FREE NEJM E-TOC    HOME   |   SUBSCRIBE   |   CURRENT ISSUE   |   PAST ISSUES   |   COLLECTIONS   |   Search Term  Advanced Search

Sign in | Get NEJM's E-Mail Table of Contents — Free | Subscribe

Previous Volume 348:1715-1717 April 24, 2003 Number 17 Next

	Since this article has no abstract, we have provided an extract of the first 100 words of the full text and any section headings.

	Full Text PDF PDA Full Text Purchase this article Add to Personal Archive Add to Citation Manager Notify a Friend E-mail When Cited E-mail When Letters Appear Related Article by van de Vijver, M. J. PubMed Citation

To the Editor: The study by van de Vijver et al. (Dec. 19 issue)¹ is of considerable interest with respect to the biology of breast cancer. However, from the point of view of the individual patient and her physician, the sensitivity and specificity of prognostic profiles are more important than odds ratios. It is possible to calculate these factors in part from the results. For example, for "all new patients in the consecutive series" (180 patients, listed in Table 2 of the article), the sensitivity and specificity of the poor prognostic signature are 0.93 (95 percent confidence interval, 0.81 to . . . [Full Text of this Article]

This article has been cited by other articles:

• Ballman, K. V. (2008). Genetics and Genomics: Gene Expression Microarrays. Circulation 118: 1593-1597 [Full Text]  
• Brenton, J. D., Ahmed, A. A., Caldas, C. (2006). In Reply:. JCO 24: 722-723 [Full Text]  
• Lin, S. M., Kibbe, W. A. (2005). Irrational Exuberance in Clinical Proteomics. Clin. Cancer Res. 11: 7963-7964 [Full Text]