Tania Castillo-Pelayo1, Sindy Babinszky1, Jodi LeBlanc1, Peter H Watson1,2. 1. 1Tumour Tissue Repository, Trev and Joyce Deeley Research Centre, BC Cancer Agency, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada. 2. 2Office of Biobank Education and Research, Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, BC Cancer Agency and UBC, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Establishing the importance of biobanking in cancer research is important for research funders and for planning health research infrastructure. This study delineates the importance of biobanking to the cancer research landscape in Canada and relative to other forms of health research infrastructure. METHODS: The Cancer Research Society (CRS) is a Canadian organization with a broad mission and national portfolio that funds studies across the spectrum of cancer research. We selected all 35 investigators who received CRS grants in the 2010/11 competition and then analyzed their publications from 2010 to 2014. Articles were categorized by overall research area, acknowledged source of funding, specific scientific focus, and the presence of any data that involved an 'indicator' (human biospecimens, cell lines, animal models, advanced microscopy, flow cell sorters, and next generation sequencing) of dependence on different kinds of health research infrastructures. Publications involving biobanking and utilizing biospecimens were further classified by biospecimen provenance and type of biospecimen used. RESULTS: These investigators generated 502 (from a total of 749) papers that were related to the field of cancer research. Amongst 445 papers that contained primary data, we found no significant differences between CRS funded and 'other funded' papers in terms of biospecimen use, which occurred in 38% of articles. Overall biospecimens were mostly obtained directly from patients (17%), or indirectly from biorepositories (31%) and hospitals (46%). The proportions of studies using other tools was as follows: 54% cell lines, 32% animal models, 14% advanced microscopy, 14% flow sorters, and 8% next generation sequencing. The spectrum of research was very similar to the overall profile of cancer research in Canada in 2010. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that biorepositories that coordinate the activity of biobanking rank amongst the most important of established health research infrastructures as contributors to research publications.
BACKGROUND: Establishing the importance of biobanking in cancer research is important for research funders and for planning health research infrastructure. This study delineates the importance of biobanking to the cancer research landscape in Canada and relative to other forms of health research infrastructure. METHODS: The Cancer Research Society (CRS) is a Canadian organization with a broad mission and national portfolio that funds studies across the spectrum of cancer research. We selected all 35 investigators who received CRS grants in the 2010/11 competition and then analyzed their publications from 2010 to 2014. Articles were categorized by overall research area, acknowledged source of funding, specific scientific focus, and the presence of any data that involved an 'indicator' (human biospecimens, cell lines, animal models, advanced microscopy, flow cell sorters, and next generation sequencing) of dependence on different kinds of health research infrastructures. Publications involving biobanking and utilizing biospecimens were further classified by biospecimen provenance and type of biospecimen used. RESULTS: These investigators generated 502 (from a total of 749) papers that were related to the field of cancer research. Amongst 445 papers that contained primary data, we found no significant differences between CRS funded and 'other funded' papers in terms of biospecimen use, which occurred in 38% of articles. Overall biospecimens were mostly obtained directly from patients (17%), or indirectly from biorepositories (31%) and hospitals (46%). The proportions of studies using other tools was as follows: 54% cell lines, 32% animal models, 14% advanced microscopy, 14% flow sorters, and 8% next generation sequencing. The spectrum of research was very similar to the overall profile of cancer research in Canada in 2010. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that biorepositories that coordinate the activity of biobanking rank amongst the most important of established health research infrastructures as contributors to research publications.
Authors: William E Grizzle; Marianna J Bledsoe; Sameer Al Diffalha; Dennis Otali; Katherine C Sexton Journal: Biopreserv Biobank Date: 2019-06 Impact factor: 2.300
Authors: Lise A M Matzke; Sindy Babinszky; Alex Slotty; Anna Meredith; Tania Castillo-Pelayo; Marianne K Henderson; Daniel Simeon-Dubach; Brent Schacter; Peter H Watson Journal: Biopreserv Biobank Date: 2016-08-30 Impact factor: 2.300
Authors: Cassandra A Hathaway; Erin M Siegel; Christine H Chung; Smitha Pabbathi; Jennifer Vidrine; Susan Vadaparampil; Shelley S Tworoger Journal: PLoS One Date: 2021-02-05 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Matthew C Hernandez; Lin Yang; Jennifer L Leiting; Takaaki Sugihara; John R Bergquist; Tommy Ivanics; Rondell Graham; Mark J Truty Journal: Transl Oncol Date: 2018-09-28 Impact factor: 4.243