Leveling the playing field: Bringing development of biomarkers and molecular diagnostics up to the standards for drug development

Clinical Cancer Research

Volumn 18, Issue 6, 2012, Pages 1515-1523

  Poste, George ^a   Carbone, David P ^b   Parkinson, David R ^c   Verweij, Jaap ^d   Hewitt, Stephen M ^e   Jessup, J Milburn ^e  

^a ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b VANDERBILT INGRAM CANCER CENTER   (United States)

^c Nodality Inc   (United States)

^d ERASMUS MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^e NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BIOLOGICAL MARKER; CRIZOTINIB; EPIDERMAL GROWTH FACTOR RECEPTOR; ERLOTINIB; IMATINIB; VEMURAFENIB;

ACCREDITATION; CHRONIC MYELOID LEUKEMIA; CLINICAL LABORATORY; CLINICAL PRACTICE; CLINICAL RESEARCH; DATA BASE; DRUG DEVELOPMENT; DRUG RESEARCH; DRUG RESPONSE; GASTROINTESTINAL TUMOR; GENE MUTATION; HUMAN; LUNG NON SMALL CELL CANCER; MELANOMA; MOLECULAR DIAGNOSIS; PHARMACOGENOMICS; PHASE 1 CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); PHASE 2 CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); PHASE 3 CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); PHASE 4 CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); PRIORITY JOURNAL; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); REGISTER; REVIEW; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; STANDARDIZATION; VALIDITY;

BIOLOGICAL SPECIMEN BANKS; CLINICAL TRIALS AS TOPIC; DATABASES AS TOPIC; DRUG DESIGN; HUMANS; MOLECULAR DIAGNOSTIC TECHNIQUES; NEOPLASMS; PATHOLOGY, MOLECULAR; TUMOR MARKERS, BIOLOGICAL; VALIDATION STUDIES AS TOPIC;

EID: 84858169566     PISSN: 10780432     EISSN: 15573265     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-11-2206     Document Type: Review

References (66)

