scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Author

Richard M. Elledge

Bio: Richard M. Elledge is an academic researcher from University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio. The author has contributed to research in topics: Breast cancer & Tamoxifen. The author has an hindex of 35, co-authored 64 publications receiving 8002 citations. Previous affiliations of Richard M. Elledge include University of Kansas & University of Texas at Austin.


Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: It is postulated that gene expression profiles of the primary breast cancer can predict the response to docetaxel, and these molecular profiles could allow development of a clinical test for docetAXel sensitivity, thus reducing unnecessary treatment for women with breast cancer.

851 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, the p53 (also known as TP53) tumor suppressor gene encodes for a nuclear phosphoprotein thought to regulate proliferation of normal cells, and the relationship between levels of mutant p53 protein expression, tumor cell proliferation rate, and clinical outcome in patients with node-negative breast cancer was investigated.
Abstract: Background: The p53 (also known as TP53) tumor suppressor gene encodes for a nuclear phosphoprotein thought to regulate proliferation of normal cells. Most p53 mutations result in a nonfunctional protein that accumulates in tumor cell nuclei. These common mutations appear to be involved in the development and/or progression of several neoplastic diseases including human breast cancer. Purpose: Our purpose was to investigate the relationships between levels of mutant p53 protein expression, tumor cell proliferation rate, and clinical outcome in patients with node-negative breast cancer

767 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: When accurately measured, PgR status is an independent predictive factor for benefit from adjuvant endocrine therapy and should be taken into account when discussing RR reductions expected from endocrine treatment with individual patients.
Abstract: Purpose: To determine whether progesterone receptor (PgR) status provides additional value to estrogen receptor (ER) status and improves prediction of benefit from endocrine treatment among patients with primary breast cancer. Patients and Methods: Clinical outcomes of patients in two large databases were analyzed as a function of steroid receptor status. The first database (PP), contained 3,739 patients who did not receive any systemic adjuvant therapy and 1,688 patients who received adjuvant endocrine therapy but no chemotherapy. The second database (SPORE), contained 10,444 patients who received adjuvant endocrine therapy but no chemotherapy. Biochemical ER and PgR assays were identically performed in two different central laboratories. Results: In univariate and multivariate analyses, the prognostic significance of PgR status among systemically untreated patients is modest. Among endocrine-treated patients, however, multivariate analyses, including lymph-node involvement, tumor size, and age, demonstr...

715 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In women 55 years old or older, advancing age is associated with more favorable tumor biology, and breast cancer survival in older women is similar to survival in the general population irrespective of disease status.
Abstract: Background: The number of elderly patients with breast cancer is increasing. Limited age-related information available about this disease prompted this study. Patients and Methods: The study population was derived from 50 828 and 256 287 patients with invasive breast cancer in San Antonio breast cancer databases and the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) registry, respectively. Tumor biologic and clinical characteristics, local and systemic therapies, and survival according to the patient’s age were analyzed. Survival was also compared with that of age-matched women from the general population. Results: In patients 55 years old or older, there was an association between increasing age at diagnosis and the presence of more favorable biologic characteristics of the tumor, including more tumors that express steroid receptors, lower proliferative rates, diploidy, normal p53, and absence of the expression of epidermal growth factor receptor and c-erbB2. In older patients with lymph node-negative disease and/or small tumors, the observed and expected survivals were almost identical. In the SEER registry, the 8-year survival of lymph nodenegative patients relative to the expected survival of agematched women from the general population was 1.01 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.98‐1.04) for patients 70‐74 years old, 1.06 (95% CI = 1.01‐1.11) for patients 75‐79 years old, and 1.09 (95% CI = 0.98‐1.20) for patients 80‐84 years old. Conclusion: In women 55 years old or older, advancing age is associated with more favorable tumor biology, and breast cancer survival in older women is similar to survival in the general population irrespective of disease status. This favorable outcome should be considered when making clinical decisions in older patients. [J Natl Cancer Inst 2000;92: 550‐6]

