This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) CME: Take the course for this article: Uses and Abuses of Tumor Markers in the Diagnosis, Monitoring, and Treatmen... eLetters: Submit a response to this article Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services E-mail this article link to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Reprints/Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Henry, N. L. Articles by Hayes, D. F. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Henry, N. L. Articles by Hayes, D. F.

Breast Cancer

Uses and Abuses of Tumor Markers in the Diagnosis, Monitoring, and Treatment of Primary and Metastatic Breast Cancer

Department of Internal Medicine, Breast Oncology Program, University of Michigan Comprehensive Cancer Center, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA

Key Words. Tumor marker • Her-2/neu • Breast cancer • Estrogen receptor • Prognostic factor • Predictive factor

Correspondence: Daniel F. Hayes, M.D., University of Michigan Comprehensive Cancer Center, 1500 East Medical Center Drive, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109, USA. Telephone: 734-615-6725; Fax: 734-615-3947; e-mail: hayesdf{at}umich.edu

Although breast cancer incidence continues to increase, mortality has been decreasing, principally as a result of earlier detection and improvements in adjuvant systemic therapy. Nonetheless, because antineo-plastic agents are associated with substantial morbidity and occasional mortality, efforts to individualize treatment strategies are desirable. In addition to classic histopathologic diagnosis, molecular and cellular tumor markers may help in establishing prognosis or prediction of benefit.

Recommendations for routine use of tumor markers in breast cancer have been conservative. Although several studies have been reported, few are of sufficiently high level of evidence to permit solid conclusions. Three key issues in tumor marker evaluation are utility, magnitude, and reliability. Poorly conceived study designs cloud the issue of how the marker might be used. Reliance on p-values rather than the size of the differences in outcome between patients who are positive and those who are negative for the factor obscures the importance. Technical issues result in poor reproducibility and interpretability of assays. Analytical issues lead to poorly defined cutoff values for marker levels. Poor patient selection leads to difficulty interpreting results because of confounders such as differences in treatment regimens. This review focuses on these issues, with an emphasis on currently accepted tumor markers. Finally, new tumor marker reporting recommendations are discussed, the adoption of which may lead to improved design and publication of tumor marker studies in the future.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				D. F. Hayes and J. Smerage Is There a Role for Circulating Tumor Cells in the Management of Breast Cancer? Clin. Cancer Res., June 15, 2008; 14(12): 3646 - 3650. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. Ignatiadis, G. Kallergi, M. Ntoulia, M. Perraki, S. Apostolaki, M. Kafousi, G. Chlouverakis, E. Stathopoulos, E. Lianidou, V. Georgoulias, et al. Prognostic Value of the Molecular Detection of Circulating Tumor Cells Using a Multimarker Reverse Transcription-PCR Assay for Cytokeratin 19, Mammaglobin A, and HER2 in Early Breast Cancer Clin. Cancer Res., May 1, 2008; 14(9): 2593 - 2600. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. S. Ross, C. Hatzis, W. F. Symmans, L. Pusztai, and G. N. Hortobagyi Commercialized Multigene Predictors of Clinical Outcome for Breast Cancer Oncologist, May 1, 2008; 13(5): 477 - 493. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. F. Hayes Markers for Predicting and Evaluating Response to Therapy for Breast Cancer ASCO Educational Book, January 1, 2008; 2008(1): 30 - 34. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. P. A. Ioannidis Is Molecular Profiling Ready for Use in Clinical Decision Making? Oncologist, March 1, 2007; 12(3): 301 - 311. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]