<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<recommendedContent xmlns="http://api.mspoke.com">
    <recommendedItem id="20100101_19_452"
                     title="Study Backs Late Cardiotoxicity of Childhood Cancer Treatment (CME/CE)"
                     score="0.012"
                     href="http://www.medpagetoday.com/HematologyOncology/OtherCancers/tb/18384?impressionId=1265792945270"
                     
      A childhood cancer survivor&apos;s risk of dying from cardiovascular causes rises with the dose of radiation his heart received during treatment, researchers in France and the U.K. affirmed.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;Those whose hearts were exposed had a 60% higher risk of cardiovascular death than the general population, even at a dose of 1 Gy (95% CI 20% to 250%), according to Florent de Vathaire, PhD, of L&apos;Institut National de la Sant&amp;#233; et de la Recherche M&amp;#233;dicale in Paris, and colleagues.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;The risk jumped to 12.5-fold for a cumulative radiation dose to the heart of 5 to 14.9 Gy, and to 14.9-fold for a dose of more than 15 Gy (&lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;&amp;lt;0.01 for trend), the researchers reported online in the &lt;em&gt;Journal of Clinical Oncology&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;The notion that exposing the heart to radiation increases the risk of cardiovascular disease and death is not surprising, according to an accompanying editorial.&lt;p&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;However, this study examined cardiovascular mortality effects of both the dose of radiation and the dose of anthracyclines given to childhood cancer victims in the same cohort.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;That&apos;s something previous studies haven&apos;t done, according to editorialists Steven E. Lipshultz, MD, of the University of Miami and Holtz Children&apos;s Hospital in Miami, and M. Jacob Adams, MD, MPH, of the University of Rochester, N.Y.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;These are pretty profound findings,&quot; Lipshultz told &lt;em&gt;MedPage Today&lt;/em&gt;. &quot;These are the exact concerns we&apos;ve had based on careful subclinical assessments of how the heart in these survivors has been working.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;His group was one of the first to report that survivors of childhood cancer faced not only acute cardiotoxicity from treatment, but also late cardiac effects.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;As more effective treatment for childhood cancers came into play, the dramatic jump in survival rates  --  from less than 50% in the mid-1970s to 80% today  --  yielded a large enough population of survivors to make chronic issues from treatment apparent, Lipshultz noted.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;It appears that for some of these survivors we have substituted one fatal disease of childhood  --  cancer  --  for another fatal disease of early adult life,&quot; he said.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;de Vathaire&apos;s group studied a cohort of 4,122 French and British children diagnosed with childhood solid cancer between 1942 and 1986 and who survived at least five years.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Over an average of 27 years of follow-up, they were at 8.3-fold higher risk of dying from any cause compared with the general populations in France and the U.K. (95% CI 7.6 to 9.0).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The majority of these excess deaths occurred early after diagnosis, five to nine years afterward in this analysis  --  in which all patients survived to five years.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Based on just 32 deaths from cardiovascular diseases in the cohort, the childhood cancer survivors experienced five times the cardiovascular mortality (95% CI 3.3 to 6.7) expected from the general population (1.7% cumulative at 35 years versus 0.3%).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;This elevation in risk was similar to that seen in large studies from the U.S. and Nordic countries, suggesting generalizability of the results, Lipshultz said.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Radiation therapy also conferred a 5.0-fold elevation in risk of cardiovascular disease-related death (95% CI 1.2 to 21.4).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Like radiation, a higher cumulative dose of anthracycline chemotherapy also increased risk of dying from cardiac diseases, compared with the general population (RR 4.4 for a dose over 360 mg/m&lt;sup&gt;2&lt;/sup&gt;, 95% CI 1.3 to 15.3).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;However, radiotherapy and chemotherapy did not appear to interact for cardiovascular mortality (&lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;=0.4).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Notably, the vinca alkaloids were also significantly linked to cardiovascular disease-related death risk among childhood cancer survivors, even after adjustment for sex, treatment period, age at diagnosis, follow-up, and all other treatment modalities (RR 3.6, 95% CI 1.0 to 12.9).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Currently, guidelines support regular long-term cardiovascular screening for childhood cancer survivors who received anthracycline-based chemotherapy but provide little to no direction for those treated with nonanthracycline chemotherapy or radiation, Lipshultz noted.