657 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Fulvestrant was at least as effective as anastrozole, with efficacy end points slightly favoring fulvestrant, and represents an additional treatment option for postmenopausal women with advanced breast cancer whose disease progresses on tamoxifen therapy.
Abstract: PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy and tolerability of fulvestrant (formerly ICI 182,780) with anastrozole in the treatment of advanced breast cancer in patients whose disease progresses on prior endocrine treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this double-blind, double-dummy, parallel-group study, postmenopausal patients were randomized to receive either an intramuscular injection of fulvestrant 250 mg once monthly or a daily oral dose of anastrozole 1 mg. The primary end point was time to progression (TTP). Secondary end points included objective response (OR) rate, duration of response (DOR), and tolerability. RESULTS: Patients (n = 400) were followed for a median period of 16.8 months. Fulvestrant was as effective as anastrozole in terms of TTP (hazard ratio, 0.92; 95.14% confidence interval [CI], 0.74 to 1.14; P = .43); median TTP was 5.4 months with fulvestrant and 3.4 months with anastrozole. OR rates were 17.5% with both treatments. Clinical benefit rates (complete response + partial response + stable ...

605 citations


Cited by
More filters
01 Jan 2000
TL;DR: This annex is aimed at providing a sound basis for conclusions regarding the number of significant radiation accidents that have occurred, the corresponding levels of radiation exposures and numbers of deaths and injuries, and the general trends for various practices, in the context of the Committee's overall evaluations of the levels and effects of exposure to ionizing radiation.
Abstract: NOTE The report of the Committee without its annexes appears as Official Records of the General Assembly, Sixty-third Session, Supplement No. 46. The designations employed and the presentation of material in this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Secretariat of the United Nations concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area, or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. The country names used in this document are, in most cases, those that were in use at the time the data were collected or the text prepared. In other cases, however, the names have been updated, where this was possible and appropriate, to reflect political changes. Scientific Annexes Annex A. Medical radiation exposures Annex B. Exposures of the public and workers from various sources of radiation INTROdUCTION 1. In the course of the research and development for and the application of atomic energy and nuclear technologies, a number of radiation accidents have occurred. Some of these accidents have resulted in significant health effects and occasionally in fatal outcomes. The application of technologies that make use of radiation is increasingly widespread around the world. Millions of people have occupations related to the use of radiation, and hundreds of millions of individuals benefit from these uses. Facilities using intense radiation sources for energy production and for purposes such as radiotherapy, sterilization of products, preservation of foodstuffs and gamma radiography require special care in the design and operation of equipment to avoid radiation injury to workers or to the public. Experience has shown that such technology is generally used safely, but on occasion controls have been circumvented and serious radiation accidents have ensued. 2. Reviews of radiation exposures from accidents have been presented in previous UNSCEAR reports. The last report containing an exclusive chapter on exposures from accidents was the UNSCEAR 1993 Report [U6]. 3. This annex is aimed at providing a sound basis for conclusions regarding the number of significant radiation accidents that have occurred, the corresponding levels of radiation exposures and numbers of deaths and injuries, and the general trends for various practices. Its conclusions are to be seen in the context of the Committee's overall evaluations of the levels and effects of exposure to ionizing radiation. 4. The Committee's evaluations of public, occupational and medical diagnostic exposures are mostly concerned with chronic exposures of …

3,924 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: An international Expert Panel that conducted a systematic review and evaluation of the literature and developed recommendations for optimal IHC ER/PgR testing performance recommended that ER and PgR status be determined on all invasive breast cancers and breast cancer recurrences.
Abstract: Purpose To develop a guideline to improve the accuracy of immunohistochemical (IHC) estrogen receptor (ER) and progesterone receptor (PgR) testing in breast cancer and the utility of these receptors as predictive markers. Methods The American Society of Clinical Oncology and the College of American Pathologists convened an international Expert Panel that conducted a systematic review and evaluation of the literature in partnership with Cancer Care Ontario and developed recommendations for optimal IHC ER/PgR testing performance. Results Up to 20% of current IHC determinations of ER and PgR testing worldwide may be inaccurate (false negative or false positive). Most of the issues with testing have occurred because of variation in preanalytic variables, thresholds for positivity, and interpretation criteria. Recommendations The Panel recommends that ER and PgR status be determined on all invasive breast cancers and breast cancer recurrences. A testing algorithm that relies on accurate, reproducible assay performance is proposed. Elements to reliably reduce assay variation are specified. It is recommended that ER and PgR assays be considered positive if there are at least 1% positive tumor nuclei in the sample on testing in the presence of expected reactivity of internal (normal epithelial elements) and external controls. The absence of benefit from endocrine therapy for women with ER-negative invasive breast cancers has been confirmed in large overviews of randomized clinical trials.

