Abstract

Cancer is one of the leading causes of death in the United States, and further than I .5 million new cases and further than 0.5 million deaths were reported during 2010 in the United States alone. Following completion of the sequencing of the mortal genome, substantial progress has been made in characterizing the mortal epigenome, proteome, and metabolome; a better understanding of pharmacogenomics has been developed, and the eventuality for customizing health care for the existent has grown extensively. Lately, individualized drug has substantially involved the methodical use of inheritable or other information about an individual case to elect or optimize that case's precautionary and remedial care. Molecular profiling in healthy and cancer case samples may allow for a lesser degree of individualized drug than is presently available. Information about a case's proteinaceous, inheritable, and metabolic profile could be used to conform medical care to that existent's requirements. A crucial trait of this medical model is the development of companion diagnostics, whereby molecular assays that measure situations of proteins, genes, or specific mutations are used to give a specific remedy for an existent's condition by stratifying complaint status, opting the proper drug, and acclimatizing tablets to that case's specific requirements. Also, similar styles can be used to assess a case's threat factors for a number of conditions and to conform individual precautionary treatments. This review focuses on the part of personalised drug in cancer forestallment and treatment as well as its unborn direction in oncology.

Keywords

Introduction

The incidence and prevalence of cancer are rising alarmingly, but treatment progress has been sluggish, and the duration of the therapeutic effects ranges from weeks to months. On the basis of a pathological examination, disease symptoms, and medication history, doctors typically provide patient care. Numerous cancer forms can now be identified prior to the onset of clinical signs due to improvements in diagnostic technology and early detection markers. These indicators are biochemical, genetic, epigenetic, genetically encoded, image-based, metabolomic, and proteomic. The use of multiplexing technology is a possibility to find these markers in clinical samples. The use of many markers in the same sample often the sensitivity and specificity of cancer detection and aids in making an early and accurate diagnosis by a doctor. The profiles of the indicators outlined above allow for the conclusion that the existence and stage of cancer can be used to construct treatment regimens. Although pathological diagnosis is still the gold standard in

Clinical practice molecular diagnosis may differ from pathological diagnosis given more inforrnation. Cancer may result from somatic or inherited genetic anomalies. Following cancer genetics can help you understand hereditary malignancies, which make up a significant portion of medical genetics. Only 10-15% of all cancers are inherited, while the rest are impacted by the environment, infections, and way of life. This data aids researchers in estimating a person's lifetime risk of developing cancer (l). Personalized medicine is a new method of patient care that bases clinical decisions on a patient's features, including genetic profile, with the goal of providing the best possible care at the best possible moment. Finding diagnostic, prognostic, and predictive biomarkers is a branch of medicine that is always developing. Numerous specialties already regularly employ individualized medicine, which has a wide range of uses. One example is the measurement of thiopurine methyltransferase before starting azathioprine therapy for inflammatory bowel disease (2).

The need of personalised medicine:

Despite the fact that DNA from various cells is identical, the way that genes in one organ (and the cells that they are expressed in) behave varies from that of genes in other organs. Although several tumor forms in cancer may share the same DNA, they differ in their gene expression patterns. We can study the gene expression profiles of hundreds of genes at once using technologies like gene-expression microarray and can differentiate between a gene expression profile that is associated with cancer and a normal profile. Cohort-based epidemiological studies, which tend to draw their conclusions at the population level and do not take Into consideration an individual's genetic diversity, have been used for decades to guide routine medical care (3). Before recommending a course of treatment, modern customized medicine consider a patients genetic make-up and medical history. This contrasts with conventional personalized medicine, in which a patient's therapy is based on their family history, social situation, environment and lifestyle. Tactical therapy is the foundation of contemporary tailored medicine. Information on the changed pathway and the factors causing cancer must be readily available in order to administer targeted therapy. Women with breast cancer who express more HER-2, for instance, are treated with Herceptin. Tyrosine kinase is inhibited by Gleevec, a drug used to treat chronic myeloid leukemias. When chromosomes 9 and 20 move in the other direction in these patients, abl-driven protein signalling is over-activated.

