Translational Research Working Group developmental pathway for biospecimen-based assessment modalities

Clinical Cancer Research

Volumn 14, Issue 18, 2008, Pages 5672-5677

  Srivastava, Sudhir ^a,b   Gray, Joe W ^a,c   Reid, Brian J ^a,d   Grad, Oren ^a,e   Greenwood, Addison ^a,b   Hawk, Ernest T ^a,b,f  

^a Translational Research Working Group

^b NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE   (United States)

^c LAWRENCE BERKELEY NATIONAL LABORATORY   (United States)

^d USA

^e Science and Technology Policy Institute   (United States)

^f UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MD ANDERSON CANCER CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

TRASTUZUMAB; TUMOR MARKER;

CANCER CONTROL; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER RESEARCH; CANCER SCREENING; CANCER THERAPY; FLUORESCENCE IN SITU HYBRIDIZATION; HEALTH CARE ORGANIZATION; HEALTH INSURANCE; HUMAN; PATIENT ASSESSMENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROGNOSIS; REVIEW; TREATMENT RESPONSE; ARTICLE; COMPUTER PROGRAM; EVALUATION; GOVERNMENT REGULATION; INTERDISCIPLINARY COMMUNICATION; NEOPLASM; PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT; REPRODUCIBILITY; UNITED STATES;

EVALUATION STUDIES AS TOPIC; GOVERNMENT REGULATION; HUMANS; INTERDISCIPLINARY COMMUNICATION; NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH (U.S.); NEOPLASMS; PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SOFTWARE DESIGN; TUMOR MARKERS, BIOLOGICAL; UNITED STATES;

EID: 53249144494     PISSN: 10780432     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-08-1267     Document Type: Review

References (11)

1. Nass SJ, Moses HL, editors. Committee on Developing Biomarker-Based Tools for Cancer Screening, Diagnosis, and Treatment. Cancer Biomarkers: The Promises and Challenges of Improving Detection and Treatment. Washington (DC): Institute of Medicine; 2007.
2. Hawk ET, Matrisian LM, Nelson WG, et al. The Translational Research Working Group developmental pathways: introduction and overview. Clin Cancer Res 2008:14:5664-71.
3. Pepe MS, Etzioni R, Feng Z, et al. Phases of biomarker development for early detection of cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 2001;93:1054-61.
4. Ransohoff DF. Rules of evidence for cancer molecular-marker discovery and validation. Nat Rev Cancer. 2004;4:309-14.
5. Ransohoff DF. Bias as a threat to the validity of cancer molecular-marker research. Nat Rev Cancer 2005; 5:142-9.
6. Paik S, Shak S, Tang G, et al. A multigene assay to predict recurrence of tamoxifen-treated, nodenegative breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2004;351: 2817-26.
7. Paik S, Tang G, Shak S, et al. Gene expression and benefit of chemotherapy in women with node-negative, estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2006;24:3726-34.
8. van Dekken H, Pinkel D, Mullikin J, Gray JW. Enzymatic production of single-stranded DNA as a target for fluorescence in situ hybridization. Chromosoma 1988;97:1-5.
9. Sokolova IA, Hailing KC, Jenkins RB, et al. The development of a multitarget, multicolor fluorescence in situ hybridization assay for the detection of urothelial carcinoma in urine. J Mol Diagn 2000;2: 116-23.
10. Hailing KC. Vysis UroVysion for the detection of urothelial carcinoma. Expert Rev Mol Diagn 2003;3: 507-19.
11. Erratum in: Expert Rev Mol Diagn 2004; 4:266.