Literature DB >> 22422403

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

George Poste1, David P Carbone, David R Parkinson, Jaap Verweij, Stephen M Hewitt, J Milburn Jessup.   

Abstract

Molecular diagnostics are becoming increasingly important in clinical research to stratify or identify molecularly profiled patient cohorts for targeted therapies, to modify the dose of a therapeutic, and to assess early response to therapy or monitor patients. Molecular diagnostics can also be used to identify the pharmacogenetic risk of adverse drug reactions. The articles in this CCR Focus section on molecular diagnosis describe the development and use of markers to guide medical decisions regarding cancer patients. They define sources of preanalytic variability that need to be minimized, as well as the regulatory and financial challenges involved in developing diagnostics and integrating them into clinical practice. They also outline a National Cancer Institute program to assist diagnostic development. Molecular diagnostic clinical tests require rigor in their development and clinical validation, with sensitivity, specificity, and validity comparable to those required for the development of therapeutics. These diagnostics must be offered at a realistic cost that reflects both their clinical value and the costs associated with their development. When genome-sequencing technologies move into the clinic, they must be integrated with and traceable to current technology because they may identify more efficient and accurate approaches to drug development. In addition, regulators may define progressive drug approval for companion diagnostics that requires further evidence regarding efficacy and safety before full approval can be achieved. One way to accomplish this is to emphasize phase IV postmarketing, hypothesis-driven clinical trials with biological characterization that would permit an accurate definition of the association of low-prevalence gene alterations with toxicity or response in large cohorts.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22422403      PMCID: PMC3307147          DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-11-2206

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Cancer Res        ISSN: 1078-0432            Impact factor:   12.531


  47 in total

1.  Fit-for-purpose method development and validation for successful biomarker measurement.

Authors:  Jean W Lee; Viswanath Devanarayan; Yu Chen Barrett; Russell Weiner; John Allinson; Scott Fountain; Stephen Keller; Ira Weinryb; Marie Green; Larry Duan; James A Rogers; Robert Millham; Peter J O'Brien; Jeff Sailstad; Masood Khan; Chad Ray; John A Wagner
Journal:  Pharm Res       Date:  2006-01-12       Impact factor: 4.200

2.  I-SPY 2: an adaptive breast cancer trial design in the setting of neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

Authors:  A D Barker; C C Sigman; G J Kelloff; N M Hylton; D A Berry; L J Esserman
Journal:  Clin Pharmacol Ther       Date:  2009-05-13       Impact factor: 6.875

3.  Cancer: the road to Amiens.

Authors:  David J Stewart; Razelle Kurzrock
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2008-12-08       Impact factor: 44.544

Review 4.  The price of success: cost-effectiveness of molecularly targeted agents.

Authors:  S Sleijfer; J Verweij
Journal:  Clin Pharmacol Ther       Date:  2009-02       Impact factor: 6.875

5.  Biomarker discovery, development, and implementation in France: a report from the French National Cancer Institute and cooperative groups.

Authors:  Fabrice Andre; Frederique Nowak; Monica Arnedos; Ludovic Lacroix; Patrice Viens; Fabien Calvo
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2012-03-15       Impact factor: 12.531

6.  Analytical performance and clinical validity of two free prostate-specific antigen assays compared.

Authors:  K Jung; C Stephan; M Lein; W Henke; D Schnorr; B Brux; P Schürenkämper; S A Loening
Journal:  Clin Chem       Date:  1996-07       Impact factor: 8.327

7.  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:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2005-08-17       Impact factor: 13.506

8.  JAK mutations in high-risk childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia.

Authors:  Charles G Mullighan; Jinghui Zhang; Richard C Harvey; J Racquel Collins-Underwood; Brenda A Schulman; Letha A Phillips; Sarah K Tasian; Mignon L Loh; Xiaoping Su; Wei Liu; Meenakshi Devidas; Susan R Atlas; I-Ming Chen; Robert J Clifford; Daniela S Gerhard; William L Carroll; Gregory H Reaman; Malcolm Smith; James R Downing; Stephen P Hunger; Cheryl L Willman
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2009-05-22       Impact factor: 11.205

