Literature DB >> 15717019

Biomarkers and surrogate markers: an FDA perspective.

Russell Katz1.   

Abstract

Interest is increasing rapidly in the use of surrogate markers as primary measures of the effectiveness of investigational drugs in definitive drug trials. Many such surrogate markers have been proposed as potential candidates for use in definitive effectiveness trials of agents to treat neurologic or psychiatric disease, but as of this date, there are no such markers that have been adequately "validated," that is, shown to predict the effect of the treatment on the clinical outcome of interest. While the current law and regulations permit the United States Food and Drug Administration to base the approval of a drug product on a determination the effect of the drug on an unvalidated surrogate marker (that is, one for which it is not known that an effect on the surrogate actually predicts the desired clinical benefit), there are a number of difficulties in interpreting trials that use surrogate markers as primary measures of drug effect. In this article, the relevant regulatory context will be discussed, as well as the epistemological problems related to the interpretation of clinical trials in which unvalidated surrogate markers are used as primary outcomes.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15717019      PMCID: PMC534924          DOI: 10.1602/neurorx.1.2.189

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  NeuroRx        ISSN: 1545-5343


  13 in total

1.  Are surrogate markers adequate to assess cardiovascular disease drugs?

Authors:  R Temple
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1999-08-25       Impact factor: 56.272

2.  Evaluating surrogate endpoints.

Authors:  Michael D Hughes
Journal:  Control Clin Trials       Date:  2002-12

3.  Slowing the progression of Alzheimer disease: methodologic issues.

Authors:  P Leber
Journal:  Alzheimer Dis Assoc Disord       Date:  1997       Impact factor: 2.703

Review 4.  Surrogate end points in clinical trials: are we being misled?

Authors:  T R Fleming; D L DeMets
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  1996-10-01       Impact factor: 25.391

5.  Effect of fluoride treatment on the fracture rate in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis.

Authors:  B L Riggs; S F Hodgson; W M O'Fallon; E Y Chao; H W Wahner; J M Muhs; S L Cedel; L J Melton
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1990-03-22       Impact factor: 91.245

6.  Using serial registered brain magnetic resonance imaging to measure disease progression in Alzheimer disease: power calculations and estimates of sample size to detect treatment effects.

Authors:  N C Fox; S Cousens; R Scahill; R J Harvey; M N Rossor
Journal:  Arch Neurol       Date:  2000-03

7.  End points and United States Food and Drug Administration approval of oncology drugs.

Authors:  John R Johnson; Grant Williams; Richard Pazdur
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2003-04-01       Impact factor: 44.544

8.  An [18F]dopa-PET and clinical study of the rate of progression in Parkinson's disease.

Authors:  P K Morrish; G V Sawle; D J Brooks
Journal:  Brain       Date:  1996-04       Impact factor: 13.501

9.  Short-term correlations between clinical and MR imaging findings in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis.

Authors:  Marco Rovaris; Giancarlo Comi; David Ladkani; Jerry S Wolinsky; Massimo Filippi
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2003-01       Impact factor: 3.825

10.  Mortality and morbidity in patients receiving encainide, flecainide, or placebo. The Cardiac Arrhythmia Suppression Trial.

Authors:  D S Echt; P R Liebson; L B Mitchell; R W Peters; D Obias-Manno; A H Barker; D Arensberg; A Baker; L Friedman; H L Greene
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1991-03-21       Impact factor: 91.245

View more
  104 in total

Review 1.  Integrating ADNI results into Alzheimer's disease drug development programs.

Authors:  Jeffrey L Cummings
Journal:  Neurobiol Aging       Date:  2010-05-05       Impact factor: 4.673

Review 2.  Biomarkers for Alzheimer's disease: academic, industry and regulatory perspectives.

Authors:  Harald Hampel; Richard Frank; Karl Broich; Stefan J Teipel; Russell G Katz; John Hardy; Karl Herholz; Arun L W Bokde; Frank Jessen; Yvonne C Hoessler; Wendy R Sanhai; Henrik Zetterberg; Janet Woodcock; Kaj Blennow
Journal:  Nat Rev Drug Discov       Date:  2010-07       Impact factor: 84.694

3.  Con: Can biomarkers be gold standards in Alzheimer's disease?

Authors:  Kenneth Rockwood
Journal:  Alzheimers Res Ther       Date:  2010-06-25       Impact factor: 6.982

Review 4.  Central nervous system drug development: an integrative biomarker approach toward individualized medicine.

Authors:  B Gomez-Mancilla; E Marrer; J Kehren; A Kinnunen; G Imbert; R Hillebrand; M Bergström; M E Schmidt
Journal:  NeuroRx       Date:  2005-10

Review 5.  Advancing outcome measures for the new era of drug development in cystic fibrosis.

Authors:  Nicole Mayer-Hamblett; Bonnie W Ramsey; Richard A Kronmal
Journal:  Proc Am Thorac Soc       Date:  2007-08-01

6.  Next Generation Vaccine Biomarkers workshop October 30-31, 2014--Ottawa, Canada.

Authors:  Susan M Twine; Kelly M Fulton; John Spika; Marc Ouellette; Jennifer F Raven; J Wayne Conlan; Lakshmi Krishnan; Luis Barreto; James C Richards
Journal:  Hum Vaccin Immunother       Date:  2015       Impact factor: 3.452

Review 7.  Study design issues in evaluating immune biomarkers.

Authors:  Ronald J Bosch; Xinyan Zhang; Netanya G Sandler
Journal:  Curr Opin HIV AIDS       Date:  2013-03       Impact factor: 4.283

Review 8.  Methods and challenges in quantitative imaging biomarker development.

Authors:  Richard G Abramson; Kirsteen R Burton; John-Paul J Yu; Ernest M Scalzetti; Thomas E Yankeelov; Andrew B Rosenkrantz; Mishal Mendiratta-Lala; Brian J Bartholmai; Dhakshinamoorthy Ganeshan; Leon Lenchik; Rathan M Subramaniam
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2015-01       Impact factor: 3.173

9.  Advanced MRI: translation from animal to human in brain tumor research.

Authors:  Bradford A Moffat; Craig J Galbán; Alnawaz Rehemtulla
Journal:  Neuroimaging Clin N Am       Date:  2009-11       Impact factor: 2.264

Review 10.  Current and future uses of neuroimaging for cognitively impaired patients.

Authors:  Gary W Small; Susan Y Bookheimer; Paul M Thompson; Greg M Cole; S-C Huang; Vladimir Kepe; Jorge R Barrio
Journal:  Lancet Neurol       Date:  2008-02       Impact factor: 44.182

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.