Advertisement
Journal of Clinical Oncology  
Search for:
Limit by:
  Browse by Subject or Issue
Home Search or Browse JCO My JCO Subscriptions Customer Service Site Map

Journal of Clinical Oncology, Vol 26, No 4 (February 1), 2008: pp. 686-687
© 2008 American Society of Clinical Oncology.
DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2007.14.5102

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Purchase Article
Right arrow View Shopping Cart
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a colleague
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Save to my personal folders
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRights & Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Eisinger, F.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Eisinger, F.
Related Articles
Right arrowRelated Reply
Right arrowRelated Article
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Facebook   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

CORRESPONDENCE

CYP2D6 and Ockham's Razor

Francois Eisinger

Paoli-Calmettes Institute, Marseille, France

To the Editor:

Heredity has been both an explicative and a predictive tool for a long time. Not surprisingly, genes—its biologic component—are used for understanding the past and reading the future. We live in societies with more and more focus on the individuals,1 who claim for individualized care and prevention. Gene analysis, both somatic and germline, could help to achieve that goal; however, having a hammer in the hand does not mean everything is a nail.2

With regard to the contribution of Lim et al,3 I will challenge neither the validity nor the scientific value of this article but rather the meaning of the title "Clinical implication." It is crystal clear that the real end point, the gold standard, is the individual effectiveness of the treatment, tamoxifen in that case. A close surrogate, used in this contribution, is the concentration of active metabolites. Does having a surrogate (CYP2D6) for that surrogate, improve care and challenge current clinical practice?

The rule of Ockham, "Pluralitas non est ponenda sine necessitate," means that new entities are required only if necessary. Figure 3 tells us that CYP2D6 does predict outcome, but does it do it better than plasma concentration at steady-state stage? These data are available in that survey, and therefore comparative analysis should be disclosed. It is unlikely to expect an improved discrimination, because plasma concentration of active metabolite is the end-product of many steps, each of them partially under genetic determinism: absorption, biotransformation from inactive to active product, and elimination of the active product (partially discussed in the article). The dosage of the critical product (the active metabolite) should in that case be more accurate, concerning both calibration and discrimination.

Shifting to gene testing is an absolute necessity to preclude irreversible events like dreadful adverse effects of drugs.4 It could also be a better collective choice if cheaper, simpler, or faster. Lastly, a genetic test that will predict a wide range of effects (such as the biotransformation of many drugs) could also be used. If none of these criteria is fulfilled, the value added by the genetic testing should be low (if any), and the need for a change in clinical practice, doubtful.

The issue of the validation of genetic testing before diffusion is critical. Many rely on ACCE model.5 Few tests might impact public health,6 and currently the main reason for rejection is insufficient evidence for clinical utility.7

These points do not limit the scientific value of that article, particularly the interesting and brilliant hypothesis to be tested about the "demonstrated superior efficacy" of aromatase inhibitor compared with tamoxifen. Though the contribution of Lim et al,3 gives us a better understanding on why some women do not respond to a widely used therapeutic, the clinical implications are not yet well defined. It seems that we are living in an era of gene-driven medicine, hoping it will not drive us crazy or make us simply less efficient.

AUTHOR'S DISCLOSURES OF POTENTIAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

The author(s) indicated no potential conflicts of interest.

REFERENCES

1. Roberts BW, Helson R: Changes in culture, changes in personality: The influence of individualism in a longitudinal study of women. J Pers Soc Psychol 72:641-651, 1997[CrossRef][Medline]

2. Spallone P: Once you have a hammer, everything looks like a nail, in Clarke A, Parsons E (eds): Culture, Kinship and Genes. London, UK, Macmillan Publishers Ltd, 1997, pp 197-205

3. Lim HS, Ju Lee H, Seok Lee K, et al: Clinical implications of CYP2D6 genotypes predictive of tamoxifen pharmacokinetics in metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 25:3837-3845, 2007[Abstract/Free Full Text]

4. Relling MV, Hancock ML, Rivera GK, et al: Mercaptopurine therapy intolerance and heterozygosity at the thiopurine S-methyltransferase gene locus. J Natl Cancer Inst 91:2001-2008, 1999[Abstract/Free Full Text]

5. Haddow J, Palomaki G: ACCE: A model process for evaluating data on emerging genetic tests, in Khoury M, Little J, Burke W (eds): Human Genome Epidemiology. New York, NY, Oxford University Press, 2004, pp 217-233

6. Yoon PW, Chen B, Faucett A, et al: Public health impact of genetic tests at the end of the 20th century. Genet Med 3:405-410, 2001[Medline]

7. Kroese M, Zimmern RL, Farndon P, et al: How can genetic tests be evaluated for clinical use? Experience of the UK Genetic Testing Network. Eur J Hum Genet 15:917-921, 2007[CrossRef][Medline]


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Facebook Facebook   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?

Related Reply

  • In Reply
    Hyeong-Seok Lim and Jungsil Ro
    JCO 2008 26: 687 [Full Text]

Related Article

  • Clinical Implications of CYP2D6 Genotypes Predictive of Tamoxifen Pharmacokinetics in Metastatic Breast Cancer
    Hyeong-Seok Lim, Han Ju Lee, Keun Seok Lee, Eun Sook Lee, In-Jin Jang, and Jungsil Ro
    JCO 2007 25: 3837-3845 [Abstract] [Full Text]



This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Purchase Article
Right arrow View Shopping Cart
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a colleague
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Save to my personal folders
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRights & Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Eisinger, F.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Eisinger, F.
Related Articles
Right arrowRelated Reply
Right arrowRelated Article
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Facebook   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

About
JCO
 Editorial
Roster
 Advertising
Information
 Librarians &
Institutions
 Rights &
Permissions
 PDA Services

Copyright © 2008 by the American Society of Clinical Oncology, Online ISSN: 1527-7755. Print ISSN: 0732-183X
Terms and Conditions of Use
  HighWire Press HighWire Press™ assists in the publication of JCO Online