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;These results suggested all three groups should be getting cardiac follow-up, he told &lt;em&gt;MedPage Today&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;However, because other research has suggested that these individual treatments affect the heart in different ways, such as diastolic rather than systolic dysfunction with radiotherapy, screening modalities may need to account for this as well, he said.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The researchers cautioned that cardiovascular disease was probably under-reported as a cause of death in the cohort.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;Indeed, 15 of the deaths classified as results of cancer as the principal cause had cardiovascular diseases as the immediate cause,&quot; they wrote.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;float:left;border-style:solid;border-width:1px;border-color:#8dabbc;font-family:arial;font-size:12px;background-color:#DBE9F2;padding:5px;&quot;&gt;&lt;p&gt;The study was supported by the Ligue Nationale Contre le Cancer; the Programme Hospitalier de Recherche Clinique; the Agence Fran&amp;#231;aise de S&amp;#233;curit&amp;#233; Sanitaire et Produit de Sant&amp;#233;; Electricit&amp;#233; de France; the Wyeth Foundation for childhood and adolescent health; and a grant from the Foundation of France.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The researchers reported no conflicts of interest.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The editorialists reported no conflicts of interest.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;clear:both;&quot;&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
    </recommendedItem>
    <recommendedItem id="20100101_19_451"
                     title="Sentinel Nodes Predict Spread in Oral Cancer (CME/CE)"
                     score="0.012"
                     href="http://www.medpagetoday.com/HematologyOncology/OtherCancers/tb/18367?impressionId=1265792945270"
                     
      &lt;p&gt;In early oral squamous cell carcinoma, a sentinel node biopsy correctly predicted an absence of lymphatic metastasis in all but 4% of patients, researchers said.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;For T1 and T2 lesions that were clinically node-negative, the procedure  --  combined with additional sectioning and immunohistochemistry  --  yielded a negative predictive value of 96%, according to Francisco Civantos Jr., MD, of the University of Miami, and colleagues.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;For T1 lesions, the value was 100%, while for T2 cancers it was 94%, the researchers reported online in the &lt;em&gt;Journal of Clinical Oncology&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The finding may position the procedure as an intermediate option between watchful waiting and selective neck dissection, the researchers said, asserting that it&apos;s now &quot;reasonable&quot; to conduct a head-to-head trial of sentinel node biopsy and neck dissection.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The procedure has significantly increased the sensitivity for detecting lymphatic metastasis in melanoma and breast cancer patients, Civantos and colleagues noted.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;But in oral cancer, many surgeons prefer a completion neck dissection, they added, despite the &quot;measurable morbidity&quot; that&apos;s associated with the procedure. On the other hand, because of that morbidity, other specialists prefer watchful waiting and elective neck irradiation.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;To investigate the issue, Civantos and colleagues conducted a multicenter trial in which patients with early invasive oral cancers were treated with both procedures  --  a sentinel node biopsy, followed by completion selective neck dissection.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The primary goal was to see if a negative hematoxylin and eosin finding on the sentinel node biopsy accurately predicted the negativity of the other cervical lymph nodes removed in the neck dissection.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;All told, 140 patients qualified and had the dual procedures, the researchers reported.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The sentinel nodes were identified using a radioactive gamma probe. The primary tumor was removed transorally, followed by the sentinel node biopsy through a small incision within the area of the planned incision for the neck dissection.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Staining of the sentinel nodes at the various trial sites resulted in 106 that were negative. Of those, 100 were also negative by hematoxylin and eosin staining of the neck dissection specimens.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;That yielded a negative predictive value of 94%, the researchers said.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Additional step sectioning and immunohistochemistry at a central pathology lab increased the negative predictive value to 96%, they said.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Both findings were significant, they reported, with a one-sided &lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;-value of &lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;&amp;lt;0.0001.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;One limitation of the study, the researchers noted, is that the dual procedures may have interfered with each other, in that sentinel lymph biopsy might have changed the way the neck dissection was performed or the other way around.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;But that &quot;may actually lead to underestimation of the accuracy of this technique,&quot; they said, since the neck dissections were guided by information gleaned from nuclear imaging and the gamma probe used in the sentinel node procedure.