Skip Navigation


Journal of the National Cancer Institute Advance Access originally published online on January 29, 2008
JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute 2008 100(3):159-161; doi:10.1093/jnci/djm325
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
100/3/159    most recent
djm325v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Request Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Ellis, M. J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Ellis, M. J.
Related Collections
Right arrowRelated Articles in JNCI
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2008. Published by Oxford University Press.

EDITORIALS

Improving Outcomes for Patients With Hormone Receptor–Positive Breast Cancer: Back to the Drawing Board

Matthew J. Ellis

Affiliation of author: Department of Medicine, Division of Oncology, Siteman Cancer Center, Washington University in St Louis, St Louis, MO

Correspondence to: Matthew J. Ellis, MB, PhD, FRCP, Department of Medicine, Division of Oncology, Siteman Cancer Center, Washington University in St Louis, Campus Box 8056, 660 South Euclid Ave, St Louis, MO 63110 (e-mail: mellis@wustl.edu).

The first 10% of the full text of this article appears below.

Biomarker studies with negative results can be just as important to publish as those with positive results if the study had sufficient power to exclude a positive interaction because clinging to a long-favored but incorrect hypothesis in the face of negative evidence impedes scientific and clinical progress. The study by Viale et al. (1) in this issue of the Journal is a case in point. The investigators studied tumor tissue samples accrued from two large randomized trials that compared endocrine therapy vs cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and 5-fluorouracil (CMF) chemotherapy followed by endocrine therapy among breast cancer patients with node-negative hormone receptor–positive disease (International Breast . . . [Full Text of this Article]


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?

Related Articles in JNCI

Predictive Value of Tumor Ki-67 Expression in Two Randomized Trials of Adjuvant Chemoendocrine Therapy for Node-Negative Breast Cancer
Giuseppe Viale, Meredith M. Regan, Mauro G. Mastropasqua, Fausto Maffini, Eugenio Maiorano, Marco Colleoni, Karen N. Price, Rastko Golouh, Tiziana Perin, R. W. Brown, Anikó Kovács, Komala Pillay, Christian Öhlschlegel, Barry A. Gusterson, Monica Castiglione-Gertsch, Richard D. Gelber, Aron Goldhirsch, and Alan S. Coates On the behalf of the International Breast Cancer Study Group
J Natl Cancer Inst 2008 100: 207-212. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

IN THIS ISSUE
J Natl Cancer Inst 2008 100: 157. [Extract] [Full Text] [PDF]