|
|||||
|
|
||||||
Journal of Clinical Oncology, Vol 23, No 29 (October 10), 2005: pp. 7363-7364 © 2005 American Society of Clinical Oncology. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2005.03.2060
Chemosensitivity and Chemoresistance TestingM.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX To the Editor: This letter is written to correct the record regarding two statements contained in a Letter to the Editor from Fruehauf and Alberts1 that responded to the recently published "American Society of Clinical Oncology [ASCO] Technology Assessment: Chemotherapy Sensitivity and Resistance Assays."2 First, referring to an earlier published review of this topic written by Elizabeth Brown, MD, and me,3 Fruehauf and Alberts state that this article was "sponsored by Aetna Life and Casualty Company." This statement is incorrect. Although Dr Brown was an employee of this company (as clearly stated in the published manuscript) when the paper was written, this peer-reviewed article published in the journal Cancer was a completely independent effort of its two authors (also, as clearly stated in the published manuscript). Second, Fruehauf and Alberts state that "the Gynecologic Oncology Group has approved the concept of performing a trial to assess assay directed therapy for patients with platinum resistant epithelial ovarian cancer" and that this decision is "partially on the basis of the recent article by Loizzi et al, demonstrating a significant survival advantage for ovarian cancer patients who were treated with assay assisted therapy."4 As the individual who conceived the trial design to be employed in the Gynecologic Oncology Group study, I must clearly state that the genesis of this concept was absolutely not a claimed survival advantage in this, or any other, retrospective analysis of any chemotherapy sensitivity or resistance assay system. In fact, it is precisely because of the unsubstantiated claims, comparing any assay-directed therapy to a historical control population (described in detail in the excellent ASCO review), that it is critically important for carefully considered, well-designed, prospective trials to be conducted to determine the clinical utility of this technology. Author's Disclosures of Potential Conflicts of Interest The author indicated no potential conflicts of interest. REFERENCES
1. Fruehauf JP, Alberts DS: In vitro drug resistance versus chemosensitivity: Two sides of different coins. J Clin Oncol 23:3641-3643, 2005
2. Schrag D, Garewal HS, Burstein HJ, et al: American Society of Clinical Oncology technology assessment: Chemotherapy sensitivity and resistance assays. J Clin Oncol 22:3631-3638, 2004 3. Brown E, Markman M: Tumor chemosensitivity and chemoresistance assays. Cancer 77:1020-1025, 1996[CrossRef][Medline] 4. Loizzi V, Chan JK, Osann K, et al: Survival outcomes in patients with recurrent ovarian cancer who were treated with chemoresistance assay-guided chemotherapy. Am J Obstet Gynecol 189:1301-1307, 2003[CrossRef][Medline]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||
|
Copyright © 2005 by the American Society of Clinical Oncology, Online ISSN: 1527-7755. Print ISSN: 0732-183X
|