3,902 citations

Journal Article
TL;DR: This volume is keyed to high resolution electron microscopy, which is a sophisticated form of structural analysis, but really morphology in a modern guise, the physical and mechanical background of the instrument and its ancillary tools are simply and well presented.
Abstract: I read this book the same weekend that the Packers took on the Rams, and the experience of the latter event, obviously, colored my judgment. Although I abhor anything that smacks of being a handbook (like, \"How to Earn a Merit Badge in Neurosurgery\") because too many volumes in biomedical science already evince a boyscout-like approach, I must confess that parts of this volume are fast, scholarly, and significant, with certain reservations. I like parts of this well-illustrated book because Dr. Sj6strand, without so stating, develops certain subjects on technique in relation to the acquisition of judgment and sophistication. And this is important! So, given that the author (like all of us) is somewhat deficient in some areas, and biased in others, the book is still valuable if the uninitiated reader swallows it in a general fashion, realizing full well that what will be required from the reader is a modulation to fit his vision, propreception, adaptation and response, and the kind of problem he is undertaking. A major deficiency of this book is revealed by comparison of its use of physics and of chemistry to provide understanding and background for the application of high resolution electron microscopy to problems in biology. Since the volume is keyed to high resolution electron microscopy, which is a sophisticated form of structural analysis, but really morphology in a modern guise, the physical and mechanical background of The instrument and its ancillary tools are simply and well presented. The potential use of chemical or cytochemical information as it relates to biological fine structure , however, is quite deficient. I wonder when even sophisticated morphol-ogists will consider fixation a reaction and not a technique; only then will the fundamentals become self-evident and predictable and this sine qua flon will become less mystical. Staining reactions (the most inadequate chapter) ought to be something more than a technique to selectively enhance contrast of morphological elements; it ought to give the structural addresses of some of the chemical residents of cell components. Is it pertinent that auto-radiography gets singled out for more complete coverage than other significant aspects of cytochemistry by a high resolution microscopist, when it has a built-in minimal error of 1,000 A in standard practice? I don't mean to blind-side (in strict football terminology) Dr. Sj6strand's efforts for what is \"routinely used in our laboratory\"; what is done is usually well done. It's just that …

3,197 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The ability to identify patients who have a favourable prognosis could, after independent confirmation, allow clinicians to avoid adjuvant systemic therapy or to choose less aggressive therapeutic options.

2,870 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The RS assay not only quantifies the likelihood of breast cancer recurrence in women with node-negative, estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer, but also predicts the magnitude of chemotherapy benefit.
Abstract: Purpose The 21-gene recurrence score (RS) assay quantifies the likelihood of distant recurrence in women with estrogen receptor‐positive, lymph node‐negative breast cancer treated with adjuvant tamoxifen. The relationship between the RS and chemotherapy benefit is not known. Methods The RS was measured in tumors from the tamoxifen-treated and tamoxifen plus chemotherapy‐ treated patients in the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP) B20 trial. Cox proportional hazards models were utilized to test for interaction between chemotherapy treatment and the RS. Results A total of 651 patients were assessable (227 randomly assigned to tamoxifen and 424 randomly assigned to tamoxifen plus chemotherapy). The test for interaction between chemotherapy treatment and RS was statistically significant (P .038). Patients with high-RS ( 31) tumors (ie, high risk of recurrence) had a large benefit from chemotherapy (relative risk, 0.26; 95% CI, 0.13 to 0.53; absolute decrease in 10-year distant recurrence rate: mean, 27.6%; SE, 8.0%). Patients with low-RS ( 18) tumors derived minimal, if any, benefit from chemotherapy treatment (relative risk, 1.31; 95% CI, 0.46 to 3.78; absolute decrease in distant recurrence rate at 10 years: mean, 1.1%; SE, 2.2%). Patients with intermediate-RS tumors did not appear to have a large benefit, but the uncertainty in the estimate can not exclude a clinically important benefit.

2,390 citations