Personalized medicine in cancer:

1. Colon or Colorectal Cancer

Colon cancer's genetics and epigenetics have been thoroughly studied, and biomarkers for its early identification are available. There are a few typical colon cancer therapies (chemotherapy, radiation, and surgery) (4,5). Additionally, colonoscopy screening has aided in the early detection of this cancer when polyps are still forming. It is now being finished to correlate mutations, microsatellite instability, and hypermethylation in cancers from specific patients. The results of such studies will aid in determining which subgroups are and are not likely to react to a specific course of treatment (6). People who will benefit are able to obtain the best care possible, while people who won't benefit are able to avoid unneeded toxicities and expenses. Most people with colon cancer who receive early treatment live at least five years after being diagnosed. The condition is regarded as being cured if the colon cancer does not return after 5 years. It is thought that tumors in stages I, Il, and Ill may be cured. Stage IV cancer is typically not thought to be treatable, while there are some exceptions. According to one researcher, 5 year survival should not be viewed as potentially curable because late recurrences are known to occur in colon cancer and other tumor entities as well, and the 5 year survival rate declines with increasing cancer stage (even in stages 1-111). Several therapies have been found to be ineffective in treating colorectal cancer. For instance, cetuximab or panitumumab anti- epidermal growth factor receptor treatment is ineffective in treating tumors with KRAS mutations, which account for around 40% of colorectal malignancies (7-9). In CRC patients expressing wild-type KRAS, which encodes a downstream effector of EGFR implicated in intracellular signaling, the monoclonal antibody cetuximab, which is aimed against EGFR, has demonstrated efficacy. When compared to patients with wild-type KRAS treated with supportive care alone, a randomised trial of 572 CRC patients who had not responded to standard chemotherapy showed that wild-type KRAS status predicted response to cetuximab, with improved quality of life and nearly doubled overall and progression free survival. Cetuximab therapy had no positive effects on patients with mutant KRAS. The ability to individualize therapy and potentially improve health economics by lowering prohibitive treatment costs is made possible by predicting responsiveness to medicines based on gene mutation status (10). Given the high cost of targeted therapies and the current state of public fiscal restraint, theexpense of providing personalized care should not be understated. By focusing spending where it is most efficient and ensuring that pharmaceuticals are administered. where they will be most beneficial, least harmful, and a lower cost of care, personalized medicine offers the possibility of health-economics gains for the population as a whole.

2. Lung Cancer

There are two main types of lung cancer: non-small cell lung cancer and small cell lung cancer. Small cell lung cancer makes up about 20 of all lung cancer cases. Cancer made up of' both types is called mixed small cell/ large cell cancer. However, it's called metastatic cancer to the lung, if the cancer started nearly differently in the body and spread to the lungs. Because of the diversity of cells, it's extremely delicate to treat lung cancer. Regular treatment ways, substantially surgical and chemotherapy, have been to treat lung cancer. Grounded on recent data and understanding of the inheritable base of lung cancer, EGFR, KRAS, ALK, MET, CBL, and COX2 are being used as remedial targets (11). Curran (12) lately demonstrated application of crizotinib in the treatment of NSCLC. Crizotinib is and asset of anaplastic carcinoma kinase (ALK) and showed promising results. Other investigators have also Observed benefits of using crizotinib for lung cancer treatment (13,14). Erlotinib and EGFR shifted lung cancer has also handed significant clinical results (15). FLEX trial has also demonstrated promising results (16). Data from histopathological examination and the case's history also is considered in assessing the state of the complaint and its aggressiveness. Nyberg et al (17) studied association between SNPs and acute interstitial lung complaint in Japanese population witnessing treatment with gefitinib. This exploration handed base for farther exploration. In Chinese population, ABCC1 polymorphism was set up to be associated with lung cancer vulnerability in cases witnessing chemotherapy

(18). Genomic variations in EGFR and ERCC1 have also been identified with medicine response in small cell lung cancer cases (19,20).

