4.6 Review

Biomarkers in Ewing sarcoma: the promise and challenge of personalized medicine. A report from the Children's Oncology Group

Journal

FRONTIERS IN ONCOLOGY
Volume 3, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2013.00141

Keywords

Ewing sarcoma; biomarkers; prognostic; predictive

Categories

Funding

  1. Chair's Grant [U10 CA98543]
  2. Human Specimen Banking Grant of the Children's Oncology Group from the National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA [U24 CA114766]
  3. WWWW (QuadW) Foundation, Inc.
  4. NIH SPORE [1U54-CA168512]
  5. Daniel P. Sullivan fund
  6. Pediatric Cancer Foundation
  7. NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE [U10CA098543, U54CA168512, U24CA114766] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A goal of the COG Ewing Sarcoma (ES) Biology Committee is enabling identification of reliable biomarkers that can predict treatment response and outcome through the use of prospectively collected tissues and correlative studies in concert with COG therapeutic studies. In this report, we aim to provide a concise review of the most well-characterized prognostic biomarkers in ES, and to provide recommendations concerning design and implementation of future biomarker studies. Of particular interest and potentially high clinical relevance are studies of cell-cycle proteins, sub-clinical disease, and copy number alterations. We discuss findings of particular interest from recent biomarker studies and examine factors important to the success of identifying and validating clinically relevant biomarkers in ES. A number of promising biomarkers have demonstrated prognostic significance in numerous retrospective studies and now need to be validated prospectively in larger cohorts of equivalently treated patients. The eventual goal of refining the discovery and use of clinically relevant biomarkers is the development of patient specific ES therapeutic modalities.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available