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The study was also limited, the researchers said, because many surgeons involved were only moderately experienced and none was experienced &quot;at levels currently considered appropriate for surgeons caring for breast cancer or melanoma.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Nonetheless, they said, the negative predictive value found in the study was &quot;higher than anticipated for a multi-institutional setting with relatively inexperienced surgeons.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;They added that only a clinical trial in which outcomes after a negative sentinel node biopsy are simply observed for several years would yield a true negative predictive value for the procedure.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;float:left;border-style:solid;border-width:1px;border-color:#8dabbc;font-family:arial;font-size:12px;background-color:#DBE9F2;padding:5px;&quot;&gt;&lt;p&gt;The study was supported by the National Cancer Institute.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Civantos reported no conflicts.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;clear:both;&quot;&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
    </recommendedItem>
    <recommendedItem id="20100101_19_440"
                     title="Soft Drinks Linked to Pancreatic Cancer Risk (CME/CE)"
                     score="0.012"
                     href="http://www.medpagetoday.com/HematologyOncology/OtherCancers/tb/18354?impressionId=1265792945270"
                     
      &lt;p&gt;Regular consumers of sugary soft drinks are at higher risk for pancreatic cancer than fruit juice drinkers or the general population, a new Singaporean study has found.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Chinese men and women living in Singapore who drank two or more soft drinks per week were 87% more likely to contract pancreatic cancer after the researchers adjusted for factors such as smoking (95% CI 1.10 to 3.15), according to the report published Feb. 8 in &lt;em&gt;Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers &amp;amp; Prevention.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;In this large prospective cohort of Chinese men and women in Singapore, those who reported regular soft drink consumption were at increased risk of pancreatic cancer when compared with those who largely abstained,&quot; Mark Pereira, PhD, of the School of Public Health at the University of Minnesota, and colleagues wrote. &quot;There was no association between consumption of juice and risk of pancreatic cancer.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;While pancreatic cancer is relatively rare, it is one of the most deadly cancers, with less than 5% of patients surviving five years after diagnosis. Although rates have generally plateaued in the U.S., they continue to climb in some Asian countries, including Singapore.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;This increase may reflect demographic and socioeconomic shifts as well as a transition towards a more westernized lifestyle and diet,&quot; the authors wrote.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Research has shown that insulin promotes pancreatic cancer cell growth, and some researchers think sugary foods could result in blood sugar and insulin fluctuations that expose the pancreas to high concentrations of insulin.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;While fruit juices contain sugar, soft drinks are the major sources of added sugar in the U.S. diet and major contributors to hyperglycemia and hyperinsulinemia.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Pereira and colleagues followed 60,524 men and women who enrolled in the Singapore Chinese Health Study between April 1993 and December 1998 and were followed for 14 years.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;At enrollment, the participants completed a 146-question food frequency questionnaire, which contained three items related to soft drinks and juice. The questions asked the participants how much, if any, they drank of soft drinks such as Coca-Cola and 7-Up, orange juice, and other fruit and vegetable juices.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The dietary data was later cross-referenced with records from the Singapore Cancer Registry and the Singapore Registry of Births and Deaths, to determine which of the participants had died of pancreatic cancer and whether it might be related to their soft drink or juice consumption.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Overall, researchers found that 140 participants had contracted pancreatic cancer.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The results were largely consistent with three of four previous U.S. studies on the links between pancreatic cancer and soft drinks. Three of the U.S. studies found an association between soft drinks and cancer.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The author acknowledged that soft drink consumers are more likely than abstainers to participate in other unhealthy behaviors, including smoking and overeating, which makes it difficult to determine that soft drink consumption is an independent risk factor for pancreatic cancer.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;For instance, smokers in their study were at higher risk for pancreatic cancer. &quot;We could not rule out the possibility of residual confounding by factors associated with the habit of drinking soft drinks or other unascertained factors such as waist circumference,&quot; they wrote.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;They also noted that the study was limited in statistical power because pancreatic cancer is rare, which limited the sample size of cancer cases. &quot;Also, because we were unable to collect repeated dietary measurements in this study, we were unable to account for changes in consumption of soft drinks and juices,&quot; they wrote, &quot;especially when the diagnosis of diabetes occurred after the baseline interview.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt; &lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;float:left;border-style:solid;border-width:1px;border-color:#8dabbc;font-family:arial;font-size:12px;background-color:#DBE9F2;padding:5px;&quot;&gt;&lt;p&gt;The study was funded by the National Cancer Institute.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The authors reported no financial conflicts of interest.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;clear:both;&quot;&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
