Cargando…
Low utility of Oncotype DX® in the clinic
Precision medicine tools are currently making their way into the clinic and being utilized to diagnose, prognose, and individualize cancer care. The multi‐gene expression‐based assay, Oncotype DX® (ODX), is a genomic tumor profiling tool that determines the expression of 21 tumor‐ associated genes;...
Autores principales: | , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5345634/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28145091 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cam4.837 |
_version_ | 1782513754302316544 |
---|---|
author | Ricks‐Santi, Luisel J. McDonald, John Tyson |
author_facet | Ricks‐Santi, Luisel J. McDonald, John Tyson |
author_sort | Ricks‐Santi, Luisel J. |
collection | PubMed |
description | Precision medicine tools are currently making their way into the clinic and being utilized to diagnose, prognose, and individualize cancer care. The multi‐gene expression‐based assay, Oncotype DX® (ODX), is a genomic tumor profiling tool that determines the expression of 21 tumor‐ associated genes; it helps determine the risk for distant recurrence and whether chemotherapy is an appropriate course of treatment in patients with early stage, estrogen receptor (ER) positive, HER2 negative, and lymph node negative (or 1–3 positive lymph nodes) invasive BCa. The aim of this study was to determine the overall utilization and uptake of the ODX genomic test in a cross‐sectional analysis of the Virginia Tumor registry, compare utilization in African Americans (AAs) and Caucasian Americans (CAs), and determine the profile of patients referred for testing. Caucasian (89.7%) patients made up the majority of the ODX testers compared to AAs (10.3%) (P < 0.0001). Those who received ODX testing were less likely to have higher grade and higher stage tumors, and were less likely to be ER negative (RR = 0.21, 95% CI: 0.01–0.31), progesterone receptor (PR) negative (RR = 0.35, 95% CI: 0.27–0.45), HER2 amplified (RR = 0.27, 95% CI: 0.17–0.43), or triple negative (RR = 0.21, 95% CI: 0.14–0.33). Of the patients that were eligible (n = 3924), 10.5% (n = 412) received ODX testing. Specifically, 11.7% of the Caucasian patients and 5.1% of AAs patients received ODX testing (P < 0.001). Our analysis confirmed that the utilization of ODX was low and that AAs were much less likely to receive ODX testing. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5345634 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2017 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-53456342017-03-14 Low utility of Oncotype DX® in the clinic Ricks‐Santi, Luisel J. McDonald, John Tyson Cancer Med Clinical Cancer Research Precision medicine tools are currently making their way into the clinic and being utilized to diagnose, prognose, and individualize cancer care. The multi‐gene expression‐based assay, Oncotype DX® (ODX), is a genomic tumor profiling tool that determines the expression of 21 tumor‐ associated genes; it helps determine the risk for distant recurrence and whether chemotherapy is an appropriate course of treatment in patients with early stage, estrogen receptor (ER) positive, HER2 negative, and lymph node negative (or 1–3 positive lymph nodes) invasive BCa. The aim of this study was to determine the overall utilization and uptake of the ODX genomic test in a cross‐sectional analysis of the Virginia Tumor registry, compare utilization in African Americans (AAs) and Caucasian Americans (CAs), and determine the profile of patients referred for testing. Caucasian (89.7%) patients made up the majority of the ODX testers compared to AAs (10.3%) (P < 0.0001). Those who received ODX testing were less likely to have higher grade and higher stage tumors, and were less likely to be ER negative (RR = 0.21, 95% CI: 0.01–0.31), progesterone receptor (PR) negative (RR = 0.35, 95% CI: 0.27–0.45), HER2 amplified (RR = 0.27, 95% CI: 0.17–0.43), or triple negative (RR = 0.21, 95% CI: 0.14–0.33). Of the patients that were eligible (n = 3924), 10.5% (n = 412) received ODX testing. Specifically, 11.7% of the Caucasian patients and 5.1% of AAs patients received ODX testing (P < 0.001). Our analysis confirmed that the utilization of ODX was low and that AAs were much less likely to receive ODX testing. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2017-02-01 /pmc/articles/PMC5345634/ /pubmed/28145091 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cam4.837 Text en © 2016 The Authors. Cancer Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Clinical Cancer Research Ricks‐Santi, Luisel J. McDonald, John Tyson Low utility of Oncotype DX® in the clinic |
title | Low utility of Oncotype DX® in the clinic |
title_full | Low utility of Oncotype DX® in the clinic |
title_fullStr | Low utility of Oncotype DX® in the clinic |
title_full_unstemmed | Low utility of Oncotype DX® in the clinic |
title_short | Low utility of Oncotype DX® in the clinic |
title_sort | low utility of oncotype dx® in the clinic |
topic | Clinical Cancer Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5345634/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28145091 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cam4.837 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT rickssantiluiselj lowutilityofoncotypedxintheclinic AT mcdonaldjohntyson lowutilityofoncotypedxintheclinic |