Literature DB >> 21681446

Gene expression profile testing for breast cancer and the use of chemotherapy, serious adverse effects, and costs of care.

Jennifer S Haas1, Su-Ying Liang, Michael J Hassett, Stephen Shiboski, Elena B Elkin, Kathryn A Phillips.   

Abstract

As gene expression profile (GEP) testing for breast cancer may provide additional prognostic information to guide the use of adjuvant chemotherapy, we examined the association between GEP testing and use of chemotherapy, serious chemotherapy-related adverse effects, and total charges during the 12 months following diagnosis. Medical record review was conducted for women age 30-64 years, with incident, non-metastatic, invasive breast cancer diagnosed 2006-2008 in a large, national health plan. Of 534 patients, 25.8% received GEP testing, 68.2% received chemotherapy, and 10.5% experienced a serious chemotherapy-related adverse effect. GEP testing was most commonly used in women at moderate clinical risk of recurrence (52.0 vs. 25.0% of low-risk women and 5.5% of high-risk). Controlling for the propensity to receive GEP testing, women who had GEP were less likely to receive chemotherapy (propensity adjusted odds ratio, 95% confidence interval 0.62, 0.39-0.99). Use of GEP was associated with more chemotherapy use among women at low risk based on clinical characteristics (OR = 42.19; CI 2.50-711.82), but less use among women with a high risk based on clinical characteristics (OR = 0.12; CI 0.03-0.47). Use of GEP was not associated with chemotherapy for the moderate risk group. There was no significant relationship between GEP use and either serious chemotherapy-associated adverse effects or total charges. While GEP testing was associated with an overall decrease in adjuvant chemotherapy, we did not find differences in serious chemotherapy-associated adverse events or charges during the 12 months following diagnosis.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21681446      PMCID: PMC3590013          DOI: 10.1007/s10549-011-1628-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat        ISSN: 0167-6806            Impact factor:   4.872


  29 in total

1.  Economic analysis of targeting chemotherapy using a 21-gene RT-PCR assay in lymph-node-negative, estrogen-receptor-positive, early-stage breast cancer.

Authors:  John Hornberger; Leon E Cosler; Gary H Lyman
Journal:  Am J Manag Care       Date:  2005-05       Impact factor: 2.229

2.  Gene expression profiling and breast cancer care: what are the potential benefits and policy implications?

Authors:  Nina Oestreicher; Scott D Ramsey; Hannah M Linden; Jeannine S McCune; Laura J van't Veer; Wylie Burke; David L Veenstra
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2005 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 8.822

3.  Analysis of observational studies in the presence of treatment selection bias: effects of invasive cardiac management on AMI survival using propensity score and instrumental variable methods.

Authors:  Thérèse A Stukel; Elliott S Fisher; David E Wennberg; David A Alter; Daniel J Gottlieb; Marian J Vermeulen
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2007-01-17       Impact factor: 56.272

4.  Frequency and cost of chemotherapy-related serious adverse effects in a population sample of women with breast cancer.

Authors:  Michael J Hassett; A James O'Malley; Juliana R Pakes; Joseph P Newhouse; Craig C Earle
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2006-08-16       Impact factor: 13.506

5.  Cost-effectiveness analysis of recurrence score-guided treatment using a 21-gene assay in early breast cancer.

Authors:  Daphne T Tsoi; Miho Inoue; Catherine M Kelly; Sunil Verma; Kathleen I Pritchard
Journal:  Oncologist       Date:  2010-04-26

6.  Cancer statistics, 2010.

Authors:  Ahmedin Jemal; Rebecca Siegel; Jiaquan Xu; Elizabeth Ward
Journal:  CA Cancer J Clin       Date:  2010-07-07       Impact factor: 508.702

7.  The effects of oncotype DX recurrence scores on chemotherapy utilization in a multi-institutional breast cancer cohort.

Authors:  Foluso O Ademuyiwa; Austin Miller; Tracey O'Connor; Stephen B Edge; Mangesh A Thorat; George W Sledge; Ellis Levine; Sunil Badve
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2011-01-01       Impact factor: 4.872

8.  Tradeoffs of using administrative claims and medical records to identify the use of personalized medicine for patients with breast cancer.

Authors:  Su-Ying Liang; Kathryn A Phillips; Grace Wang; Carol Keohane; Joanne Armstrong; William M Morris; Jennifer S Haas
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2011-06       Impact factor: 2.983

9.  Oncotype DX tumor gene expression profiling in stage II colon cancer. Application: prognostic, risk prediction.

Authors:  Elizabeth M Webber; Jennifer S Lin
Journal:  PLoS Curr       Date:  2010-09-02

10.  Prospective multicenter study of the impact of the 21-gene recurrence score assay on medical oncologist and patient adjuvant breast cancer treatment selection.

Authors:  Shelly S Lo; Patricia B Mumby; John Norton; Karen Rychlik; Jeffrey Smerage; Joseph Kash; Helen K Chew; Ellen R Gaynor; Daniel F Hayes; Andrew Epstein; Kathy S Albain
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2010-01-11       Impact factor: 44.544

View more
  5 in total

Review 1.  The value of multigene predictors of clinical outcome in breast cancer: an analysis of the evidence.

Authors:  Amalia M Issa; Vivek S Chaudhari; Gary E Marchant
Journal:  Expert Rev Mol Diagn       Date:  2014-12-05       Impact factor: 5.225

2.  Underutilization of gene expression profiling for early-stage breast cancer in California.

Authors:  Rosemary D Cress; Yingjia S Chen; Cyllene R Morris; Helen Chew; Kenneth W Kizer
Journal:  Cancer Causes Control       Date:  2016-04-20       Impact factor: 2.506

3.  21-gene recurrence assay in patients receiving intraoperative radiotherapy: are "favorable" characteristics a surrogate for low recurrence?

Authors:  Bridget A Oppong; Surupa Sen Gupta; Monique Gary; Patricia Wehner; Mihriye Mete; Danjing Zhao; Sulakshana Seevaratnam; Sonali Rudra; Shawna C Willey
Journal:  Gland Surg       Date:  2017-12

4.  Tissue biomarkers of breast cancer and their association with conventional pathologic features.

Authors:  L Chung; S Shibli; K Moore; E E Elder; F M Boyle; D J Marsh; R C Baxter
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2013-01-08       Impact factor: 7.640

5.  Licochalcone H Induces Cell Cycle Arrest and Apoptosis in Human Skin Cancer Cells by Modulating JAK2/STAT3 Signaling.

Authors:  Kyung-Ho Park; Sang Hoon Joo; Ji-Hye Seo; Jumi Kim; Goo Yoon; Young-Joo Jeon; Mee-Hyun Lee; Jung-Il Chae; Woo-Keun Kim; Jung-Hyun Shim
Journal:  Biomol Ther (Seoul)       Date:  2022-01-01       Impact factor: 4.634

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.