|
Advertisement |
|
|
||
 |
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
 |
||||||
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
Erratum
for
Bast et al., © 2001 American Society for Clinical Oncology
ERRATAThe review article in the first August 2000 issue by Siegel et al, entitled "Primary Cutaneous T-Cell Lymphoma: Review and Current Concepts" (J Clin Oncol 18:2908-2925, 2000), contained a figure error. The authors inadvertently inserted an incorrect figure for Fig 1D. The correct Fig 1D is provided below.
In the March 15, 2001, issue, an ASCO Special Article by Bast et al, entitled "2000 Update of Recommendations for the Use of Tumor Markers in Breast and Colorectal Cancer: Clinical Practice Guidelines for the American Society of Clinical Oncology" (J Clin Oncol 19:1865-1878, 2001), contained an error. The recommendation for use of CA 15-3 or CA 27.29 in assessing response to metastatic breast cancer therapy was omitted from the body of the 2000 Update (p. 1867) and from the Appendix of the 2000 Update (p. 1874). The recommendation is as follows: Present data are insufficient to recommend routine use of CA 15-3 or CA 27.29 alone for monitoring response to treatment. However, in the absence of readily measurable disease, an increasing CA 15-3 or CA 27.29 may be used to suggest treatment failure. The correct Appendix is reprinted here in its entirety. APPENDIX Summary of Recommendations Colorectal Cancer Guidelines Carcinoembryonic Antigen as a Marker for Colorectal Cancer 1a. 1997 Recommendation: Carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) is not recommended to be used as a screening test for colorectal cancer. 2000 Recommendation: No change. 1b. 1997 Recommendation: CEA may be ordered preoperatively in patients with colorectal carcinoma if it would assist in staging and surgical treatment planning. Although elevated preoperative CEA (> 5 ng/mL) may correlate with poorer prognosis, data are insufficient to support the use of CEA to determine whether to treat a patient with adjuvant therapy. 2000 Recommendation: No change. 1c. 1997 Recommendation: If resection of liver metastases would be clinically indicated, it is recommended that postoperative serum CEA testing may be performed every 2 to 3 months in patients with stage II or III disease for 2 or more years after diagnosis. An elevated CEA, if confirmed by retesting, warrants further evaluation for metastatic disease but does not justify the institution of adjuvant therapy or systemic therapy for presumed metastatic disease. 2000 Recommendation: No change. 1d. 1997 Recommendation: Present data are insufficient to recommend routine use of the serum CEA alone for monitoring response to treatment. If no other simple test is available to indicate a response, CEA should be measured at the start of treatment for metastatic disease and every 2 to 3 months during active treatment. Two values above baseline are adequate to document progressive disease even in the absence of corroborating radiographs. CEA is regarded as the marker of choice for monitoring colorectal cancer. 2000 Recommendation: No change. Lipid-Associated Sialic Acid as a Marker for Colorectal Cancer 2. 1997 Recommendation: Present data are insufficient to recommend lipid-associated sialic acid (LASA) for screening, diagnosis, staging, surveillance, or monitoring treatment of patients with colorectal cancer. 2000 Recommendation: No change. CA 19-9 as a Marker for Colon Cancer 3. 1997 Recommendation: Present data are insufficient to recommend CA 19-9 for screening, diagnosis, staging, surveillance, or monitoring treatment of patients with colorectal cancer. 2000 Recommendation: No change. DNA Ploidy or Flow Cytometric Proliferation Analysis as a Marker for Colon Cancer 4. 1997 Recommendation: Present data are insufficient to recommend DNA flow cytometrically derived ploidy (DNA index) for the management of colorectal cancer. 2000 Recommendation: No change. p53 as a Marker for Colorectal Cancer 5. 1997 Recommendation: Present data are insufficient to recommend the use of p53 expression or mutation for screening, diagnosis, staging, surveillance, or monitoring treatment of patients with colorectal cancer. 2000 Recommendation: No change. ras as a Marker for Colorectal Cancer 6. 1997 Recommendation: Present data are insufficient to recommend the use of the ras oncogene for screening, diagnosis, staging, surveillance, or monitoring treatment of patients with colorectal cancer. 2000 Recommendation: No change. Breast Cancer Guidelines CA 15-3 as a Marker for Breast Cancer 1a. 1997 Recommendation: Present data are insufficient to recommend CA 15-3 or CA 27.29 for screening, diagnosis, staging, or surveillance after primary treatment. Although a rising CA 15-3 or CA 27.29 level can detect recurrence after primary treatment, the clinical benefit is not established; therefore, it cannot be recommended. One well-designed study has shown that an increase in CA 27.29 can predict recurrence an average of 5.3 months before other symptoms or tests.19 Options for therapy, however, remain unchanged, and there has been no demonstrated impact on the most significant outcomes (improved disease-free or overall survival, better quality of life, lesser toxicity, or improved cost-effectiveness).20 The data used by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to approve CA 27.29 were available to the panel previously; although the assay was approved by the FDA, the FDA does not require tests to show clinical benefit. Given the small body of evidence and until there is evidence of clinical benefit, present data are insufficient to recommend routine use of CA 27.29. 