Biospecimen reporting for improved study quality

Biopreservation and Biobanking

Volumn 9, Issue 1, 2011, Pages 57-70

  Moore, Helen M ^a   Kelly, Andrea ^b   Jewell, Scott D ^c   McShane, Lisa M ^a   Clark, Douglas P ^d   Greenspan, Renata ^e   Hainaut, Pierre ^f   Hayes, Daniel F ^g   Kim, Paula ^h   Mansfield, Elizabeth ⁱ   Potapova, Olga ^j   Riegman, Peter ^k   Rubinstein, Yaffa ^l   Seijo, Edward ^m   Somiari, Stella ⁿ   Watson, Peter ^o   Weier, Heinz Ulrich ^p   Zhu, Claire ^a   Vaught, Jim ^a  

^a NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE   (United States)

^b Rose Li and Associates Inc   (United States)

^c VAN ANDEL RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (United States)

^d JOHNS HOPKINS HOSPITAL   (United States)

^e WALTER REED ARMY MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^f INTERNATIONAL AGENCY FOR RESEARCH ON CANCER   (France)

^g UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN COMPREHENSIVE CANCER CENTER   (United States)

^h TRAC Translating Research Across Communities   (United States)

ⁱ CENTER FOR DEVICES AND RADIOLOGICAL HEALTH   (United States)

^j Cureline Inc   (United States)

^k ERASMUS MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^l NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH   (United States)

^m H LEE MOFFITT CANCER CENTER AND RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (United States)

ⁿ WINDBER RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (United States)

^o UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA   (Canada)

^p LAWRENCE BERKELEY NATIONAL LABORATORY   (United States)

more..

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BODY FLUID; CLINICAL LABORATORY; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; LABORATORY DIAGNOSIS; LIFE CYCLE; PATHOLOGIST; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY CONTROL; STORAGE TEMPERATURE;

EID: 79953825108     PISSN: 19475535     EISSN: 19475543     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1089/bio.2010.0036     Document Type: Article

References (11)

1. Srinivasan M, Sedmak D, Jewell S. Effect of fixatives and tissue processing on the content and integrity of nucleic acids. Am J Pathol 2002;161:1961-1971. (Pubitemid 35434840)
2. Moore HM, Compton, CC, Lim MD, et al. Biospecimen Research Network Symposium: Advancing Cancer Research through Biospecimen Science. Cancer Res 2009;69:6770-6772.
3. Apweiler R, Aslanidis C, Deufel T, et al. Approaching clinical proteomics: current state and future fields of application in cel-lular proteomics. Cytometry A 2009;75:816-832.
4. Apweiler R, Aslanidis C, Deufel T, et al. Approaching clinical proteomics: current state and future fields of application in fluid proteomics. Clin Chem Lab Med 2009;47:724-744.
5. Espina V, Muelle C, Edmiston K, et al. Tissue is alive: new technologies are needed to address the problems of protein biomarker pre-analytical variability. Proteomics Clin Appl 2009;3:874-882.
6. Ransohoff DF, Gourlay ML. Sources of bias in specimens for research about molecular markers for cancer. J Clin Oncol 2010;28:698-704.
7. Beatty BG, Bryant R, Wang W, et al. HER-2/neu detection in fine-needle aspirates of breast cancer: fluorescence in situ hy-bridization and immunocytochemical analysis. Am J Clin Pathol 2004;122:246-255. (Pubitemid 38971358)
8. McShane LM, Altman DG, Sauerbrei W, et al. Statistics Sub-committee of the NCI-EORTC Working Group on Cancer Di-agnostics. Reporting recommendations for tumor marker prognostic studies (REMARK). J Natl Cancer Inst 2005;97:1180-1184.
9. von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, et al. STROBE Initiative. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. J Clin Epidemiol 2008;61:344-349. (Pubitemid 351289042)
10. Betsou F, Lehmann S, Ashton G, et al. Standard preanalytical coding for biospecimens: defining the sample PREanalytical code. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2010;19:1004-1011.
11. Secko DM, Preto N, Niemeyer S, et al. Informed consent in biobank research: a deliberative approach to the debate. Soc Sci Med 2009;68:781-789.