Discussion
failure of the “candidate SNP, tumor
TUMOR, SECONDARY, TUMOR ANGIOGENESIS
In our previous analysis, two haplotypes based on Homozygosity in The analyses performed did not confirm what was found in the previous study, in particular patients bearing PFS and OS in relation to haplotypes.H1/H1, Haplo1/Haplo1; H2/H2, Haplo2/Haplo2; H1/H1 + H2/H2, Haplo1/Haplo1 + Haplo2/Haplo2.*Ajusted HR and Kaplan Meir curves for The present study investigated The inhibition of angiogenesis, through blockade of the For example, the retrospective study by Loupakis and colleagues hypothesized a role of the One of the most compelling reasons for the failure of predictive marker studies is the biological complexity of tumor angiogenesis. Data in the literature suggest multiple pathways in the growth of new tumor vessels, leading to study the simultaneous inhibi-tion of multiple angiogenic targets as a potentially effective strategyMechanisms of action of anti-The ITACA study secondary analysis has shown that specific polymorphisms of The purpose of the current study was to validate our previous findings, which, if verified, might have served as a reliable criterion for choosing individuals for Bev therapy.Unfortunately, the study did not confirm the earlier findings and demonstrated the failure of both The lack of correlation evidence in the study could be due to the reduced power caused by fewer patients’ enrolled respect to the planned sample size. Although The present study confirms the absolute importance of prospective validation as an essential step on the road of biomarkers towards clinical application. Furthermore, based on the complexity of the biology of tumor angiogenesis and the involvement of multiple actors in this process, it seems rather unlikely that a single germline SNP alone could explain the efficacy of Bev. The failure of the “candidate SNP strategy” certainly opens the way to new questions on the possibility of effectively exploiting the pharmacogenetic ap-proach to identify predictors of benefit from Bev.This prospective study failed to validate the hypothesized predictive impact of 