C. Breast Cancer

In terms of mortality, breast cancer is the first cancer in women. The factors that contribute to breast cancer are genetic, environmental, and behavioural (diet, exercise, and lifestyle). Preventive methods such as screening mammograms have been adopted by many people. Screening for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations is also standard practice in clinics for women of different ages and parity groups. An iconic and well- known illustration of personalised drug is the use of trastuzumab, a humanised IgG1 monoclonal antibody in bone cancer cases whose tumours overexpress the oncogene HER2. HER2 regulates cell proliferation and is overexpressed in 20- 25 of cases with bone cancer. HER2-positive status, confers a poor prognostic but is also a strong predictor of response to trastuzumab (21). A Cochrane et. al. (32) have suggested fresh exploration on alleles other that CYP2D6 and identify cases who are responsive to treatment by tamoxifen. Norendoxifen, a metabolite of tamoxifen is considered an implicit lead emulsion in rectifiers due to its inhibition parcels of aromatase (33). Other reports suggest that MammPrint and Oncotype DX are current individual tools which are grounded on expression profiling and have promising results in individualized drug (34-36).

D. Prostate Cancer

prostate cancer is the commanding cancer in men and the alternate leading cause of death due to cancer. High rates of this cancer are observed in aged people. The main webbing procedures used to descry prostate cancer are the digital rectal test and prostate specific antigen (PSA) test. Because this cancer doesn't beget pain and takes several times to develop, croakers and cases are faced with the challenge of relating optimal treatment strategies for localized prostate cancer, biochemically intermittent prostate cancer, and latterly- stage cancer. Three treatments are veritably common chemotherapy and hormonal remedy, surgery, and radiation. Age-related changes, including metastatic complaint, may affect all of these curatives and shift the threat- benefit rate of these treatments (37). New tools, similar as the Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment, are being developed to more prognosticate who'll respond to remedy. Similar tools also may help in estimating the remaining life expectation of a specific prostate cancer case. Audet- Walsh et al. (38) demonstrated association of several SRD5A1 (steroid 5- nascence reductase) and SRD5A2 variations as independent predictors of biochemical rush after radical prostatectomy in Caucasians and Asians. In another study, BCL2 polymorphism was set up to be associated with adverse outgrowth in prostate melanoma cases (39).

E. Myeloid Neoplasia

Abnormal Inheritable and epigenetic events contribute to the development of myeloid neoplasia. Utmost of these differences have been localized in hematopoietic isolation and cellular

proliferation pathways (40). A number of remedial agents have been developed to treat myeloid dysplasia. Attempts are being made to integrate pathological information with genomic information so that unborn directions in substantiated genomics can be explored (41). Tubercles are nearly related to lymphoid leukemias, which also appear in lymphocytes but generally involve only circulating blood and the bone marrow (where blood cells are generated by hematopoiesis) and generally don't form stationary excrescences. There are numerous t of tubercles and, in turn, tubercles are a part of the broad group of conditions know as methodical of eight randomised controlled trials involving 11,991 cases showed bone cancer mortality was reduced by one- third when trastuzumab was added to standard chemotherapy rules for longer than six months in the subset of cases who overexpress HER2 growth factor. The rate of intermittent bone cancer in this cohort was also reduced, by 40% (22). Carefull case selection is important due to the cardio- toxin associated with the medicine which can negate any benefit, particularly in low threat cases or those more susceptible to its side goods. Because of differences in individualities' inheritable backgrounds and particular vulnerability to environmental and adjustable factors, interventions don't always succeed. Adding substantiation supports particular genomic vulnerability as the major factor in responding to intervention and forestallment. The approach handed by these investigators includes change for high- threat subjects (primary forestallment), early discovery and expansive monitoring of genetically susceptible subjects and non-invasive treatment of early-stage cancer cases (secondary forestallment), and eventually precautionary and remedial intervention to decelerate complaint progression (tertiary forestallment). Tamoxifen is a standard treatment (endocrine remedy) for steroid receptor positive bone cancer cases. Cytochrome P450 activates tamoxifen and forms

