TY - JOUR
T1 - Molecular Markers of Radiation Effectiveness in Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma
AU - Koch, Wayne
AU - Sidransky, David
PY - 2004/4
Y1 - 2004/4
N2 - The response of cancer to ionizing radiation treatment varies in a manner not fully explained by standard clinical, demographic, or histologic factors. Response may be related to intrinsic biologic capability of the tumor cells and/or the host immune or stromal support tissues. The availability of molecular biological methods to detect specific tumor-related genetic alterations and altered protein expression has prompted a search for molecular markers that accurately predict tumor response to therapy. Tumor suppressor genes and oncogenes such as p53 and Cyclin D1, key components of pathways that control tumor behavior, such as epidermal growth factor receptor and apoptotic factors including bcl-2, markers of proliferation (Ki-67), and markers of angiogenesis such as vascular endothelial growth factor have been examined. To date, results for each of these are mixed. This is not surprising given the complexity of the biologic system of tumor response to damage and the multitude of factors that contribute to the diversity of clinical presentation of disease. This manuscript reviews the literature to date in an effort to summarize results and suggest the direction for further study.
AB - The response of cancer to ionizing radiation treatment varies in a manner not fully explained by standard clinical, demographic, or histologic factors. Response may be related to intrinsic biologic capability of the tumor cells and/or the host immune or stromal support tissues. The availability of molecular biological methods to detect specific tumor-related genetic alterations and altered protein expression has prompted a search for molecular markers that accurately predict tumor response to therapy. Tumor suppressor genes and oncogenes such as p53 and Cyclin D1, key components of pathways that control tumor behavior, such as epidermal growth factor receptor and apoptotic factors including bcl-2, markers of proliferation (Ki-67), and markers of angiogenesis such as vascular endothelial growth factor have been examined. To date, results for each of these are mixed. This is not surprising given the complexity of the biologic system of tumor response to damage and the multitude of factors that contribute to the diversity of clinical presentation of disease. This manuscript reviews the literature to date in an effort to summarize results and suggest the direction for further study.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=2342505287&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=2342505287&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1053/j.semradonc.2003.12.007
DO - 10.1053/j.semradonc.2003.12.007
M3 - Article
C2 - 15095259
AN - SCOPUS:2342505287
SN - 1053-4296
VL - 14
SP - 130
EP - 138
JO - Seminars in Radiation Oncology
JF - Seminars in Radiation Oncology
IS - 2
ER -