Literature DB >> 21364690

Biomarker studies: a call for a comprehensive biomarker study registry.

Fabrice Andre1, Lisa M McShane, Stefan Michiels, David F Ransohoff, Douglas G Altman, Jorge S Reis-Filho, Daniel F Hayes, Lajos Pusztai.   

Abstract

Tumor biomarker studies may generate insights into the biological characteristics that drive the clinical behavior of a cancer. Publication bias and hidden multiple hypotheses testing distort the assessment of the true value of biomarkers. Publication bias from preferential reporting of 'positive' findings is well recognized. Hidden multihypothesis testing arises from several biomarkers being tested by different teams using the same samples. The more hypotheses (that is, biomarker association with outcome) tested, the greater the risk of false-positive findings. These biases inflate the potential clinical validity and utility of published biomarkers while negative results often remain hidden. Trial registries have been developed where all phase II and phase III trials should be listed regardless of study outcome. However, such steps have not been taken to reduce such bias in tumor biomarker research. We propose that a registry should be created for biomarker studies initially focused on studies that use specimens from randomized trials. Further development could include nonrandomized studies and deposition of raw data similar to existing genomic data repositories. The benefits of a comprehensive biomarker study registry include more balanced evaluation of proposed markers, fewer false positive leads in research, and hopefully more rapid identification of promising candidate biomarkers.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21364690     DOI: 10.1038/nrclinonc.2011.4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol        ISSN: 1759-4774            Impact factor:   66.675


  22 in total

1.  Clinical trial registration: a statement from the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors.

Authors:  Catherine De Angelis; Jeffrey M Drazen; Frank A Frizelle; Charlotte Haug; John Hoey; Richard Horton; Sheldon Kotzin; Christine Laine; Ana Marusic; A John P M Overbeke; Torben V Schroeder; Hal C Sox; Martin B Van Der Weyden
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2004-09-08       Impact factor: 91.245

2.  Development and validation of therapeutically relevant multi-gene biomarker classifiers.

Authors:  Richard Simon
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2005-06-15       Impact factor: 13.506

Review 3.  Tumor marker utility grading system: a framework to evaluate clinical utility of tumor markers.

Authors:  D F Hayes; R C Bast; C E Desch; H Fritsche; N E Kemeny; J M Jessup; G Y Locker; J S Macdonald; R G Mennel; L Norton; P Ravdin; S Taube; R J Winn
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  1996-10-16       Impact factor: 13.506

4.  REporting recommendations for tumor MARKer prognostic studies (REMARK).

Authors:  Lisa M McShane; Douglas G Altman; Willi Sauerbrei; Sheila E Taube; Massimo Gion; Gary M Clark
Journal:  Nat Clin Pract Oncol       Date:  2005-08

Review 5.  Primer: an evidence-based approach to prognostic markers.

Authors:  Douglas G Altman; Richard D Riley
Journal:  Nat Clin Pract Oncol       Date:  2005-09

6.  Selective reporting biases in cancer prognostic factor studies.

Authors:  Panayiotis A Kyzas; Konstantinos T Loizou; John P A Ioannidis
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2005-07-20       Impact factor: 13.506

7.  Ki67 expression and docetaxel efficacy in patients with estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer.

Authors:  Frédérique Penault-Llorca; Fabrice André; Christine Sagan; Magali Lacroix-Triki; Yves Denoux; Veronique Verriele; Jocelyne Jacquemier; Marie Christine Baranzelli; Frederic Bibeau; Martine Antoine; Nicole Lagarde; Anne-Laure Martin; Bernard Asselain; Henri Roché
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2009-04-20       Impact factor: 44.544

8.  Expression patterns and predictive value of phosphorylated AKT in early-stage breast cancer.

Authors:  F Andre; R Nahta; R Conforti; T Boulet; M Aziz; L X H Yuan; F Meslin; M Spielmann; G Tomasic; L Pusztai; G N Hortobagyi; S Michiels; S Delaloge; F J Esteva
Journal:  Ann Oncol       Date:  2007-09-05       Impact factor: 32.976

9.  Trial publication after registration in ClinicalTrials.Gov: a cross-sectional analysis.

Authors:  Joseph S Ross; Gregory K Mulvey; Elizabeth M Hines; Steven E Nissen; Harlan M Krumholz
Journal:  PLoS Med       Date:  2009-09-08       Impact factor: 11.069

10.  Why most published research findings are false.

Authors:  John P A Ioannidis
Journal:  PLoS Med       Date:  2005-08-30       Impact factor: 11.613

View more
  40 in total

1.  Improving validation practices in "omics" research.

Authors:  John P A Ioannidis; Muin J Khoury
Journal:  Science       Date:  2011-12-02       Impact factor: 47.728

2.  Clinical trials: The silent minority--unpublished data on cancer care.

Authors:  Daniel F Hayes
Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol       Date:  2011-10-04       Impact factor: 66.675

3.  Reporting recommendations for tumor marker prognostic studies (REMARK): explanation and elaboration.

Authors:  Douglas G Altman; Lisa M McShane; Willi Sauerbrei; Sheila E Taube
Journal:  BMC Med       Date:  2012-05-29       Impact factor: 8.775

4.  Reporting Recommendations for Tumor Marker Prognostic Studies (REMARK): explanation and elaboration.

Authors:  Douglas G Altman; Lisa M McShane; Willi Sauerbrei; Sheila E Taube
Journal:  PLoS Med       Date:  2012-05-29       Impact factor: 11.069

Review 5.  Reproducibility of research and preclinical validation: problems and solutions.

Authors:  Lajos Pusztai; Christos Hatzis; Fabrice Andre
Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol       Date:  2013-10-01       Impact factor: 66.675

Review 6.  Designing deep learning studies in cancer diagnostics.

Authors:  Andreas Kleppe; Ole-Johan Skrede; Sepp De Raedt; Knut Liestøl; David J Kerr; Håvard E Danielsen
Journal:  Nat Rev Cancer       Date:  2021-01-29       Impact factor: 60.716

7.  The Challenges of Validating in Precision Medicine: The Case of Excision Repair Cross-Complement Group 1 Diagnostic Testing.

Authors:  Brianna Barsanti-Innes; Spencer Phillips Hey; Jonathan Kimmelman
Journal:  Oncologist       Date:  2016-10-24

8.  Leveling the playing field: bringing development of biomarkers and molecular diagnostics up to the standards for drug development.

Authors:  George Poste; David P Carbone; David R Parkinson; Jaap Verweij; Stephen M Hewitt; J Milburn Jessup
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2012-03-15       Impact factor: 12.531

9.  Computational modelling of anti-angiogenic therapies based on multiparametric molecular imaging data.

Authors:  Benjamin Titz; Kevin R Kozak; Robert Jeraj
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2012-09-13       Impact factor: 3.609

Review 10.  Publication of tumor marker research results: the necessity for complete and transparent reporting.

Authors:  Lisa M McShane; Daniel F Hayes
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2012-10-15       Impact factor: 44.544

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.