9.  IDH1 and IDH2 mutations in gliomas.

Authors:  Hai Yan; D Williams Parsons; Genglin Jin; Roger McLendon; B Ahmed Rasheed; Weishi Yuan; Ivan Kos; Ines Batinic-Haberle; Siân Jones; Gregory J Riggins; Henry Friedman; Allan Friedman; David Reardon; James Herndon; Kenneth W Kinzler; Victor E Velculescu; Bert Vogelstein; Darell D Bigner
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2009-02-19       Impact factor: 176.079

10.  Interpretation of genetic association studies: markers with replicated highly significant odds ratios may be poor classifiers.

Authors:  Johanna Jakobsdottir; Michael B Gorin; Yvette P Conley; Robert E Ferrell; Daniel E Weeks
Journal:  PLoS Genet       Date:  2009-02-06       Impact factor: 5.917

View more
  15 in total

1.  Lessons learned from the investigational device exemption review of Children's Oncology Group trial AAML1031.

Authors:  Soheil Meshinchi; Stephen P Hunger; Richard Aplenc; Peter C Adamson; J Milburn Jessup
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2012-03-15       Impact factor: 12.531

2.  Impact of preanalytic factors on the design and application of integral biomarkers for directing patient therapy.

Authors:  Stephen M Hewitt; Sunil S Badve; Lawrence D True
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2012-03-15       Impact factor: 12.531

3.  Bridging the gap: moving predictive and prognostic assays from research to clinical use.

Authors:  P Michael Williams; Tracy G Lively; J Milburn Jessup; Barbara A Conley
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2012-03-15       Impact factor: 12.531

4.  Development and use of integral assays in clinical trials.

Authors:  Richard L Schilsky; James H Doroshow; Michael Leblanc; Barbara A Conley
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2012-03-15       Impact factor: 12.531

Review 5.  Methodological requirements for valid tissue-based biomarker studies that can be used in clinical practice.

Authors:  Lawrence D True
Journal:  Virchows Arch       Date:  2014-02-01       Impact factor: 4.064

6.  Bayesian Two-stage Biomarker-based Adaptive Design for Targeted Therapy Development.

Authors:  Xuemin Gu; Nan Chen; Caimiao Wei; Suyu Liu; Vassiliki A Papadimitrakopoulou; Roy S Herbst; J Jack Lee
Journal:  Stat Biosci       Date:  2014-12-04

Review 7.  Implantation and extravillous trophoblast invasion: From rare archival specimens to modern biobanking.

Authors:  Gerit Moser; Berthold Huppertz
Journal:  Placenta       Date:  2017-02-08       Impact factor: 3.481

Review 8.  uPA and PAI-1 as biomarkers in breast cancer: validated for clinical use in level-of-evidence-1 studies.

Authors:  Michael J Duffy; Patricia M McGowan; Nadia Harbeck; Christoph Thomssen; Manfred Schmitt
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res       Date:  2014-08-22       Impact factor: 6.466

9.  Actionable gene expression-based patient stratification for molecular targeted therapy in hepatocellular carcinoma.

Authors:  Jung-Hee Kwon; Namgyu Lee; Jin Young Park; Yun Suk Yu; Jin Pyo Kim; Ji Hye Shin; Dong-Sik Kim; Jae Won Joh; Dae Shick Kim; Kwan Yong Choi; Koo-Jeong Kang; Gundo Kim; Young Ho Moon; Hee Jung Wang
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-06-13       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Criteria for the use of omics-based predictors in clinical trials: explanation and elaboration.

Authors:  Lisa M McShane; Margaret M Cavenagh; Tracy G Lively; David A Eberhard; William L Bigbee; P Mickey Williams; Jill P Mesirov; Mei-Yin C Polley; Kelly Y Kim; James V Tricoli; Jeremy M G Taylor; Deborah J Shuman; Richard M Simon; James H Doroshow; Barbara A Conley
Journal:  BMC Med       Date:  2013-10-17       Impact factor: 11.150

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.