http://science.kqed.org/quest/2007/02/19/baby-steps-towards-personalized-medicine/ Explore science, nature and environment stories from Northern California and beyond with KQED’s multimedia series Fri, 10 Feb 2012 05:38:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 http://science.kqed.org/quest/2007/02/19/baby-steps-towards-personalized-medicine/#comment-10432 Barry Starr Wed, 21 Feb 2007 17:53:31 +0000 http://www.kqed.org/quest/blog/2007/02/19/baby-steps-towards-personalized-medicine/#comment-10432 They did a study with 302 women. They found the test was excellent at predicting that a tumor would NOT spread if the tumor was under 5 cm, it was lymph node negative (hadn't spread to the lymph nodes) and the patient was 61 years old or younger. It correctly predicted that cancer would not spread 95% of the time. It was only right 1/4 to 1/3 of the time when it predicted the cancers would spread. I haven't been able to find the raw numbers the 1/4 or 1/3 was based on yet. They did a study with 302 women. They found the test was excellent at predicting that a tumor would NOT spread if the tumor was under 5 cm, it was lymph node negative (hadn't spread to the lymph nodes) and the patient was 61 years old or younger. It correctly predicted that cancer would not spread 95% of the time. It was only right 1/4 to 1/3 of the time when it predicted the cancers would spread. I haven't been able to find the raw numbers the 1/4 or 1/3 was based on yet.

]]> http://science.kqed.org/quest/2007/02/19/baby-steps-towards-personalized-medicine/#comment-10431 Kyle Dawson Tue, 20 Feb 2007 18:53:58 +0000 http://www.kqed.org/quest/blog/2007/02/19/baby-steps-towards-personalized-medicine/#comment-10431 Very interesting article. I'd like to ask what percentage of patients tested negative for aggressive cancer and then had their cancer spread. If the number is very low, than it seems the MammaPrint test assumes a conservative interpretation of the results, making sure to catch these cancers before they spread. This sounds great to me, I'd much rather be misdiagnosed with an aggressive tumor than to have one sneak up on me. Very interesting article. I'd like to ask what percentage of patients tested negative for aggressive cancer and then had their cancer spread. If the number is very low, than it seems the MammaPrint test assumes a conservative interpretation of the results, making sure to catch these cancers before they spread. This sounds great to me, I'd much rather be misdiagnosed with an aggressive tumor than to have one sneak up on me.

]]>