuire WL (1989) Prediction of relapse or survival in patients with node-negative breast cancer by DNA flow cytometry. N Engl J Med 320:627–633
George SL (1994) Statistical considerations and modeling of clinical utility of tumor markers. In: Hayes DF (eds) Hematology/oncology clinics of North America: tumor markers in adult solid malignancies. Saunders, Philadelphia, pp 457–470
Hayes DF, Trock B (1998) Assessing the clinical impact of prognostic factors: statistically significant is not necessarily clinically useful. Breast Cancer Res Treat (in press)
Hayes DF, Bast R, Desch CE, Fritsche H, Kemeny NE, Jessup J, Locker GY, Macdonald J, Mennel RG, Norton L, Ravdin P, Taube S, Winn R (1996) A tumor marker utility grading system (TMUGS): a framework to evaluate clinical utility of tumor markers. J Natl Cancer Inst 88:1456–1466
Simon R, Altman DG (1994) Statistical aspects of prognostic factor studies in oncology. Br J Cancer 69:979–985
Trock B, Leonessa F, Clarke R (1997) Multidrug resistance in breast cancer: a meta-analysis of MDR1/gp170 expression and its possible functional significance. J Natl Cancer Inst 89:917–931
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1998 Springer-Verlag Berlin · Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Hayes, D.F. (1998). Determination of Clinical Utility of Tumor Markers: A Tumor Marker Utility Grading System. In: Senn, HJ., Gelber, R.D., Goldhirsch, A., Thürlimann, B. (eds) Adjuvant Therapy of Primary Breast Cancer VI. Recent Results in Cancer Research, vol 152. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-45769-2_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-45769-2_7
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-45771-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-45769-2
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive