Literature DB >> 12373720

Prognostic and predictive value of HER2/neu oncogene in breast cancer.

Shahla Masood1, Marilyn M Bui.   

Abstract

Assessment of HER2/neu oncogene has been used as both a prognostic and predictive marker for breast cancer. However, the choice of the best method to assess the status of HER2/neu oncogene in breast cancer tissue remains controversial. A variety of techniques are available to detect HER2/neu gene amplification and overexpression. Tissue-based detection methods by immunohistochemistry (IHC) and/or fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) offers a clear advantage over other approaches. FISH is a costly and relatively difficult assay and yet appears to be a better predictor of response to Herceptin (Trastuzumab) therapy and patient outcome. IHC is less expensive and is easier to perform; however, it suffers from a high rate of false negativity and positivity as well as inter-observer variability among pathologists. Suggestions have been made to use IHC as a screening procedure followed by confirmation by FISH in selected cases. Considering the importance of an accurate assessment of HER2/neu oncogene in selecting therapy, a better alternative may be to use FISH as the primary testing for HER2/neu oncogene. Herceptin therapy is associated with several side effects and is expensive. Thus, in the long term, it may be more cost-effective to use the FISH procedure and reduce the possibility of under-treatment or over-treatment of breast cancer patients. In addition, assessment of HER2/neu oncogene on every newly diagnosed early breast carcinoma may not be necessary. Metastatic lesions, when they occur, can be sampled by fine needle aspiration biopsy or core needle biopsy for assessment of HER2/Neu status. Copyright 2002 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12373720     DOI: 10.1002/jemt.10181

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Microsc Res Tech        ISSN: 1059-910X            Impact factor:   2.769


  16 in total

1.  Development of an integrated genomic classifier for a novel agent in colorectal cancer: approach to individualized therapy in early development.

Authors:  Todd M Pitts; Aik Choon Tan; Gillian N Kulikowski; John J Tentler; Amy M Brown; Sara A Flanigan; Stephen Leong; Christopher D Coldren; Fred R Hirsch; Marileila Varella-Garcia; Christopher Korch; S Gail Eckhardt
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2010-06-08       Impact factor: 12.531

2.  Integrating molecular diagnostics into anticancer drug discovery.

Authors:  István Peták; Richárd Schwab; László Orfi; László Kopper; György Kéri
Journal:  Nat Rev Drug Discov       Date:  2010-06-07       Impact factor: 84.694

Review 3.  Biomarkers and surrogate end points--the challenge of statistical validation.

Authors:  Marc Buyse; Daniel J Sargent; Axel Grothey; Alastair Matheson; Aimery de Gramont
Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol       Date:  2010-04-06       Impact factor: 66.675

4.  [Molecular protocol for HER2/neu analysis in breast carcinoma].

Authors:  Montse Verdú Artufel; Anna Colomer Valero; Ruth Román Lladó; Nadina Erill Sagalés; Miquel Calvo Llorca; Abelardo Moreno Carazo; Carlos Cordón Cardó; Xavier Puig Torrus
Journal:  Clin Transl Oncol       Date:  2005-12       Impact factor: 3.405

5.  In silico analysis of DNA re-replication across a complete genome reveals cell-to-cell heterogeneity and genome plasticity.

Authors:  Maria Anna Rapsomaniki; Stella Maxouri; Patroula Nathanailidou; Manuel Ramirez Garrastacho; Nickolaos Nikiforos Giakoumakis; Stavros Taraviras; John Lygeros; Zoi Lygerou
Journal:  NAR Genom Bioinform       Date:  2021-01-28

6.  Genetic tests and genomic biomarkers: regulation, qualification and validation.

Authors:  Giuseppe Novelli; Cinzia Ciccacci; Paola Borgiani; Marisa Papaluca Amati; Eric Abadie
Journal:  Clin Cases Miner Bone Metab       Date:  2008-05

Review 7.  Applying genomics to organ transplantation medicine in both discovery and validation of biomarkers.

Authors:  Sunil Kurian; Yevgeniy Grigoryev; Steve Head; Daniel Campbell; Tony Mondala; Daniel R Salomon
Journal:  Int Immunopharmacol       Date:  2007-08-09       Impact factor: 4.932

8.  HER2 gene amplification and chromosome 17 copy number do not predict survival of patients with resected pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

Authors:  Saima Sharif; Ramesh K Ramanathan; Douglas Potter; Kathleen Cieply; Alyssa M Krasinskas
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2008-05-08       Impact factor: 3.199

9.  Using image analysis as a tool for assessment of prognostic and predictive biomarkers for breast cancer: How reliable is it?

Authors:  Mark C Lloyd; Pushpa Allam-Nandyala; Chetna N Purohit; Nancy Burke; Domenico Coppola; Marilyn M Bui
Journal:  J Pathol Inform       Date:  2010-12-23

10.  Prognostic markers in breast cancer: the reliability of HER2/neu status in core needle biopsy of 325 patients with primary breast cancer.

Authors:  Susanne Taucher; Margaretha Rudas; Robert M Mader; Michael Gnant; Peter Dubsky; Sebastian Roka; Thomas Bachleitner; Daniela Kandioler; Günther Steger; Martina Mittlböck; Raimund Jakesz
Journal:  Wien Klin Wochenschr       Date:  2004-01-31       Impact factor: 2.275

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.