active metabolites 4- hydroxytamoxifen and endoxifen (23). These metabolites have two order of magnitude affinity towards the steroid receptor compared to tamoxifen. These composites inhibit proliferation of cells. CYP2D6 has different variants and poor metabolizers and oppressively

bloodied CYP2D6 are suggested to be associated with high rush of bone cancer (24). Therefore genotyping of CYP2D6 before treatment may prognosticate response to treatment. Intelligent clinical decision can be made about the option of choosing strong CYP2D6 impediments which may inactivate active metabolites. Because the pharmacogenomics grounded approaches use CYP2D6 genotyping to have an idea about particular metabolizer phenotype, ethical issues must be addressed in advance. Cases and their caregivers should be well informed about the treatment strategies (25). Raloxifene becomes an indispensable choice of treatment in CYP2D6 poor metabolizer cases (25). Recommendations for broad CYP2D6 allele content and high- outturn MALDI-TOF MS CAN (matrix- supported ray desorption adsorption time- of- flight mass spectrometry/ dupe number assay) have been made by Schroth et. al. (26) to reduce phenotypic misclassification. Erb- B2 expression grounded remedy of bone cancer has shown promising results in the field of individualized drug (27,28). Recent report, still, indicates that routine assessment of CYP2D6 shouldn't be used as a companion for tamoxifen treatment and other factors should also be considered (29-31). These investigators have suggested that impediments shouldn’t be administered to those cases who are pre- or permenopausal. Fleeman hematological tumors. Takahashi al. (42) demonstrated CYP3A5 polymorphism on imatinib traugh attention and clinical response among cases with habitual phase myeloid leukemia.

F. Lymphoma and Leukemia

 Lymphoma is a cancer in the lymphatic cells of the vulnerable system. It's present as a solid excrescence of lymphoid cells. Research is being conducted to use the clinical characterization of lymphoma and integration of genomic information to identify cases who'll profit from the treatment. Lymphoma comprises substantially Hodgkin lymphoma and non- Hodgkin lymphoma, although at least 60 subtypes of lymphoma have been reported to date (43). An effective treatment for acute promyelocytic leukemia consists of relating and developing the PML- RARA emulsion gene and applying each- trans retinoic acid (ATRA) (44). This disquisition has led to the discovery of the bcr- abl emulsion gene in habitual myelogenous leukemia and development of imatinib (45). Genetics- grounded medicine remedy doesn't always work efficiently. Erlotinib and crizotinib are other genetics- grounded medicines with minimal efficacity in different cancers (46). The medium of action of these specifics is grounded on apoptosis. The reason for developing apoptosis- grounded curatives is the advantage of killing cancer cells specifically with low or minimum toxin. These medicines weren't effective because the isolation and proliferation pathways weren't affected by these medicines. In an ideal situation, the medicine should inhibit all of these pathways and stop the signaling way. To attack the final way in the apoptosis pathway and achieve better efficacity, mortal recombinant DNAse I- grounded medicines are being developed (47). Polymorphisms in mismatch form genes impact response to treatment and survival in large B cell lymphoma (48). Vagace et al. (47) linked presence of multitudinous inheritable variants that may have reckoned for subacute methotrexate neurotoxicity in acute lymphoblastic leukemia.

Challenges

Health care providers must develop tools to maintain up- to- date case data and sophisticated

decision- making support tools. Croakers and primary care croakers should do their jobs more by acquiring an educational background and hands- on experience in genomic and proteomic tests and their interpretation, developing decision- making tools, and creating service lines around forestallment and heartiness to replace earnings lost by traditional medical practice When determining treatment, an oncologist needs to weigh not just the genes and biology of the cancer but the age, medical condition, life, and pretensions of each case. Government should play an active part in approving individualized drug tests snappily and give impulses for using them. The Genomics and Personalized Medicine Act was introduced in the U.S. Congress and covers, scientific walls, adverse request pressures, and nonsupervisory obstacles. Public education and communication about individualized drug should be part of the outreach to the population at large. Like-wise consumers should be defended from possible detriment performing from the unseasonable restatement of exploration findings, and the innovative and cost-effective operation of discoveries that ameliorate substantiated medical care should be encouraged. In individualized drug, the crucial task is to identify and validate crucial proteins, different expression patterns, and gene variants associated with complaint or complaint predilection; and better genotype- phenotype relationship. The needed structure also includes a high position of collaboration among specialists to integrate and make sensible conclusions from available data. Individualized drug involves not only acclimatizing the right treatment/ medicine for the right person but also assessing predilection to complaint, occasionally several times before a complaint is completely developed (for instance, before metastasis).

