Multi-gene signatures have become widely used for the prediction of overall recurrence risk and tailoring administration of adjuvant chemotherapy, but only a few have been shown to be prognostic for late (distant) relapse.
Recently, other gene-expression signatures originally developed for tailoring administration of adjuvant chemotherapy to ER-positive/HER2-negative breast cancer patients treated with endocrine therapy were assessed for their ability to predict early and late relapses (Table 1) (Sestak et al, 2013; Zhang et al, 2013; Sgroi et al, 2013a, 2013b).
The idea would be to tailor the administration of melatonin in a way that realigns the out-of-sync circadian rhythm in people with SAD, just as tiny doses (much smaller than those typically sold in health-food and drug stores) of melatonin can be used to speed recovery from jet lag.
This suggests that such strategy may help to tailor fluid administration, by selecting the most severe patients for aggressive fluid resuscitation, and emphasizes the lack of efficacy of CVP-driven resuscitation for that purpose.
In contrast, the fact that we observed significant differences between the outcomes of two small groups of patients emphasizes the potential value of using ΔPP to tailor fluid administration during high-risk surgery, and the likelihood of observing similar differences in larger populations of patients.
Our result of the significant differences in outcomes between two groups of patients emphasizes the potential value of using GOS and FIM to tailor progesterone administration and the likelihood of observing similar differences in a larger patient population; however, the possibility exists that a statistical error may have occurred because of an inadequate sample size.
This paper presents the rationale and design for a randomized controlled trial examining the relative efficacy of tailoring DCS administration based on exposure success (i.e. end fear levels) during a 5-session group CBT protocol for social anxiety disorder (n = 156).
Other potential advantages could be a more tailor-made administration of therapies that interfere with the coagulation system [ 5– 8].
Tailoring PROMs administration, as our findings suggest may be helpful, is potentially controversial because the purist view of PROMs is that they should be delivered in exactly the same format that they were developed to ensure validity and comparability.
And then, let the administration tailor it and obviously add in its political goals and observations.
