4.5 Article

Designs and challenges for personalized medicine studies in oncology: focus on the SHIVA trial

期刊

TARGETED ONCOLOGY
卷 7, 期 4, 页码 253-265

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11523-012-0237-6

关键词

Personalized medicine; SHIVA trial; Randomized study; Molecular profile; Sequencing; Cancer; Challenges

类别

资金

  1. Agence Nationale de le Recherche (Investissements d'avenir) [ANR-10-EQPX-03]
  2. SiRIC (Site de Recherche Integre contre le Cancer)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Personalized medicine is defined by the National Cancer Institute as a form of medicine that uses information about a person's genes, proteins, and environment to prevent, diagnose, and treat disease. In oncology, the term personalized medicine arose with the emergence of molecularly targeted agents. The prescription of approved molecularly targeted agents to cancer patients currently relies on the primary tumor location and histological subtype. Predictive biomarkers of efficacy of these modern agents have been exclusively validated in specific tumor types. A major concern today is to determine whether the prescription of molecularly targeted therapies based on tumor molecular abnormalities, independently of primary tumor location and histology, would improve the outcome of cancer patients. This new paradigm requires prospective validation before being implemented in clinical practice. In this paper, we will first review different designs, including observational cohorts, as well as nonrandomized and randomized clinical trials, that have been recently proposed to evaluate the relevance of this approach, and further discuss their advantages and drawbacks. The design of the SHIVA trial, a randomized proof-of-concept phase II trial comparing therapy based on tumor molecular profiling versus conventional therapy in patients with refractory cancer will be detailed. Finally, we will discuss the multiple challenges associated with the implementation of personalized medicine in oncology, as well as perspectives for the future.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据