FUTURE PERSPECTIVES

In the future, a "bench to bedside" approach will be followed that will be grounded on epidemiologic studies. These studies will test the recently discovered intervention from preclinical trials in first clinical trials. During this time, population studies and clinical studies will be designed to assess the frequency, associations, relations, perceptivity, particularity, and prophetic value of inheritable and non-genetic factors. The evolving field of personalised drug is an instigative area of cancer lores with a diversity of operations, including real advancements in clinical issues for duly named sub-sets of cases. Its significance in clinical operation is demonstrated by the recent, rapid-fire integration of colourful individualised, molecularly targeted curatives into routine clinical practice. The efficacity of colorful target curatives in similar distant tumours suggests that we're approaching an period in which treatment opinions will be grounded on tumour molecular abnormality profile, rather than tumour towel type or anatomical point of origin, perfecting patient prognostic and quality of life.

CONCLUSION:

The use of personalised drug in cancer is therefore a promising yet developing field. It's timely suitable to treat each case uniquely grounded on the complete DNA structure of their cancer. The answer is no, we aren't there yet. Still, the field is evolving, and substantiated drug has much to offer toward perfecting cancer treatment for moment and hereafter.

REFERENCES

1. Stricker, T; Catenacci, D.V,; Siewert, S.Y. Molecular profiling of cancer—the future of personalized cancer medicine: a primer on cancer biology and the tools necessary to bring molecular testing to the clinic. Semin. Oncol. 201 1, 38, 173-185.
2. Zhou Z. Clinical pharmacogenomics of thiopurine S-methyltransferase. Curr Clin Pharmacol 2()06; 1(1):119-28.
3. Offit, K, Personalized medicine: new genomics, old lessons. Hum. Genet. 2011, 130,3—14.
4. Catenacci, D.V.; Kozloff, M:,Kindler, H.L.; Polite, B. Personalized colon cancer care in 2010. Semin. Oncol. 2011, 38, 2W308.
5. Kelley, R.K.; Van Bebber, S.L.; Phillips, K.A.; Venook, A.P. Personalized medicine and oncology practice guidelines: a case study of contemporary biomarkers in colorectal cancer. J.NatL Compr, Canc. Netw. 2011, 9, 13—25.
6. Baehner, F.L.; Lee, M.; Demeure, M.J.; Bussey, K.J.; Kiefer, J.A.; Barrett, M.T. Genomic signatures of cancer: basis for individualized risk assessment, selective staging and therapy. J.Surg. Oncol. 2011, 103, 563—573.
7. Amado, R.G.; Wolf, M.; Peeters, M.; van Cutsem, E.; Siena, S.; Freeman, D.J.; Juan, T.; Sikorski, R.; Suggs, S.; Radinsky, R.; Patterson, S.D.; Chang, D.D. Wild-type KRAS is required for panitumumab efficacy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. J Clin. Oncol. 2008, 26, 1626-1634.
8. Jimcno, A.; Messersmith, W.A.; Hirsch, F.R.; Franklin, W.A.; Eckhardt, S.G. KRS mutations and sensitivity to epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitors in colorectal cancer: practical application of patient selection. J. Cling Oncol. 2009, 27, 1130—1136.
9. Lievre, A.; Bachet, J.B.; Boige, V.; Cayre, A.; Le Corre, D.; Buc, E.; Ychou, M., Bouché, 0.4, Landi, B.; Louvet, C.; André, T.; et al. KRAS mutations as an independent prognostic factor in patients with advanced colorectal cancer treated with cetuximab. J Clim Oncol. 2008, 26, 374-379.
10. Karapctis CS, Khambata-Ford S, Jonker DJ, O'Callaghan CJ, Tu D, Tebbutt NC, Simes RJ, Chalchal H, Shapiro JD, Robitaille S, Price TJ, Shepherd L et al. K-ras Mutations and Benefit from Cetuximab in Advanced Colorectal Cancer. N Engl J Med 2008; 359:1757-1765.
11. Salgia R.; Hensing, T.; Campbell, N.; Salama, A.K.; Maitland, M.; Hoffman, P., Villaflor, V.; Vokes, E.E. Personalized treatment of lung cancer. Semin. Oncol. 201 1, 74-83.
12. Curran, M.P. Crizotinib: in locally advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer. Drugs 2012, 72, 99-107.
13. Ou, S.H. Crizotinib: a novel and first-in-class multitargeting tyrosine kinase inhibitor for the treatment of anaplastic lymphoma kinase rearranged non-small cell lung cancer and beyond. Drug Des. Devel. Ther. 201 1, 5, 471—485.
14. Shaw, A.T.; Solomon, B.; Kenudson, M.M. Crizotinib and testing for ALK. J. Natl. Compr. Netw. 201 1, 9, 1335-1345.

