Literature DB >> 28510101

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

Amanda Rush1, Kevin Spring2,3,4, Jennifer A Byrne5,6.   

Abstract

There are concerns that a substantial proportion of published research data is not reproducible, which may partially explain the frequent failure to translate pre-clinical results to clinical care. High-quality cancer biospecimens are needed for robust, reproducible research findings, with most researchers obtaining these specimens from cancer biobanks or tumour banks. This review provides an overview of the types of quality control (QC) activities conducted within cancer biobanks that pertain to biospecimen quality and of biospecimen quality reporting tools, including SPREC and BRISQ. We examine how QC assay results and other biospecimen data are communicated from biobanks to researchers, and whether these activities lead to improved biospecimen quality reporting within the literature and/or to improved research outcomes. We also discuss operational factors that limit QC activities within biobanks and evidence gaps requiring further research. In summary, whereas the provision of quality biospecimens is a common aim of cancer biobanks, QC activities remain underreported and are rarely discussed in the literature, compared with other aspects of biobank operations. Further research is required to determine how biobanks can most efficiently optimise biospecimen quality, and how communication between biobanks and researchers can be improved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Biobank; Biospecimen quality; Cancer; Quality control; Reporting; Research reproducibility

Year:  2015        PMID: 28510101      PMCID: PMC5418485          DOI: 10.1007/s12551-015-0178-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Biophys Rev        ISSN: 1867-2450


  70 in total

1.  Workshop on laboratory protocol standards for the Molecular Methods Database.

Authors:  Tomas Klingström; Larissa Soldatova; Robert Stevens; T Erik Roos; Morris A Swertz; Kristian M Müller; Matúš Kalaš; Patrick Lambrix; Michael J Taussig; Jan-Eric Litton; Ulf Landegren; Erik Bongcam-Rudloff
Journal:  N Biotechnol       Date:  2012-06-02       Impact factor: 5.079

2.  Biobanking and international interoperability: samples.

Authors:  Michael Kiehntopf; Michael Krawczak
Journal:  Hum Genet       Date:  2011-07-15       Impact factor: 4.132

3.  Obligation for cell line authentication: appeal for concerted action.

Authors:  Peter Lichter; Heike Allgayer; Helmut Bartsch; Norbert Fusenig; Kari Hemminki; Magnus von Knebel Doeberitz; Bruno Kyewski; Anthony B Miller; Harald zur Hausen
Journal:  Int J Cancer       Date:  2010-01-01       Impact factor: 7.396

4.  Biobank classification in an Australian setting.

Authors:  Amanda Rush; Jeffrey H Christiansen; Jake P Farrell; Susan M Goode; Rodney J Scott; Kevin J Spring; Jennifer A Byrne
Journal:  Biopreserv Biobank       Date:  2015-06       Impact factor: 2.300

5.  An online tool for improving biospecimen data element reporting.

Authors:  Stefanie Cheah; Simon Dee; Alexandra Cole; Lise Matzke; Sheila O'Donoghue; Peter H Watson
Journal:  Biopreserv Biobank       Date:  2012-12       Impact factor: 2.300

6.  A Minimum Data Set for Sharing Biobank Samples, Information, and Data: MIABIS.

Authors:  Loreana Norlin; Martin N Fransson; Mikael Eriksson; Roxana Merino-Martinez; Maria Anderberg; Sanela Kurtovic; Jan-Eric Litton
Journal:  Biopreserv Biobank       Date:  2012-08       Impact factor: 2.300

7.  Influence of evolution in tumor biobanking on the interpretation of translational research.

Authors:  Rebecca O Barnes; Michelle Parisien; Leigh C Murphy; Peter H Watson
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2008-12       Impact factor: 4.254

8.  Return of research results from genomic biobanks: cost matters.

Authors:  Marianna J Bledsoe; Ellen Wright Clayton; Amy L McGuire; William E Grizzle; P Pearl O'Rourke; Nikolajs Zeps
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2012-08-30       Impact factor: 8.822

9.  Resistance to fluid shear stress is a conserved biophysical property of malignant cells.

Authors:  J Matthew Barnes; Jones T Nauseef; Michael D Henry
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-12-03       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 10.  Molecular profiling of childhood cancer: Biomarkers and novel therapies.

Authors:  Federica Saletta; Carol Wadham; David S Ziegler; Glenn M Marshall; Michelle Haber; Geoffrey McCowage; Murray D Norris; Jennifer A Byrne
Journal:  BBA Clin       Date:  2014-06-28
View more
  3 in total

Review 1.  Enriching Personalized Endometrial Cancer Research with the Harmonization of Biobanking Standards.

Authors:  Meera Adishesh; Dharani K Hapangama
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2019-11-05       Impact factor: 6.639

2.  Gene expression of cytokinesis regulators PRC1, KIF14 and CIT has no prognostic role in colorectal and pancreatic cancer.

Authors:  Vojtech Hanicinec; Veronika Brynychova; Jachym Rosendorf; Richard Palek; Vaclav Liska; Martin Oliverius; Zdenek Kala; Beatrice Mohelnikova-Duchonova; Ivona Krus; Pavel Soucek
Journal:  Oncol Lett       Date:  2021-06-09       Impact factor: 2.967

3.  Building Research Support Capacity across Human Health Biobanks during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Authors:  Jennifer A Byrne; Jane E Carpenter; Candace Carter; Kathleen Phillips; Stephen Braye; Peter H Watson; Amanda Rush
Journal:  Biomark Insights       Date:  2021-06-14
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.