A pathway and approach to biomarker validation and qualification for osteoarthritis clinical trials

Current Drug Targets

Volumn 11, Issue 5, 2010, Pages 536-545

  Hunter, David J ^a   Losina, Elena ^b   Guermazi, Ali ^c   Burstein, Deb ^d   Lassere, Marissa N ^e   Kraus, Virginia ^f  

^a NEW ENGLAND BAPTIST HOSPITAL   (United States)

^b BRIGHAM AND WOMEN S HOSPITAL   (United States)

^c BOSTON UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^d BETH ISRAEL DEACONESS MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^e ST GEORGE HOSPITAL   (Australia)

^f DUKE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Biochemical marker; Biomarkers; Imaging; Intervention; Osteoarthritis; Qualification; Surrogate; Validation

Indexed keywords

BIOCHEMICAL MARKER; DISEASE MODIFYING ANTIRHEUMATIC DRUG; RISEDRONIC ACID;

CLINICAL PATHWAY; CLINICAL TRIAL; DRUG EFFICACY; DRUG SAFETY; FALSE NEGATIVE RESULT; FEASIBILITY STUDY; HUMAN; JOINT CAVITY; JOINT RADIOGRAPHY; OSTEOARTHRITIS; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; REVIEW; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; VALIDATION PROCESS;

BIOLOGICAL MARKERS; CLINICAL TRIALS AS TOPIC; DRUG AND NARCOTIC CONTROL; DRUG DISCOVERY; HUMANS; MODELS, ORGANIZATIONAL; OSTEOARTHRITIS; TREATMENT OUTCOME; VALIDATION STUDIES AS TOPIC;

EID: 77951068899     PISSN: 13894501     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2174/138945010791011947     Document Type: Review

References (53)