15. Chmielecki, J.; Pietanza, M.C.; Aftab, D.; Shen, R.; Zhao, Z.; Chen, X.; Hutchinson, K.; Viale, A.; Kris, M.G.; Stout, T.; Miller, V.; Rizvi, N.; Pao, W. EGRR-mutant lung adenocarcinomas treated first line with the novel EGFR inhibitor, XL647, can subsequently retain moderate sensitivity to erlotinib. J. Thorac. Oncol. 2011, PMID.22173702, in press.
16. O'Byrne, K.J.; Gatzemeir, U.; Bondarenko, 1.; Barrios, C.; Eschbach, C.; Martens, U.M.; Hotko, Y.; Kortsik, C.; Paz-Ares, L.; Pereira, J.R.; von Pawel, J.; et al. Molecular biomarkers in non-small cell lung cancer: a retrospective analysis of data from the phase 111 FLEX study. Lancet Oncol. 2011, 12, 795-805.
17. Nyberg, F.; Barratt, B.J.; Mushiroda, T.; Takahashi, A.; Jawaid, A.; Hada, S.; Umemura, T.; Fukuoka, M.; Nakata, K.; Ohe, Y.; Kato, H.; et al. Interstitial lung disease in gefitinib treated Japanese patients with non-small cell lung cancer: genome-wide analysis of genetic data. Phamacogenomics 2011, 12, 965—977.
18. Yin, J.Y.; Han, L.F.; Huang, Q.; xu, x.J., Zhou, H.H.; Liu, z.Q. ABCCI polymorphism Arg723Gln (2168G — A) is associated with lung cancer susceptibility in a Chinese population. Clin. Exp. Phamaco. Physiol. 201 1, 38, 632—637.
19. Wu, J.Y., Shih, J.Y.; Chen, K.Y., Yang, C.H., Yu, C.J.; Yang, P.c. Gefitinib therapy in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer with or without testing for epidemal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations. Medicine 201 1, 90, 159-167.
20. Osawa, K. SNPs in ERCCI and drug response to cisplatin in non-small cell lung cancer
21. Goldenberg MM. Trastuzumab, a recombinant DNA-derived humanized monoclonal antibody, a novel agent for the treatment of metastatic breast cancer, Clin Ther. 1 999; 21(2):309-18.
22. L, Tagliabue L, Balduzzi S, Pamelli E, Pistotti V, Guarncri V and D'Amico R. Trastuzumab containing regimens for early breast cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev2012',
23. Brauch, ll.; Murdter, T.E.; Eichelbaum, M.; Schwab, B. Pharmacogenomics of tamoxifen therapy. Clin Chem. 2009, 55, 1770—1782.
24. Brauch, H:. Jordan, V.C. Targeting of tamoxifen antitumor action for the treatment and prevention of breast cancer: the "personalized approach." Eur. J. Cancer. 2009, 45, 2074-2283,
25. Hoskins, Carey, L.A.; McLeod, H.L. CYP2D6 and tamoxifen: DNA matters in breast cancer. Nat. Rev. Cancer 2009, 9, 576—586.
26. Schroth, Hammen, U.; Fasching, A.P.; Dauser, S.; Winter, S.; Eichelbaum, M.; Schuab, Nt.;Brauch, H. CYP2D6 polymorphism as predictors of outcome in breast cancer patients treated with tamoxifen: expanded polymorphism coverage improves ask stratification. Cl in. Cancer Res. 2010, 16, 4468-4477.
