Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Clinicians' guide to microarrays.

L Maraqa1, C F Donnellan, M B Peter

  • 1Pathology and Tumour Biology, Leeds Institute for Molecular Medicine, St. James's University Hospital, Leeds LS9 7TF, UK. drmaraqa@yahoo.co.uk

Surgical Oncology
|February 13, 2007
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Multifocal and multicentric breast cancer, is it time to think again?

Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England·2020
Same author

Evaluation of applying IHC4 as a prognostic model in the translational study of Intergroup Exemestane Study (IES): PathIES.

Breast cancer research and treatment·2017
Same author

The future developments in nutrition.

Frontline gastroenterology·2017
Same author

Ischaemic colitis.

BMJ (Clinical research ed.)·2016
Same author

Prevention and Management of Radiation-induced Late Gastrointestinal Toxicity.

Clinical oncology (Royal College of Radiologists (Great Britain))·2015
Same author

Prognostic and predictive value of ERβ1 and ERβ2 in the Intergroup Exemestane Study (IES)-first results from PathIES†.

Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology·2015
Same journal

Prognostic significance of age in adult primary intestinal diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: Insights from the SEER database.

Surgical oncology·2026
Same journal

Total neoadjuvant therapy versus standard neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced rectal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis of long-term outcomes.

Surgical oncology·2026
Same journal

Associations of latent profiles of resilience and fear of progression with discharge symptoms and postoperative frailty among patients undergoing lung resection: A longitudinal study.

Surgical oncology·2026
Same journal

Plastic surgeon or surgical oncologist: Impact of surgical training background on outcomes in microsurgical head and neck reconstruction.

Surgical oncology·2026
Same journal

Five-year survival after minimally invasive versus open gastrectomy: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials with trial sequential analysis.

Surgical oncology·2026
Same journal

Ovarian teratoma and the anti-N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor encephalitis paraneoplastic phenomenon: A systematic review and analysis of the literature.

Surgical oncology·2026
See all related articles

Microarray technology offers molecular signatures to predict cancer patient outcomes and guide treatment. This review details microarray types, their clinical pros and cons, focusing on breast cancer applications.

Area of Science:

  • Oncology
  • Biotechnology
  • Genomics

Background:

  • Cancer is a complex, heterogeneous disease requiring personalized treatment strategies.
  • Predicting patient prognosis and treatment response remains a clinical challenge.
  • Microarray technology has emerged as a promising tool in molecular diagnostics.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To review different types of microarray technologies.
  • To discuss the clinical advantages and disadvantages of microarrays.
  • To highlight the application of microarrays in breast cancer management.

Main Methods:

  • Literature review of microarray technologies.
  • Clinical perspective analysis of microarray applications.
  • Focus on breast cancer as a case study.

Related Experiment Videos

Main Results:

  • Microarrays can provide molecular signatures for patient stratification.
  • Different microarray platforms have varying clinical utility.
  • Understanding pros and cons is crucial for effective clinical implementation.

Conclusions:

  • Microarray technology holds significant potential for personalized cancer therapy.
  • Clinical adoption requires careful consideration of technological limitations and benefits.
  • Further research is needed to optimize microarray use in routine breast cancer care.