1. Kluft C. Principles of use of surrogate markers and endpoints. Maturitas 2004; 47(4): 293-298 (Pubitemid 38520115)
2. Wagner JA. Overview of biomarkers and surrogate endpoints in drug development. Disease Markers 2002; 18(2): 41-46
3. Cummings J, Ward TH, Greystoke A, Ranson M, Dive C. Biomarker method validation in anticancer drug development. [Review] [103 refs]. Br J Pharmacol 2008; 153(4): 646-656
4. Richter WS. Imaging biomarkers as surrogate endpoints for drug development. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imag 2006; 33(Suppl 1): 6-10.
5. DiMasi JA, Hansen RW, Grabowski HG. The price of innovation: new estimates of drug development costs. J Health Economics 2003; 22(2): 151-185
6. Berndt E, Gottschalk A, Strobeck M. Opportunities for improving the drug development process: results from a survey of industry and FDA. MIT-FDA-Industry White Paper. http://web mit edu/cbi/docs/berndt-et-al6-3-05 pdf 2006 [cited 2009 Mar 17];Available from: URL: http://web.mit.edu/cbi/docs/berndt-et-al6-3- 05.pdf
7. Bingham CO, III, Buckland-Wright JC, Garnero P, et al. Risedronate decreases biochemical markers of cartilage degradation but does not decrease symptoms or slow radiographic progression in patients with medial compartment osteoarthritis of the knee: results of the two-year multinational knee osteoarthritis structural arthritis study. Arthritis Rheumatism 2006; 54(11): 3494-3507
8. Temple R. Are surrogate markers adequate to assess cardiovascular disease drugs? JAMA 1999; 282(8): 790-795
9. NIH Definitions Working Group. Biomarkers and surrogate endpoints in clinical research: definitions and conceptual model. In: Downing G, editor. Biomarkers and Surrogate Endpoints: Clinical Research and Applications Amsterdam: Elsevier; 2000; p. 1-9.
10. Goodsaid FM, Frueh FW, Mattes W. Strategic paths for biomarker qualification. Toxicology 2008; 245(3): 219-223
11. NIH-FDA Conference: Biomarkers and Surrogate Endpoints: Advancing Clinical Research and Applications. Abstracts. Disease Markers 1998; 14(4): 187-334.
12. Lesko LJ, Atkinson AJ Jr. Use of biomarkers and surrogate endpoints in drug development and regulatory decision making: criteria, validation, strategies. [Review] [61 refs]. Annu Rev Pharmacol Toxicol 2001; 41: 347-366
13. Biomarkers Definitions Working Group. Biomarkers and surrogate endpoints: preferred definitions and conceptual framework. Clin Pharmacol Therapeutics 2001; 69(3): 89-95.
14. Fleming TR. Surrogate endpoints and FDA's accelerated approval process. Health Affairs 2005; 24(1): 67-78.
15. Fleming TR, DeMets DL. Surrogate end points in clinical trials: are we being misled? Ann Intern Med 1996; 125(7): 605-613
16. Prentice RL. Surrogate endpoints in clinical trials: definition and operational criteria. Stat Med 1989; 8(4): 431-440 (Pubitemid 19105891)
17. US Food and Drug Administration. Guidance for industry - pharmacogenomic data submissions. http://wwwfdagov/cder/guidance/6400fnlpdf 2005 [cited 2009 Mar 20];Available from: URL: www.fda.gov/cder/guidance/6400fnl.pdf
18. Lee JW, Devanarayan V, Barrett YC, et al. Fit-for-purpose method development and validation for successful biomarker measurement. Pharm Res 2006; 23(2): 312-328
19. Wagner JA, Williams SA, Webster CJ. Biomarkers and surrogate end points for fit-for-purpose development and regulatory evaluation of new drugs. Clin Pharmacol Therapeutics 2007; 81(1):104-107
20. Goodsaid F, Frueh F. Biomarker qualification pilot process at the US Food and Drug Administration. AAPS J 2007; 9(1): E105-8.
21. Rolan P. The contribution of clinical pharmacology surrogates and models to drug development - a critical appraisal. Br J Clin Pharmacol 1997; 44(3): 219-225 (Pubitemid 27376248)
22. Lassere M. A users guide to measurement in medicine. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2006; 14(Suppl 1): 10-14
23. Boers M, Brooks P, Strand CV, Tugwell P. The OMERACT filter for Outcome Measures in Rheumatology. J Rheumatol 1998; 25(2): 198-199
24. Katz R. Biomarkers and surrogate markers: an FDA perspective. NeuroRx 2004; 1(2): 189-195 (Pubitemid 46604746)
25. Lassere MN. The Biomarker-Surrogacy Evaluation Schema: a review of the biomarker-surrogate literature and a proposal for a criterion-based, quantitative, multidimensional hierarchical levels of evidence schema for evaluating the status of biomarkers as surrogate endpoints. Stat Methods Med Res 2008; 17(3): 303-340
26. Li Z, Chines AA, Meredith MP. Statistical validation of surrogate endpoints: is bone density a valid surrogate for fracture?. J Musculoskeletal Neuronal Interact 2004; 4(1): 64-74. (Pubitemid 38714796)
27. Hughes MD, DeGruttola V, Welles SL. Evaluating surrogate markers. [Review] [22 refs]. J Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndr Hum Retrovirol 1995; 10(Suppl 2): S1-S8.
