Cargando…

Towards decision-making using individualized risk estimates for personalized medicine: A systematic review of genomic classifiers of solid tumors

Recent advances in the understanding of the genetic underpinnings of cancer offer the promise to customize cancer treatments to the individual through the use of genomic classifiers (GCs). At present, routine clinical utilization of GCs is uncommon and their current scope and status, in a broad sens...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Trifiletti, Daniel M., Sturz, Vanessa N., Showalter, Timothy N., Lobo, Jennifer M.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5423583/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28486497
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0176388
_version_ 1783234973223878656
author Trifiletti, Daniel M.
Sturz, Vanessa N.
Showalter, Timothy N.
Lobo, Jennifer M.
author_facet Trifiletti, Daniel M.
Sturz, Vanessa N.
Showalter, Timothy N.
Lobo, Jennifer M.
author_sort Trifiletti, Daniel M.
collection PubMed
description Recent advances in the understanding of the genetic underpinnings of cancer offer the promise to customize cancer treatments to the individual through the use of genomic classifiers (GCs). At present, routine clinical utilization of GCs is uncommon and their current scope and status, in a broad sense, are unknown. As part of a registered review (PROSPERO 2014:CRD42014013371), we systematically reviewed the literature evaluating the utility of commercially available GCs by searching Ovid Medline (PubMed), EMBASE, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and CINAHL on September 2, 2014. We excluded articles involving pediatric malignancies, non-solid or non-invasive cancers, hereditary risk of cancer, non-validated GCs, and GCs involving fewer than 3 biomarkers. A total of 3,625 studies were screened, but only 37 met the pre-specified inclusion criteria. Of these, 15 studies evaluated outcomes and clinical utility of GCs through clinical trials, and the remainder through the use of mathematical models. Most studies (29 of 37) were specific to hormone-receptor positive breast cancer, whereas only 4 studies evaluated GCs in non-breast cancer (prostate, colon, and lung cancers). GCs have spurred excitement across disciplines in recent decades. While there are several GCs that have been validated, the general quality of the data are weak. Further research, including prospective validation is needed, particularly in the non-breast cancer GCs.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5423583
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-54235832017-05-15 Towards decision-making using individualized risk estimates for personalized medicine: A systematic review of genomic classifiers of solid tumors Trifiletti, Daniel M. Sturz, Vanessa N. Showalter, Timothy N. Lobo, Jennifer M. PLoS One Research Article Recent advances in the understanding of the genetic underpinnings of cancer offer the promise to customize cancer treatments to the individual through the use of genomic classifiers (GCs). At present, routine clinical utilization of GCs is uncommon and their current scope and status, in a broad sense, are unknown. As part of a registered review (PROSPERO 2014:CRD42014013371), we systematically reviewed the literature evaluating the utility of commercially available GCs by searching Ovid Medline (PubMed), EMBASE, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and CINAHL on September 2, 2014. We excluded articles involving pediatric malignancies, non-solid or non-invasive cancers, hereditary risk of cancer, non-validated GCs, and GCs involving fewer than 3 biomarkers. A total of 3,625 studies were screened, but only 37 met the pre-specified inclusion criteria. Of these, 15 studies evaluated outcomes and clinical utility of GCs through clinical trials, and the remainder through the use of mathematical models. Most studies (29 of 37) were specific to hormone-receptor positive breast cancer, whereas only 4 studies evaluated GCs in non-breast cancer (prostate, colon, and lung cancers). GCs have spurred excitement across disciplines in recent decades. While there are several GCs that have been validated, the general quality of the data are weak. Further research, including prospective validation is needed, particularly in the non-breast cancer GCs. Public Library of Science 2017-05-09 /pmc/articles/PMC5423583/ /pubmed/28486497 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0176388 Text en © 2017 Trifiletti et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Trifiletti, Daniel M.
Sturz, Vanessa N.
Showalter, Timothy N.
Lobo, Jennifer M.
Towards decision-making using individualized risk estimates for personalized medicine: A systematic review of genomic classifiers of solid tumors
title Towards decision-making using individualized risk estimates for personalized medicine: A systematic review of genomic classifiers of solid tumors
title_full Towards decision-making using individualized risk estimates for personalized medicine: A systematic review of genomic classifiers of solid tumors
title_fullStr Towards decision-making using individualized risk estimates for personalized medicine: A systematic review of genomic classifiers of solid tumors
title_full_unstemmed Towards decision-making using individualized risk estimates for personalized medicine: A systematic review of genomic classifiers of solid tumors
title_short Towards decision-making using individualized risk estimates for personalized medicine: A systematic review of genomic classifiers of solid tumors
title_sort towards decision-making using individualized risk estimates for personalized medicine: a systematic review of genomic classifiers of solid tumors
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5423583/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28486497
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0176388
work_keys_str_mv AT trifilettidanielm towardsdecisionmakingusingindividualizedriskestimatesforpersonalizedmedicineasystematicreviewofgenomicclassifiersofsolidtumors
AT sturzvanessan towardsdecisionmakingusingindividualizedriskestimatesforpersonalizedmedicineasystematicreviewofgenomicclassifiersofsolidtumors
AT showaltertimothyn towardsdecisionmakingusingindividualizedriskestimatesforpersonalizedmedicineasystematicreviewofgenomicclassifiersofsolidtumors
AT lobojenniferm towardsdecisionmakingusingindividualizedriskestimatesforpersonalizedmedicineasystematicreviewofgenomicclassifiersofsolidtumors