    </recommendedItem>
    <recommendedItem id="20100101_19_430"
                     title="HRT Linked to Asthma Risk (CME/CE)"
                     score="0.012"
                     href="http://www.medpagetoday.com/Endocrinology/Menopause/tb/18342?impressionId=1265792945270"
                     
      &lt;p&gt;Estrogen-only hormone replacement therapy is associated with an increased risk of asthma in postmenopausal women, a large prospective observational cohort study showed.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Recent and current users of estrogen had a 54% increase in the risk of being diagnosed with asthma, according to Isabelle Romieu, MD, ScD, of the National Institute of Public Health in Cuernavaca, Mexico, and colleagues.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The risk was even higher in nonsmokers or those who reported an allergic disease before they developed asthma, the researchers reported online in &lt;em&gt;Thorax&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Epidemiological studies suggest that an endocrine mechanism  --  perhaps endogenous estrogen synthesis  --  is involved in asthma in women and girls, the researchers wrote.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;It&apos;s plausible that hormone replacement therapy &quot;might therefore play a role in asthma onset,&quot; they theorized in the journal.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;To delve into the question, Romieu and colleagues turned to the E3N cohort study, which is the French component of the continuing European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC) study.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The study started in 1990 and includes 98,995 French women born between 1925 and 1950. The participants complete self-administered questionnaires every two years, giving details of their medical history, menopausal status, and a variety of lifestyle characteristics.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Women were deemed to have a new case of asthma if  --  after being free of the disease at baseline  --  they later reported both that they had suffered asthma attacks and that the diagnosis had been confirmed by a physician.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Among the participants, Romieu and colleagues found 57,664 women who were free of asthma at menopause. In that group, the researchers found, there were 569 incident cases of asthma during a total of 495,448 years of follow-up.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Analysis showed that hormone replacement therapy in general was related to an increased risk of asthma onset among recent users, with a hazard ratio of 1.20. But the 95% confidence interval ranged from 0.98 to 1.46, so the finding was not statistically significant.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Instead, the researchers found, the association only reached significance among women reporting the use of estrogen alone, where the hazard ratio was 1.54, with a 95% confidence interval from 1.13 to 2.09.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The risk was particularly great in estrogen-using women who had never smoked or who had reported allergic disease before the asthma onset. Those hazard ratios were 1.80 and 1.84, respectively, and both reached significance.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The increased risk among never smokers might reflect an anti-estrogen effect of tobacco smoke, the researchers speculated, or difficulty isolating the additional effect of the therapy in smokers.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The strengths of the study include its large size, prospective design, and relatively low loss to follow-up of 3.8%, Romieu and colleagues said.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;They added that the results might be biased if users of hormone replacement therapy reported more asthma attacks or were diagnosed more often because of more frequent visits to the doctor.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Indeed, hormone therapy users had more mammograms than nonusers, they noted, but added that the participants all had free medical care and &quot;there is no reason to believe&quot; that hormone users had more medical visits for non-gynecological reasons than nonusers.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Hormone therapy has been controversial  --  and on the decline  --  since the landmark Women&apos;s Health Initiative study was stopped in 2002 when the researchers found that participants taking estrogen plus progestin had a greater incidence of coronary heart disease, breast cancer, stroke, and pulmonary embolism than those receiving placebo.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In the current study, the combination hormone therapy was not associated with an increase in asthma incidence.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;float:left;border-style:solid;border-width:1px;border-color:#8dabbc;font-family:arial;font-size:12px;background-color:#DBE9F2;padding:5px;&quot;&gt;&lt;p&gt;The study and researchers had support from Mutuelle G&amp;#233;n&amp;#233;rale de l&apos;Education Nationale, the Institut de Canc&amp;#233;rologie Gustave Roussy, the Institut National de la Sant&amp;#233; et de la Recherche M&amp;#233;dicale, the CDC, the Canc&amp;#233;rop&amp;#244;le R&amp;#233;gion Ile de France, and the GA&lt;sup&gt;2&lt;/sup&gt;LEN project.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The authors did not report any potential conflicts.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;clear:both;&quot;&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
