1. Advances in Personalized Medicine in Oncology: A Refresher for the Practicing Radiation Therapist
Sophia Lamey 

2. Background 
 Many advances have been made in recent years in profiling cancers on a more specific cellular or genetic level. These new technologies have led to insights for cancer treatment decisions. 

3. Objective 
To give an update on the new innovations in the oncology world. Personalized medicine is evolving the standard of care in oncology, and by extension, radiation therapy. The way we treat certain cancer stages and sites may no longer be a universal standard, but changing with the way we define cancers at the cellular level.

4. Methods
A literature review was conducted to evaluate the technology utilized in making treatment decisions for specific cancers.  Sources were gathered to evaluate different methods used to profile cancers on genetic, cellular, and disease specific levels, and how they are used in the treatment decision making process. 

5. Results 
Genetic sequencing tools and tumor markers give insight on different prognostic and predictive indicators for breast, prostate, colon, and glioblastoma cancer patients.  Researchers found these results were just as predictive, if not more predictive of prognosis, response, and recurrence of these cancers in comparison to traditional histopathology reporting tools.  New cognitive processing computers such as IBM’s Watson, have aided doctors in using evidence based research to decide on appropriate treatment methods for various cancers
Pam50
OncotypeDX
MGMT promoter methylation
IBM Watson 

6. Conclusion
The use of genetic sequencing will support personalized medicine in health care in the near future. By understanding the implementation of these tools into oncology as a whole, radiation therapists will become knowledgeable of the reasons for selection of particular patients' radiation therapy treatment protocol.  

7. References References
1. Cancer Facts & Figures 2017. Cancerorg    Accessed February 8, 2017. 
2. Solin L, Gray R, Baehner F, et al. A multigene expression assay to predict local recurrence risk for ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute. 2013;105(10): doi: /jnci/djt067. 
3. Knezevic D, Goddard A, Natraj N, et al. Analytical validation of the Oncotype DX prostate cancer assay – A clinical RT-PCR assay optimized for prostate needle biopsies. BMC Genomics. 2013;14(1):690. doi: /  
4. Filipits M, Nielsen T, Rudas M, et al. The PAM50 risk-of-recurrence score predicts risk for late distant recurrence after endocrine therapy in postmenopausal women with endocrine-responsive early breast cancer. Clinical Cancer Research. 2014;20(5): doi: / ccr
5. Srivastava G, Renfro L, Behrens R, et al. Prospective multicenter study of the impact of oncotype DX colon cancer assay results on treatment recommendations in stage II colon cancer patients. The Oncologist. 2014;19(5): doi: /theoncologist   
6. Lechapt-Zalcman E, Levallet G, Dugué A, et al. O6-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase (MGMT) promoter methylation and low MGMT-encoded protein expression as prognostic markers in glioblastoma patients treated with biodegradable carmustine wafer implants after initial surgery followed by radiotherapy. Cancer. 2012;118(18): doi: /cncr
7. Leu S, von Felten S, Frank S, et al. IDH/MGMT-driven molecular classification of low-grade glioma is a strong predictor for long-term survival. Neuro-Oncology. 2013;15(4): doi: /neuonc/nos317. 
8. Weller M, Stupp R, Hegi M, et al. Personalized care in neuro-oncology coming of age: Why we need MGMT and 1p/19q testing for malignant glioma patients in clinical practice. Neuro-Oncology. 2012;14(suppl 4):iv100-iv108. doi: /neuonc/nos206. 
9. Malin J. Envisioning Watson as a rapid-learning system for oncology. Journal of Oncology Practice. 2013;9(3): doi: /jop  
10. Doyle-Lindrud S. Watson will see you now: A supercomputer to help clinicians make informed treatment decisions. Clinical Journal of Oncology Nursing. 2015;19(1): doi: /15.cjon