1. Cancer Genome Atlas Research Network. Integrated genomic analyses of ovarian carcinoma. Nature 2011;474:609-15.
2. Verhaak RG, Hoadley KA, Purdom E,Wang V, Qi Y, Wilkerson MD, et al Cancer Genome Atlas Research Network. Integrated genomic analysis identifies clinically relevant subtypes of glioblastoma characterized by abnormalities in PDGFRA, IDH1, EGFR, and NF1. Cancer Cell 2010;17:98-110.
3. Cancer Genome Atlas Research Network. Comprehensive genomic characterization defines human glioblastoma genes and core pathways. Nature 2008;455:1061-8.
4. Mullighan CG, Collins-Underwood JR, Phillips LA, Loudin MG, Liu W, Zhang J, et al. Rearrangement of CRLF2 in B-progenitor- and Down syndrome-associated acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Nat Genet 2009;41:1243-6.
5. Harvey RC, Mullighan CG, Wang X, Dobbin KK, Davidson GS, Bedrick EJ, et al. Identification of novel cluster groups in pediatric high-risk B-precursor acute lymphoblastic leukemia with gene expression profiling: correlation with genome-wide DNA copy number alterations, clinical characteristics, and outcome. Blood 2010;116:4874-84.
6. Mullighan CG, Zhang J, Harvey RC, Collins-Underwood JR, Schulman BA, Phillips LA, et al. JAK mutations in high-risk childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2009;106:9414-8.
7. Zhang J, Mullighan CG, Harvey RC, Wu G, Chen X, Edmonson M, et al. Key pathways are frequently mutated in high-risk childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia: a report from the Children's Oncology Group. Blood 2011;118:3080-7.
8. Parsons DW, Jones S, Zhang X, Lin JC, Leary RJ, Angenendt P, et al. An integrated genomic analysis of human glioblastoma multiforme. Science 2008;321:1807-12.
9. Wood LD, Parsons DW, Jones S, Lin J, Sjöblom T, Leary RJ, et al. The genomic landscapes of human breast and colorectal cancers. Science 2007;318:1108-13. (Pubitemid 350134889)
10. Jones S, Zhang X, Parsons DW, Lin JC, Leary RJ, Angenendt P, et al. Core signaling pathways in human pancreatic cancers revealed by global genomic analyses. Science 2008;321:1801-6.
11. Schilsky RL, Doroshow JH, LeBlanc M, Conley BA. Development and use of integral assays in clinical trials. Clin Cancer Res 2012;18:1540-6.
12. Hewitt SM, Badve SS, True LD. Impact of preanalytic factors on the design and application of integral biomarkers for directing patient therapy. Clin Cancer Res 2012;18:1524-30.
13. Williams PM, Lively TG, Jessup JM, Conley BA. Bridging the gap: moving predictive and prognostic assays from research to clinical use. Clin Cancer Res 2012;18:1531-9.
14. Meshinchi S, Hunger SP, Aplenc R, Adamson PC, Jessup JM. Lessons learned from the Investigational Device Exemption review of Children's Oncology Group Trial AAML1031. Clin Cancer Res 2012;18:1547-54.
15. Andre F, Nowak F, Arnedos M, Lacroix L, Viens P, Calvo F. Biomarker discovery, development, and implementation in France: a report from the French National Cancer Institute and cooperative groups. Clin Cancer Res 2012;18:1555-60.
16. Atkinson AJ Jr, Colburn WA, DeGruttola VG, DeMets DL, Downing GJ, Hoth DF, et al. Biomarkers and surrogate endpoints: preferred definitions and conceptual framework. Clin Pharmacol Ther 2007;69:89-95.
17. U.S. Food and Drug Administration [homepage on the Internet]. Draft guidance for industry, clinical investigators, and Food and Drug Administration staff - design considerations for pivotal clinical investigations for medical devices [cited 2011 Sept 20]. Available from: http://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/ DeviceRegulationandGuidance/GuidanceDocuments/ucm081752.htm.
18. U.S. Food and Drug Administration [homepage on the Internet]. Draft guidance for industry and Food and Drug Administration staff-in vitro companion diagnostic devices [cited 2011 Jul 13]. Available from: http://www.fda.gov/ medicaldevices/deviceregulationandguidance/guidancedocuments/ucm262292.htm.
19. U.S. Government Printing Office [homepage on the Internet]. Title 42-Public Health. Chapter IV-Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, Department of Health and Human Services (continued). Part 493-Laboratory requirements. Available from: http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/waisidx-04/ 42cfr493-04.html.
20. Simon RM, Paik S, Hayes DF. Use of archived specimens in evaluation of prognostic and predictive biomarkers. J Natl Cancer Inst 2009;101:1446-52.
21. McShane LM, Altman DG, Sauerbrei W, Taube SE, Gion M, Clark GMStatistics Subcommittee of the NCI-EORTC Working Group on Cancer Diagnostics. Reporting recommendations for tumor marker prognostic studies (REMARK). J Natl Cancer Inst 2005;97:1180-4. (Pubitemid 41258223)
22. Yan H, Parsons DW, Jin G, McLendon R, Rasheed BA, Yuan W, et al. IDH1 and IDH2 mutations in gliomas. N Engl J Med 2009;360:765-73.
23. Westgard JO. The need for a system of quality standards for modern quality management. Scand J Clin Lab Invest 1999;59:483-6. (Pubitemid 30056737)
24. Lee JW, Devanarayan V, Barrett YC, Weiner R, Allinson J, Fountain S, et al. Fit-for-purpose method development and validation for successful biomarker measurement. Pharm Res 2006;23:312-28. (Pubitemid 43237862)
25. Wagner JA. Strategic approach to fit-for-purpose biomarkers in drug development. Annu Rev Pharmacol Toxicol 2008;48:631-51. (Pubitemid 351738166)