27. Hatzis, C.; Pusztai, L.; Valero, V.; Booser, D.J.; Esserman, L.; Lluch, A.; Vidaurre, T.; Holmes, F.; Souchon, E.; Wang, H.; Martin M.; et al. A genomic predictor of response and survival following taxane-anthracyclin chemotherapy for invasive breast cancer. JAVA 2011, 305, 1873-1881.
28. Arao, Tv; Matsumoto, K.; Maegawa, M.; Nishio, K. What can and cannot be done using a microarray analysis? Treatment stratification and clinical applications in oncology.Biol. Pham. Bull. 201 1, 34, 1789-1793.
29. Fernandez, O.A.; Jolis, L.L.; Vinas, V.G. Individualization of treatment strategies. Adv. Them, 2011, 6, 19-38.
30. Barginear, M.F.; Jaremko, M.; Peter, 1.; Yu, C.; Kasai, Y.; Kemeny, M.; Raptis, G.;Desnick, R.J. Increasing tamoxifen dose in breast cancer patients based on CYP2D6 genotypes and endoxifen levels: effect of and active metabolite isomers and the antiestrogenic activity score. Clin. Pharmacol. Ther. 201 1, 90, 605—61 1.
31. Conin-Fenton, D.P.; Lash, T.L. Clinical epidemiology and pharmacology of CYp2D6 inhibition related to breast cancer outcomes. Expert Rev. Clin. Pharmacol. 2011, 4- 363-377.
32. Fleeman, N.; Martin, S.C.; Payne, K.; Boland, A.; Dickson, R.; Dundar, Y.; Femåndez Santander, A:, Howell, S.; Newman, W.; Oyee, J,; Walley, T. The clinical effectiveness and cost effectiveness of genotyping for CYP2D6 for the management of women with breast cancer with tamoxifen: a systematic review. Health Technol. j, 1 6,1-102.
33. Lu, w. J xu, Pei, Mayhoub, A.s.; Cushman, M.; D.A. metabolite norendoxifen is a potent and selective inhibitor of aromatase (CYP 1 9) and a potential lead compound for novel therapeutic agents. Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 1, in press.
34. Krigsman, 0.; Ropeman, P.; Zwart, W. Carroll, J.S.; Tian, S.; de Snoo, F.A.; Bender, R.A.; Bernards, R.; Glas, A.M. A diagnostic gene profile for molecular subtyping of breast cancer associated with treatment response. Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 2()1 1, PM IL) 21814749 in press.
35. Rutgers, E.; Pictaart-Gebhart, M.J; Bogaerts, J.; Delaloge, S.; Veer, L.V.; Rubio, I.T.; Viale, G.; Thompson, A.M.; Passalacqua, R.; Nitz, U.; Vindevoghel, A.; Pierga, J.Y.; Ravdin, P.M.; Werutsky, Cardoso, F. The EORTC 10041/BlG 03Ä)4 MINDACT trial is feasible: results of the pilot phase. Eur. J. Cancer 201 1, 47, 2742—2749.
36. Kim, C.; Tang, G.; Pogue-Geile, K.L.; Costantino, J.P.; Baehner, F.L.; Baker, J.;Cronin, M.T.; Watson, D.; Shak, S.; Bohn, O.L.; Fumagalli, D.; et al. Estrogen receptor (ESR l) mRNA expression and benefit from tamoxifen in the treatment and prevention of estrogen- receptor positive breast cancer. J. Clin. Oncol. 201 1, 29, 4160—4167.
37. Sajid, S.; Mohile, S.G.; Szmulewitz, R.; Posadas, E.; Dale, W. Individualized decision making for older men with prostate cancer: balancing cancer control with treatment consequences across the clinical spectrum. Semin. Oncol. 201 1, 38, 309—325.