    </recommendedItem>
    <recommendedItem id="20100101_19_377"
                     title="Advisory Panel Rates Genomic Cancer Tests"
                     score="0.01"
                     href="http://www.medpagetoday.com/PublicHealthPolicy/Medicare/tb/18269?impressionId=1265792945270"
                     
      &lt;p&gt;Some genomic tests aimed at identifying patients most likely to respond to cancer drugs won a thumbs-up from a Medicare advisory panel, but others didn&apos;t make the grade.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;As part of a national coverage determination under way at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, members of the Medicare Evidence Development &amp;amp; Coverage Advisory Committee (MEDCAC) last week rated the clinical value of several pharmacogenomic cancer tests now available.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The tests would be used to select patients for treatment with drugs including tamoxifen, irinotecan (Camptosar), trastuzumab (Herceptin), and imatinib (Gleevec).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;CMS has not previously decided whether such tests should be reimbursed by Medicare, although testing is already routine for some of these treatments.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The FDA-approved labeling for trastuzumab requires such testing. Imatinib&apos;s approvals include chronic myeloid leukemia featuring the BCR-ABL &quot;Philadelphia chromosome&quot; mutation, although the label doesn&apos;t explicitly mention testing.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;CMS is aware that the body of evidence on the role of pharmacogenomic testing in cancer continues to evolve,&quot; according to the agency&apos;s notice of the meeting.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;Recognizing the rapid accumulation of such evidence, CMS seeks guidance from the panel to inform future coverage determinations. We want to ensure that Medicare beneficiaries have access to any demonstrated improved health outcomes of pharmacogenomic testing, and are protected from inaccurate or inappropriate pharmacogenomic testing that could compromise therapy or increase the risks of adverse events during therapy.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;MEDCAC panelists were asked to rate their confidence in the clinical utility of five tests and in the scientific evidence available for review.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The five tests cover: &lt;ul&gt; &lt;li&gt;Polymorphisms in the CYP2D6 drug-metabolizing enzyme for breast cancer patients who are candidates for tamoxifen&lt;/li&gt; &lt;li&gt;Polymorphisms in the UGT1A1 gene for colon cancer patients considered for irinotecan treatment&lt;/li&gt; &lt;li&gt;Presence of HER/neu epidermal growth factor receptor expression in patients with breast cancer, indicating suitability for trastuzumab&lt;/li&gt; &lt;li&gt;Presence of the BCR-ABL mutation in patients with chronic myeloid leukemia who would be candidates for imatinib&lt;/li&gt; &lt;li&gt;Mutations in the K-ras gene for metastatic colorectal cancer patients eligible for cetuximab (Erbitux) or panitumumab (Vectibix)&lt;/li&gt; &lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The 15 panel members assigned values of one to five, reflecting low to high confidence, to each test. A score of two reflected medium-low confidence, while a four meant medium-high confidence.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Most of the panelists agreed that the evidence underlying the tests for CYP2D6 and UGT1A1 polymorphisms was still too scant for an assessment of their clinical value. Mean scores for these tests were 2.07 and 1.83, respectively, with nearly all votes either a one or two.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;But MEDCAC members were more confident that the usefulness of the other three tests for diagnostic and monitoring purposes could be evaluated. Mean scores for those tests were all well above four.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;For the HER/neu, BCR-ABL, and K-ras tests, since members believed the evidence was adequate for assessment, MEDCAC also voted on whether their use actually would improve health outcomes in cancer patients.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;A third ranking provided the committee&apos;s views on whether the conclusions could be generalized to the Medicare population and patients in the community.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Mean scores for those rankings were all also above four, indicating the panel&apos;s support for these tests as clinically beneficial.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;On the other hand, when asked whether there was enough evidence to assess the utility of the BCR-ABL test in detecting treatment failure, panelists didn&apos;t think so. Most of those votes were twos, and the mean was 2.47.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;CMS has not given a time line for deciding whether to approve Medicare coverage for the tests.&lt;/p&gt;

    </recommendedItem>
</recommendedContent>