Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Evaluating the Clinical Utility of Circulating Tumor Cells in Metastatic Breast Cancer—Is Not Worse Good Enough?

Evaluating the Clinical Utility of Circulating Tumor Cells in Metastatic Breast Cancer—Is Not... Opinion EDITORIAL Evaluating the Clinical Utility of Circulating Tumor Cells in Metastatic Breast Cancer—Is Not Worse Good Enough? Tarah J. Ballinger, MD; Mary Lou Smith, JD, MBA; Kathy D. Miller, MD Recent decades have brought meaningful improvements in cally useful test to guide the choice of endocrine therapy or outcomes for patients with metastatic hormone receptor– chemotherapy as initial treatment of hormone receptor– positive, ERBB2-negative metastatic breast cancer. positive, ERBB2-negative breast cancer. Discovery of effec- tive adjuncts to hormonal therapy has improved quality of life The question of clinical utility is critical. What do clini- and survival in the endocrine- cians and patients want? We contend that adding to or replac- sensitive and resistant set- ing the parameters we use to make a clinical decision should Related article page 34 tings. Several randomized help us improve the lives of patients, whether through supe- trials and meta-analyses demonstrate the benefit of modern rior survival outcomes, improved quality of life, reduced cost, hormonal therapy–based treatments over traditional cyto- or lessened toxicity. Noninferiority trials, often used to evalu- toxic chemotherapy approaches. Although practice guide- ate less intensive or deescalated treatment regimens, strive to 2,3 lines routinely recommend initial hormone-based therapy, prove that http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png JAMA Oncology American Medical Association

Evaluating the Clinical Utility of Circulating Tumor Cells in Metastatic Breast Cancer—Is Not Worse Good Enough?

Loading next page...
 
/lp/american-medical-association/evaluating-the-clinical-utility-of-circulating-tumor-cells-in-UziCGDRpGc
Publisher
American Medical Association
Copyright
Copyright 2020 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.
ISSN
2374-2437
eISSN
2374-2445
DOI
10.1001/jamaoncol.2020.5460
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Opinion EDITORIAL Evaluating the Clinical Utility of Circulating Tumor Cells in Metastatic Breast Cancer—Is Not Worse Good Enough? Tarah J. Ballinger, MD; Mary Lou Smith, JD, MBA; Kathy D. Miller, MD Recent decades have brought meaningful improvements in cally useful test to guide the choice of endocrine therapy or outcomes for patients with metastatic hormone receptor– chemotherapy as initial treatment of hormone receptor– positive, ERBB2-negative metastatic breast cancer. positive, ERBB2-negative breast cancer. Discovery of effec- tive adjuncts to hormonal therapy has improved quality of life The question of clinical utility is critical. What do clini- and survival in the endocrine- cians and patients want? We contend that adding to or replac- sensitive and resistant set- ing the parameters we use to make a clinical decision should Related article page 34 tings. Several randomized help us improve the lives of patients, whether through supe- trials and meta-analyses demonstrate the benefit of modern rior survival outcomes, improved quality of life, reduced cost, hormonal therapy–based treatments over traditional cyto- or lessened toxicity. Noninferiority trials, often used to evalu- toxic chemotherapy approaches. Although practice guide- ate less intensive or deescalated treatment regimens, strive to 2,3 lines routinely recommend initial hormone-based therapy, prove that

Journal

JAMA OncologyAmerican Medical Association

Published: Jan 5, 2021

References