2000 Recommendation: No change. 1b. 1997 Recommendation: Present data are insufficient to recommend routine use of CA 15-3 or CA 27.29 alone for monitoring response to treatment. However, in the absence of readilty measurable disease, an increasing CA 15-3 or CA 27.29 may be used to suggest treatment failure. 2000 Recommendation: No change. CEA as a Marker for Breast Cancer 2a. 1997 Recommendation: CEA is not recommended for screening, diagnosis, staging, or routine surveillance of breast cancer patients after primary therapy. 2000 Recommendation: No change. 2b. 1997 Recommendation: Routine use of CEA for monitoring response of metastatic disease to treatment is not recommended. However, in the absence of readily measurable disease, a rising CEA may be used to suggest treatment failure. 2000 Recommendation: No change. Estrogen Receptors and Progesterone Receptors as Markers for Breast Cancer 3. 1997 Recommendation: Estrogen and progesterone receptors are recommended to be measured on every primary breast cancer and may be measured on metastatic lesions if the results would influence treatment planning. In both pre- and postmenopausal patients, steroid hormone receptor status may be used to identify patients most likely to benefit from endocrine forms of adjuvant therapy and therapy for recurrent or metastatic disease. 2000 Recommendation: No change. DNA Flow Cytometrically Derived Parameters as Markers for Breast Cancer 4a. 1997 Recommendation: Present data are insufficient to recommend obtaining DNA flow cytometry–derived estimates of DNA content or S phase in breast tissue. 2000 Recommendation: No change. 4b. 1997 Recommendation: DNA flow cytometry–derived ploidy are not recommended to be used to assign a patient to prognostic groupings. There is insufficient evidence to recommend the use of S phase determination for assigning patients to prognostic groupings. 2000 Recommendation: No change. c-erbB-2 (HER-2/neu) as a Marker for Breast Cancer 5a. 1997 Recommendation: Present data are insufficient to recommend the use of c-erbB-2 (HER-2/neu) gene amplification or overexpression for management of patients with breast cancer. 2000 Recommendation: c-erbB-2 overexpression should be evaluated on every primary breast cancer either at the time of diagnosis or at the time of recurrence. Measures of c-erbB-2 amplification may also be of value. Methods for Measuring c-erbB-2 5b. 2000 Recommendation: Because of the uncertain interchangeability, reproducibility, and clinical utility of different c-erbB-2 tests, it is important that clinical laboratories report not only an estimate c-erbB-2 but also a statement about the test’s quality controls, the method, the specific kit or critical reagents, details of the scoring system, a statement regarding reproducibility, sensitivity, and specificity of the assay, and a reference to the clinical validation of the assay or its correlation with a clinically validated c-erbB-2 test. Sensitivity to Trastuzumab 6. 2000 Recommendation: High levels of c-erbB-2 expression or c-erbB-2 amplification can be used to identify patients for whom trastuzumab may be of benefit for the treatment of metastatic, recurrent, and/or treatment-refractory unresectable locally advanced breast cancer. Response to Cyclophosphamide/Methotrexate/Fluorouracil or Nonanthracycline-Based Adjuvant Chemotherapy 7. 2000 Recommendation: The question of whether c-erbB-2 overexpression affects the relative benefit of adjuvant cyclophosphamide methotrexate, and fluorouracil chemotherapy remains open, and the update committee cannot make a definitive practice recommendation at present. Response to Anthracycline-Based Adjuvant Chemotherapy 8. 2000 Recommendation: High levels of c-erbB-2 expression, as determined by immunohistochemistry, may identify patients who particularly benefit from anthracycline-based adjuvant therapy, but levels of c-erbB-2 expression should not be used to exclude patients from anthracycline treatment. Sensitivity to Endocrine Therapy 9. 2000 Recommendation: The use of c-erbB-2 data to decide whether to prescribe endocrine therapy either in the adjuvant or metastatic setting is not recommended. Sensitivity or Resistance to Taxane Therapy 10. 2000 Recommendation: The use of c-erbB-2 data to decide whether to prescribe taxane-based chemotherapy either in the adjuvant or metastatic setting is not recommended. Use of Measures of c-erbB-2 to Predict Patient Prognosis 11. 2000 Recommendation: The data are insufficient to recommend the routine use of c-erbB-2 overexpression in patients with early breast cancer to identify patients with a higher risk of relapse. Utility of Measures of Circulating Extracellular Domain of c-erbB-2 12. 2000 Recommendation: Measuring circulating extracellular domain of c-erbB-2 is not currently recommended for any clinical setting. p53 as a Marker for Breast Cancer 13. 1997 Recommendation: Present data are insufficient to recommend use of p53 measurements for management of patients with breast cancer. 2000 Recommendation: No change. Cathepsin-D as a Marker for Breast Cancer 14. 1997 Recommendation: Present data are insufficient to recommend use of cathepsin-D measurements for management of patients with breast cancer. 2000 Recommendation: No change.
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|||||||||||
|
|
Copyright © 2001 by the American Society of Clinical Oncology, Online ISSN: 1527-7755. Print ISSN: 0732-183X
|
