Prediction and prognosis: Impact of gene expression profiling in personalized treatment of breast cancer patients

LIMES (Life and Medical Sciences Bonn) Institute, Genomics and Immunoregulation, University Bonn, Carl-Troll-Strasse 31, 53115 Bonn, Germany.
The EPMA journal 09/2010; 1(3):421-37. DOI: 10.1007/s13167-010-0044-z
Source: PubMed


Breast cancer is a complex disease, whose heterogeneity is increasingly recognized. Despite considerable improvement in breast cancer treatment and survival, a significant proportion of patients seems to be over- or undertreated. To date, single clinicopathological parameters show limited success in predicting the likelihood of survival or response to endocrine therapy and chemotherapy. Consequently, new gene expression based prognostic and predictive tests are emerging that promise an improvement in predicting survival and therapy response. Initial evidence has emerged that this leads to allocation of fewer patients into high-risk groups allowing a reduction of chemotherapy treatment. Moreover, pattern-based approaches have also been developed to predict response to endocrine therapy or particular chemotherapy regimens. Irrespective of current pitfalls such as lack of validation and standardization, these pattern-based biomarkers will prove useful for clinical decision making in the near future, especially if more patients get access to this form of personalized medicine.

Download full-text


Available from: Joachim L. Schultze,
  • Source

    09/2010; 1(3):365-7. DOI:10.1007/s13167-010-0048-8
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Aim: Breast cancer is the most common cause of cancer-related death among women. Delayed diagnosis leads to development of metastasis and impairs the outcome. This study was designed to utilize subcellular DNA imaging by 'comet assay' and determine pathology-specific comet patterns as the robust biomarker to distinguish between high and low risk for breast cancer development among predisposed individuals with benign breast alterations. Materials & methods: A total of 161 patients were grouped as follows: benignancy, premenopause (n = 59); benignancy, postmenopause (n = 20); breast cancer, premenopause (n = 19); breast cancer, postmenopause (n = 63). On average, 800-1000 comets were evaluated per patient. Results & conclusion: The qualitative comet assay is an innovative approach for breast cancer risk assessment that can be utilized for the screening of highly predisposed individuals among patients with benign breast alterations. Pathology-specific comet patterns have been identified as the robust biomarker for breast cancer risk. Mathematic model-based diagnostic windows have been constructed for their clinical application.
    Personalized Medicine 05/2011; 8(3):321-330. DOI:10.2217/pme.11.17 · 1.34 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Perinatal Asphyxia-oxygen deficit at delivery-can lead to severe hypoxic ischaemic organ damage in newborns followed by a fatal outcome or severe life-long pathologies. The severe insults often cause neurodegenerative diseases, mental retardation and epilepsies. The mild insults lead to so-called "minimal brain-damage disorders" such as attention deficits and hyperactivity, but can also be associated with the development of schizophrenia and life-long functional psychotic syndromes. Asphyxia followed by re-oxygenation can potentially lead to development of several neurodegenerative pathologies, diabetes type 2 and cancer. The task of individual prediction, targeted prevention and personalised treatments before a manifestation of the life-long chronic pathologies usually developed by newborns with asphyxic deficits, should be given the extraordinary priority in neonatology and paediatrics. Socio-economical impacts of educational measures and advanced strategies in development of robust diagnostic approaches targeted at effected molecular pathways, biomarker-candidates and potential drug-targets for tailored treatments are reviewed in the paper.
    EPMA Journal, The 06/2011; 2(2):197-210. DOI:10.1007/s13167-011-0087-9
Show more