Predictive chemosensitivity testing
1985

Challenges in Predictive Chemosensitivity Testing

Editorial Evidence: low

Author Information

Author(s): P.R. Twentyman

Primary Institution: MRC Clinical Oncology and Radiotherapeutics Unit, Cambridge

Hypothesis

Can a reliable system for predictive chemosensitivity testing be developed for clinical use?

Conclusion

Current predictive chemosensitivity tests are not yet reliable enough for common solid tumors.

Supporting Evidence

  • Current predictive tests have a true prediction rate of sensitivity between 65-75%.
  • True prediction of resistance is often around 90%, but this depends on the actual response rate in vivo.
  • Clonogenic assays require a single cell suspension, which is difficult to achieve.
  • Non-clonogenic assays may provide better predictions of short to medium term clinical response.

Takeaway

Doctors want to know which cancer drugs will work best for patients, but it's really hard to test this accurately with current methods.

Methodology

The article discusses various methods of chemosensitivity testing, including clonogenic assays and short-term biochemical assays.

Potential Biases

There is a risk of bias due to the reliance on small samples and the difficulty in mimicking in vivo conditions.

Limitations

The tests may not accurately represent the complexity of tumor responses and are affected by tumor heterogeneity.

Want to read the original?

Access the complete publication on the publisher's website

View Original Publication