38. Audet-Walsh, E.; Bellemare, J.; Nadeau, G.; Lacombe, L.; Fradet, Y.; Fradet, V.; Huang, s.p., Bao, B.Y., Douville, Girard, Guillemette, C.; et al. SRD5A polymorphism and biochemical failure after radical prostatectomy. Eur. Urol, 2()11, 60, 1226-1234.
39. Bachmann, H.S.; Heukamp, L.C.; Schmitz, R.J.; Hilburn, C.F.; Kahl, P.; Buettner, R. Nückel, H.; Eisenhardt, A.; Rübben, H.; Schmid, K.W.; SifTert, W.; et al. Regulatory BCL2 promoter polymorphism (938 C—A) is associated adverse outcome in patients with prostate carcinoma. Int. L Cancer. 201 1, 129, 2390—2399.
40. Odenike, 0:,Thinnan, M.J.; Anz, A.S.; Godley, L.A.; Larson, R.A.•, Stock, W. Gene mutations, epigenetig dysregulation, and personalized therapy in myeloid neoplasia; are we there yet? Semin. Oneol. 2011, 38, 196-214.
41. Godley, L.A.; Cunningham, J.; Dolan, M.E.; Huang, R.S.; Gurbuxani. S.. Ntcxcrnes M,E.; Larson, RX; Leonge Lussiers Yo: Onei.          et al, An integrated genomic approach to the assessment and treatment Of acute myeloid leukemia. Semin. Oncol. 2011, 38, 215—224.
42. Takahashi, Miura, Me; Scott, S.A.; Kagaya, H.; Kameoka, Y.; Tagawa, H; Saitoh, He; Fujishima, N.; Yoshioka, T.; Hirokawa, M.; Sawada, K. Influence of CYP3A5 and drug transporter polymorphisms on imatinib trough concentration and clinical response among patients with chronic phase chronic myeloid leukemia. J. Hum. Genet. (), 55, 731-737.
43. Ramsdale, E.; van Besien, K.; Smith, S.M. Personalized treatment of lymphoma: promise and reality. Semin Oncol. 2011, 38, 225—235.
44. Nasr, R.; Guillemin, M.C.; Ferhi, 0.; Soilihi, H.; Peres, L.; Berthier, C.; Roussclot, P.; Robledo-Sarmiento, M.; Lallemand-Breitenbach, V.; Gourmel, B.; et al. Eradication of acute promyelocytic leukemia-initiating cells through P ML-RARA degradation. Nat. Med. 2008, 14, 1333-1342.
45. Barbany, G.; Hoglund, M.; Simonsson, B.; Swedish CML Group. Complete molecular remission in chronic myelogenous leukemia after imatinib therapy. N. Eng. J. Med. 2002, 347, 539-540.
46. Rossi, D.; Rasi, S.; Di Rocco, A.; Fabbri, A.; Forconi, F.; Gloghini, A.; Bruscaggin, A.; Franceschetti, S.; Fangazio, Mg De Paoli, L.; et al. The host genetic background of DNA repair mechanisms is an independent predictor of survival in diffuse large B-cel lymphoma. Blood 2011, 117, 2405-2413.
47. Vagace, J.M.; Caceres-Marzal, C.; Jimenez, M.; Casado, M.S.; de Murillo, S.G.; Gervasini, G. Methotrexate-induced subacute neurotoxicity in a child with acute lymphoblastic leukemia carrying genetic polymorphisms related to folate homeostasis. Am. J. Hematol. 2011, 86, 98-101.
48. Solit, D.; Sawyers, C.L. Drug discovery: how melanomas bypass new therapy. Nature 2010, 468,902-903.