BACKGROUND: The Reporting Recommendations for Tumor Marker Prognostic Studies (REMARK) checklist consists of 20 items to report for published tumor marker prognostic studies. It was developed to address widespread deficiencies in the reporting of such studies. In this paper we expand on the REMARK checklist to enhance its use and effectiveness through better understanding of the intent of each item and why the information is important to report. METHODS: REMARK recommends including a transparent and full description of research goals and hypotheses, subject selection, specimen and assay considerations, marker measurement methods, statistical design and analysis, and study results. Each checklist item is explained and accompanied by published examples of good reporting, and relevant empirical evidence of the quality of reporting. We give prominence to discussion of the 'REMARK profile', a suggested tabular format for summarizing key study details. SUMMARY: The paper provides a comprehensive overview to educate on good reporting and provide a valuable reference for the many issues to consider when designing, conducting, and analyzing tumor marker studies and prognostic studies in medicine in general. To encourage dissemination of the Reporting Recommendations for Tumor Marker Prognostic Studies (REMARK): Explanation and Elaboration, this article has also been published in PLoS Medicine.
BACKGROUND: The Reporting Recommendations for Tumor Marker Prognostic Studies (REMARK) checklist consists of 20 items to report for published tumor marker prognostic studies. It was developed to address widespread deficiencies in the reporting of such studies. In this paper we expand on the REMARK checklist to enhance its use and effectiveness through better understanding of the intent of each item and why the information is important to report. METHODS: REMARK recommends including a transparent and full description of research goals and hypotheses, subject selection, specimen and assay considerations, marker measurement methods, statistical design and analysis, and study results. Each checklist item is explained and accompanied by published examples of good reporting, and relevant empirical evidence of the quality of reporting. We give prominence to discussion of the 'REMARK profile', a suggested tabular format for summarizing key study details. SUMMARY: The paper provides a comprehensive overview to educate on good reporting and provide a valuable reference for the many issues to consider when designing, conducting, and analyzing tumor marker studies and prognostic studies in medicine in general. To encourage dissemination of the Reporting Recommendations for Tumor Marker Prognostic Studies (REMARK): Explanation and Elaboration, this article has also been published in PLoS Medicine.
Authors: George Pentheroudakis; Konstantine T Kalogeras; Ralph M Wirtz; Irene Grimani; George Zografos; Helen Gogas; Udo Stropp; Dimitrios Pectasides; Dimosthenis Skarlos; Guido Hennig; Epaminondas Samantas; Dimitrios Bafaloukos; Pavlos Papakostas; Haralabos P Kalofonos; Nicholas Pavlidis; George Fountzilas Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2008-07-31 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: I de Mascarel; F Bonichon; M Durand; L Mauriac; G MacGrogan; I Soubeyran; V Picot; A Avril; J M Coindre; M Trojani Journal: Eur J Cancer Date: 1998-01 Impact factor: 9.162
Authors: Monica M Bertagnolli; Robert S Warren; Donna Niedzwiecki; Elke Mueller; Carolyn C Compton; Mark Redston; Margaret Hall; Hejin P Hahn; Scott D Jewell; Robert J Mayer; Richard M Goldberg; Leonard B Saltz; Massimo Loda Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2009-03-10 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Iman Osman; Herman Yee; Samir S Taneja; Benjamin Levinson; Anne Zeleniuch-Jacquotte; Caroline Chang; Craig Nobert; David M Nanus Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2004-06-15 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: D Loussouarn; L Campion; F Leclair; M Campone; C Charbonnel; G Ricolleau; W Gouraud; R Bataille; P Jézéquel Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2009-06-09 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: Yi Yan; George P Skliris; Carla Penner; Shilpa Chooniedass-Kothari; Charlton Cooper; Zoann Nugent; Anne Blanchard; Peter H Watson; Yvonne Myal; Leigh C Murphy; Etienne Leygue Journal: Breast Cancer Res Date: 2009 Impact factor: 6.466
Authors: Jan P Vandenbroucke; Erik von Elm; Douglas G Altman; Peter C Gøtzsche; Cynthia D Mulrow; Stuart J Pocock; Charles Poole; James J Schlesselman; Matthias Egger Journal: PLoS Med Date: 2007-10-16 Impact factor: 11.069
Authors: L Oliveira-Ferrer; M Kürschner; V Labitzky; D Wicklein; V Müller; G Lüers; U Schumacher; K Milde-Langosch; C Schröder Journal: J Cancer Res Clin Oncol Date: 2015-02-10 Impact factor: 4.553
Authors: Marta Usó; Eloísa Jantus-Lewintre; Silvia Calabuig-Fariñas; Ana Blasco; Eva García Del Olmo; Ricardo Guijarro; Miguel Martorell; Carlos Camps; Rafael Sirera Journal: Oncoimmunology Date: 2016-12-07 Impact factor: 8.110
Authors: Mithu Raychaudhuri; Holger Bronger; Theresa Buchner; Marion Kiechle; Wilko Weichert; Stefanie Avril Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2017-02-08 Impact factor: 4.872