4.7 Article

Pharmacogenetic assessment of toxicity and outcome after platinum plus taxane chemotherapy in ovarian cancer: The Scottish randomised trial in ovarian cancer

Journal

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY
Volume 25, Issue 29, Pages 4528-4535

Publisher

AMER SOC CLINICAL ONCOLOGY
DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2006.10.4752

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. NCI NIH HHS [R21 CA113491] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NIGMS NIH HHS [U01 GM63340] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose Standard therapy for advanced ovarian cancer consists of a platinum agent in combination with a taxane, which has a 5-year survival rate of approximately 45%. The large individual variability for ovarian cancer patients in both outcome and toxicity risk from chemotherapy makes the identification of pharmacogenetic markers that can be used to screen patients before therapy selection an attractive prospect. Patients and Methods We assessed 27 selected polymorphisms based on previously described associations or putative functional effects in 16 key genes from pathways that may influence cellular sensitivity to taxanes (ABCB1, ABCC1, ABCC2, ABCG2, CDKN1A, CYP1B1, CYP2C8, CYP3A4, CYP3A5, MAPT, and TP53) and platinum (ABCC2, ABCG2, ERCC1, ERCC2, GSTP1, MPO, and XRCC1) using polymerase chain reaction and Pyrosequencing in 914 ovarian cancer patients from the Scottish Randomised Trial in Ovarian Cancer phase III trial who were treated at presentation with carboplatin and taxane regimens after cytoreductive surgery. Results No reproducible significant associations between genotype and outcome or toxicity were found for any of the genes analyzed. Previously reported genotype associations could not be replicated in this large study of a well-defined patient population within one specific clinical trial. Conclusion There are no clear candidates for taxane/platinum pharmacogenetic markers. This study highlights the need for validation of putative genetic markers in large, well-defined clinical sample sets.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available