Correlative studies in neuro-oncology trials: should they influence treatment?

Recent molecular correlative studies accompanying clinical trials in glioma have provided strong evidence for prognostic markers and predictive factors for treatment response. However, to what extent can these markers influence the limited choice of therapeutic options? Do we further validate the markers in the next trials or move on, incorporate the markers for patient selection or stratification, aim at improving the modestly effective treatments by adding new drugs, and develop alternative therapy strategies for patients selected for their bad predictor?