Literature DB >> 24845043

Certification for biobanks: the program developed by the Canadian Tumour Repository Network (CTRNet).

Elizabeth A M Matzke1, Sheila O'Donoghue, Rebecca O Barnes, Helena Daudt, Stefanie Cheah, Aaron Suggitt, John Bartlett, Sambasivarao Damaraju, Randal Johnston, Leigh Murphy, Lois Shepherd, Anne-Marie Mes-Masson, Brent Schacter, Peter H Watson.   

Abstract

Two core aspects of the discipline of biobanking are biospecimen quality and good governance. Meeting the demands of both sample quality and governance can be challenging, especially in a resource limited environment. Frequently, differences between biobank processes reduce the ability for cooperative action and specimen sharing with researchers. In the Canadian context, we have made an attempt to identify these gaps and have provided a framework to support excellence, initially for tumor biobanks. The Canadian Tumour Repository Network (CTRNet) was established with funding from the Canadian Institute of Health Sciences (CIHR) Institute of Cancer Research (ICR) to foster translational research through improved access to high quality tumour biospecimens. Consistent with this mandate, CTRNet has focused on the establishment and deployment of common standards to harmonize biospecimen quality and approaches to governance. More recently, CTRNet has implemented a certification program to communicate these standards in conjunction with simultaneous exposure to education focusing on the rationale and foundations underlying these standards. The CTRNet certification program comprises registration and certification steps as two linked phases. In the registration phase, launched in November 2011, biobanks are registered into the system and individuals complete an introductory educational module. In the subsequent certification phase, the type of biobank is classified and assigned relevant educational modules and adoption of relevant standards of practice is confirmed through review of documentation including policies and protocols that address the CTRNet Required Operational Practices (ROPs). An important feature of the program is that it is intended for all types of tumor biobanks, so the scope and extent of assessment is scaled to the type of biobank. This program will provide an easily adoptable and flexible mechanism to communicate common standards through education and address both quality assurance and governance across the broad spectrum of biobanks.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 24845043     DOI: 10.1089/bio.2012.0026

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Biopreserv Biobank        ISSN: 1947-5543            Impact factor:   2.300


  12 in total

Review 1.  Sense and nonsense in the process of accreditation of a pathology laboratory.

Authors:  Elodie Long-Mira; Kevin Washetine; Paul Hofman
Journal:  Virchows Arch       Date:  2015-09-03       Impact factor: 4.064

2.  A framework for biobank sustainability.

Authors:  Peter H Watson; Sara Y Nussbeck; Candace Carter; Sheila O'Donoghue; Stefanie Cheah; Lise A M Matzke; Rebecca O Barnes; John Bartlett; Jane Carpenter; William E Grizzle; Randal N Johnston; Anne-Marie Mes-Masson; Leigh Murphy; Katherine Sexton; Lois Shepherd; Daniel Simeon-Dubach; Nikolajs Zeps; Brent Schacter
Journal:  Biopreserv Biobank       Date:  2014-02       Impact factor: 2.300

Review 3.  Enhancing translational research in paediatric rheumatology through standardization.

Authors:  Rae S M Yeung; Salvatore Albani; Brian M Feldman; Elizabeth Mellins; Berent Prakken; Lucy R Wedderburn
Journal:  Nat Rev Rheumatol       Date:  2016-09-22       Impact factor: 20.543

4.  Enhancing Cooperation Between Academic Biobanks and Biomedical Industry: Better Mutual Understanding and New Collaborative Models Are Needed.

Authors:  Daniel Simeon-Dubach; Michael H Roehrl; Paul Hofman; Pascal Puchois
Journal:  Biopreserv Biobank       Date:  2020-02-11       Impact factor: 2.300

Review 5.  Biopsies: next-generation biospecimens for tailoring therapy.

Authors:  Mark Basik; Adriana Aguilar-Mahecha; Caroline Rousseau; Zuanel Diaz; Sabine Tejpar; Alan Spatz; Celia M T Greenwood; Gerald Batist
Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol       Date:  2013-06-25       Impact factor: 66.675

6.  Online Training as a Means to Improve the Understanding of Ethical, Legal, and Social Aspects of Biobanking Research: Stakeholder Perspectives from South Africa.

Authors:  Shenuka Singh; Keymanthri Moodley; Rosemary Jean Cadigan
Journal:  Biopreserv Biobank       Date:  2021-12-20       Impact factor: 2.256

Review 7.  A critical analysis of cancer biobank practices in relation to biospecimen quality.

Authors:  Amanda Rush; Kevin Spring; Jennifer A Byrne
Journal:  Biophys Rev       Date:  2015-10-22

8.  Impact of Specimen Heterogeneity on Biomarkers in Repository Samples from Patients with Acute Myeloid Leukemia: A SWOG Report.

Authors:  Era L Pogosova-Agadjanyan; Anna Moseley; Megan Othus; Frederick R Appelbaum; Thomas R Chauncey; I-Ming L Chen; Harry P Erba; John E Godwin; Min Fang; Kenneth J Kopecky; Alan F List; Galina L Pogosov; Jerald P Radich; Cheryl L Willman; Brent L Wood; Soheil Meshinchi; Derek L Stirewalt
Journal:  Biopreserv Biobank       Date:  2017-11-27       Impact factor: 2.256

9.  EPMA position paper in cancer: current overview and future perspectives.

Authors:  Godfrey Grech; Xianquan Zhan; Byong Chul Yoo; Rostyslav Bubnov; Suzanne Hagan; Romano Danesi; Giorgio Vittadini; Dominic M Desiderio
Journal:  EPMA J       Date:  2015-04-15       Impact factor: 6.543

Review 10.  Basic principles of biobanking: from biological samples to precision medicine for patients.

Authors:  Laura Annaratone; Giuseppe De Palma; Giuseppina Bonizzi; Anna Sapino; Gerardo Botti; Enrico Berrino; Chiara Mannelli; Pamela Arcella; Simona Di Martino; Agostino Steffan; Maria Grazia Daidone; Vincenzo Canzonieri; Barbara Parodi; Angelo Virgilio Paradiso; Massimo Barberis; Caterina Marchiò
Journal:  Virchows Arch       Date:  2021-07-13       Impact factor: 4.064

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.