Interpreting the CYP2D6 Results From the International Tamoxifen Pharmacogenetics Consortium. Issue 2 (8th May 2014)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Province, M A; Altman, R B; Klein, T E
• Is Part Of: Clinical pharmacology & therapeutics. Volume 96:Issue 2(2014)
• Page Start: 144
• Page End: 146
• Publication Date: 2014-05-08
• Subjects: Pharmacology -- Periodicals; Therapeutics -- Periodicals; 615.5
• DOI: 10.1038/clpt.2014.100
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0009-9236

Abstract

<abstract abstract-type="main"> <title> <x xml:space="preserve">Abstract</x> </title> <p>Meta‐analysis of the entire analyzable cohort of 4, 935 tamoxifen‐treated breast cancer patients by the International Tamoxifen Pharmacogenetics Consortium (ITPC) (criterion 3) revealed no CYP2D6 effect on outcomes but strong heterogeneity across sites.<xref ref-type="link" rid="cptclpt2014100-bib-0001">¹</xref> However, a <italic>post hoc</italic>–defined subgroup (criterion 1: postmenopausal, estrogen receptor positive, receiving 20 mg/day tamoxifen for 5 years; <italic>n</italic> = 1, 996) did find a statistically significant effect of CYP2D6 on both invasive disease–free survival as well as breast cancer–free interval, with little site heterogeneity. How should we interpret these discrepant findings?</p> <p>"<italic>Statistics: The only science that enables different experts using the same figures to draw different conclusions</italic>."</p> <p>—Evan Esar, humorist</p> <p>"<italic>Data do not give up their secrets easily. They must be tortured to confess</italic>."</p> <p>—Jeffrey Hooper, Bell Laboratories</p> <p>"<italic>Facts are stubborn, but statistics are more pliable</italic>."</p> <p>—Mark Twain, humorist</p> <p> <italic>Clinical Pharmacology &amp; Therapeutics</italic> (2014); <bold>96</bold> 2, 144–146. doi:<ext-link ext-link-type="doi" xlink:type="simple" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">10.1038/clpt.2014.100</ext-link></p> </abstract>