28. Boissel JP, Collet JP, Moleur P, Haugh M. Surrogate endpoints: a basis for a rational approach. [Review] [19 refs]. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 1992; 43(3): 235-244
29. Consensus report of the Working Group on: "Molecular and biochemical markers of Alzheimer's disease". The ronald and nancy reagan research institute of the Alzheimer's association and the national institute on aging working group. [erratum appears in Neurobiol Aging 1998; 19(3): 285]. Neurobiol Aging 1998; 19(2): 109-116
30. De Gruttola VG, Clax P, DeMets DL, et al. Considerations in the evaluation of surrogate endpoints in clinical trials. summary of a National Institutes of Health workshop. Control Clin Trials 2001; 22(5): 485-502.
31. Weir CJ, Walley RJ. Statistical evaluation of biomarkers as surrogate endpoints: a literature review. Stat Med 2006; 25(2): 183-203.
32. Goodsaid F, Frueh F. Process map proposal for the validation of genomic biomarkers. Pharmacogenomics 2006; 7(5): 773-782
33. Altar CA. The Biomarkers Consortium: on the critical path of drug discovery. Clin Pharmacol Therapeutics 2008; 83(2): 361-364
34. Revkin JH, Shear CL, Pouleur HG, Ryder SW, Orloff DG. Biomarkers in the prevention and treatment of atherosclerosis: need, validation, and future. Pharmacological Rev 2007; 59(1): 40-53.
35. FDA. Critical Path Initiative. http://www fda gov/oc/initiatives/ criticalpath/ 2009 [cited 2009 Mar 17]; Available from: URL: http://www.fda.gov/oc/initiatives/criticalpath/
36. FDA. Critical Path Opportunities Report and List. http://www fda gov/oc/initiatives/criticalpath/reports/opp-reportpdf 2006 [cited 2009 Mar 17]; Available from: URL: http://www.fda.gov/oc/initiatives/criticalpath/reports/opp- report.pdf
37. Food and Drug Administration. Guidance for Industry. Clinical Development Programs for Drugs, Devices, and Biological Products Intended for the Treatment of Osteoarthritis (OA). http://www fda gov/Cber/gdlns/osteo htm 1999 [cited 2009 Mar 17]; Available from: URL: http://www.fda.gov/Cber/gdlns/osteo.htm
38. Mazzuca SA, Brandt KD. Is knee radiography useful for studying the efficacy of a disease-modifying osteoarthritis drug in humans? Rheum Dis Clin North Am 2003; 29(4): 819-830
39. Mazzuca SA, Brandt KD, Buckwalter KA, Lequesne M. Pitfalls in the accurate measurement of joint space narrowing in semiflexed, anteroposterior radiographic imaging of the knee. Arthritis Rheum 2004; 50(8): 2508-2515
40. Alpert JS. The Vioxx debacle. Am J Med 2005; 118(3): 203-204
41. Guermazi A, Burstein D, Conaghan P, et al. Imaging in osteoarthritis. [Review] [183 refs]. Rheum Dis Clin North Am 2008; 34(3): 645-687
42. Hunter DJ, Zhang YQ, Tu X, et al. Change in joint space width: hyaline articular cartilage loss or alteration in meniscus? Arthritis Rheum 2006; 54(8): 2488-2495
43. Hannan MT, Felson DT, Pincus T. Analysis of the discordance between radiographic changes and knee pain in osteoarthritis of the knee. J Rheumatol 2000; 27(6): 1513-1517
44. Gossec L, Hawker G, Davis AM, et al. OMERACT/OARSI initiative to define states of severity and indication for joint replacement in hip and knee osteoarthritis. J Rheumatol 2007; 34(6): 1432-1435
45. Mildvan D, Landay A, De GV, Machado SG, Kagan J. An approach to the validation of markers for use in AIDS clinical trials. [Review] [184 refs]. Clin Infec Dis 1997; 24(5): 764-774
46. Bauer DC, Hunter DJ, Abramson SB, et al. Classification of osteoarthritis biomarkers: a proposed approach. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2006; 14(8): 723-727
47. Zerhouni EA, Sanders CA, von Eschenbach AC. The Biomarkers Consortium: public and private sectors working in partnership to improve the public health. Oncologist 2007; 12(3): 250-252
48. Lassere MN, Johnson KR, Boers M, et al. Definitions and validation criteria for biomarkers and surrogate endpoints: development and testing of a quantitative hierarchical levels of evidence schema. [24 refs]. J Rheumatol 2007; 34(3): 607-615
49. Maruvada P, Srivastava S. Joint National Cancer Institute-Food and Drug Administration workshop on research strategies, study designs, and statistical approaches to biomarker validation for cancer diagnosis and detection. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prevent 2006 Jun;15(6):1078-1082
50. Birmingham K. An inauspicious start for the US National Biospecimen Network. J Clin Investig 2004; 113(3): 320.
51. Hede K. NCI's National Biospecimen Network: too early or too late? J Natl Cancer Inst 2005; 97(4): 247-248
52. Feng Z, Yasui Y. Statistical considerations in combining biomarkers for disease classification. Dis Markers 2004; 20(2): 45-51.
53. McIntosh MW, Pepe MS. Combining several screening tests: optimality of the risk score. Biometrics 2002; 58(3): 657-664