26. U.S. Food and Drug Administration [homepage on the Internet] [cited 2011 Oct 30]. Available from: http://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/ DeviceRegulationandGuidance/Overview/default.htm.
27. National Cancer Institute [homepage on the Internet]. Templates for clinical assay development [cited 2011 Oct 30]. Available from: http://cdp.cancer.gov/diagnostics/templates.htm.
28. Grund B, Sabin C. Analysis of biomarker data: logs, odds ratios, and receiver operating characteristic curves. Curr Opin HIV AIDS 2010;5:473-9.
29. Jung K, Stephan C, Lein M, Henke W, Schnorr D, Brux B, et al. Analytical performance and clinical validity of two free prostate-specific antigen assays compared. Clin Chem 1996;42:1026-33. (Pubitemid 26231408)
30. Jakobsdottir J, Gorin MB, Conley YP, Ferrell RE, Weeks DE. Interpretation of genetic association studies: markers with replicated highly significant odds ratios may be poor classifiers. PLoS Genet 2009;5:e1000337.
31. Cicchetti DV, Koenig K, Klin A, Volkmar FR, Paul R, Sparrow S. From Bayes through marginal utility to effect sizes: a guide to understanding the clinical and statistical significance of the results of autism research findings. J Autism Dev Disord 2011;41:168-74.
32. Deeks JJ, Altman DG. Diagnostic tests 4: likelihood ratios. BMJ 2004;329:168-9.
33. Leeflang MM, Deeks JJ, Gatsonis C, Bossuyt PM; Cochrane Diagnostic Test Accuracy Working Group. Systematic reviews of diagnostic test accuracy. Ann Intern Med 2008;149:889-97.
34. Moreira J, Bisoffi Z, Narváez A, Van den Ende J. Bayesian clinical reasoning: does intuitive estimation of likelihood ratios on an ordinal scale outperform estimation of sensitivities and specificities? J Eval Clin Pract 2008;14:934-40.
35. National Human Genome Research Institute [homepage on the Internet]. Ensuring the safety and effectiveness of new genetic tests. Chapter 2. Promoting safe and effective genetic testing in the United States. A report of the Genetic Testing Task Force of the National Human Genome Research Institute [cited 2011 Oct 30]. Available from: http://www.genome.gov/10002404.
36. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence [homepage on the Internet] [cited 2011 Oct 30]. Available from: http://www.nice.org.uk/.
37. Center for Medical Technology Policy [homepage on the Internet] [cited 2011 Oct 30]. Available from: http://www.cmtpnet.org/.
38. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality [homepage on the Internet] [cited 2011 Oct 30]. Available from: http://www.ahrq.gov/clinic/techix.htm.
39. Evaluation of Genomic Applications in Practice and Prevention [homepage on the Internet] [cited 2011 Oct 30]. Available from: http://www.egappreviews. org/.
40. Blue Cross Blue Shield Association [homepage on the Internet] [cited 2011Oct 30].Available from: http://www.bcbs.com/blueresources/tec/.
41. Blue Cross Blue Shield Association [homepage on the Internet] [cited 2011 Oct 30]. Available from: http://www.bcbs.com/blueresources/tec/vols/25/ epidermal-growth-factor.html.
42. Andre F, McShane LM, Michiels S, Ransohoff DF, Altman DG, Reis-Filho JS, et al. Biomarker studies: a call for a comprehensive biomarker study registry. Nat Rev Clin Oncol 2011;8:171-6.
43. National Cancer Institute [homepage on the Internet] [cited 2011 Nov 26]. Available from: http://cancer.gov.
44. My Cancer Genome [homepage on the Internet] [cited 2011 Nov 26]. Available from: http://www.mycancergenome.org/.
45. HUGO Gene Nomenclature Committee [homepage on the Internet] [cited 2011 Nov 26]. Available from: http://genenames.org.
46. Human Genome Variation Society [homepage on the Internet] [cited 2011 Nov 26]. Available from: http://www.hgvs.org/.
47. Hanahan D, Weinberg RA. Hallmarks of cancer: the next generation. Cell 2011;144:646-74.
48. Demir E, Cary MP, Paley S, Fukuda K, Lemer C, Vastrik I, et al. The BioPAX community standard for pathway data sharing. Nat Biotechnol 2010;28:935-42.
49. Ruebenacker O, Moraru II, Schaff JC, Blinov ML. Integrating BioPAX pathway knowledge with SBML models. IET Syst Biol 2009;3:317-28.
50. Poste G. Bring on the biomarkers. Nature 2011;469:156-7.
51. Moore HM, Compton CC, Alper J, Vaught JB. International approaches to advancing biospecimen science. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2011;20:729-32.
52. Sleijfer S, Verweij J. The price of success: cost-effectiveness of molecularly targeted agents. Clin Pharmacol Ther 2009;85:136-8.
53. Sullivan R, Peppercorn J, Sikora K, Zalcberg J, Meropol NJ, Amir E, et al. Delivering affordable cancer care in high-income countries. Lancet Oncol 2011;12:933-80.
54. O'Brien SG, Guilhot F, Larson RA, Gathmann I, Baccarani M, Cervantes F, et al IRIS Investigators. Imatinib compared with interferon and low-dose cytarabine for newly diagnosed chronic-phase chronic myeloid leukemia. N Engl J Med 2003;348:994-1004. (Pubitemid 36302244)
55. Verweij J, Casali PG, Zalcberg J, LeCesne A, Reichardt P, Blay JY, et al. Progression-free survival in gastrointestinal stromal tumours with high-dose imatinib: randomised trial. Lancet 2004;364:1127-34. (Pubitemid 39296599)
56. Kwak EL, Bang YJ, Camidge DR, Shaw AT, Solomon B, Maki RG, et al. Anaplastic lymphoma kinase inhibition in non-small-cell lung cancer.N Engl J Med 2010;363:1693-703.
57. Chapman PB, Hauschild A, Robert C, Haanen JB, Ascierto P, Larkin J, et al; BRIM-3 Study Group. Improved survival with vemurafenib in melanoma with BRAF V600E mutation. N Engl J Med 2011;364:2507-16.
58. Stewart DJ, Kurzrock R. Cancer: the road to Amiens. J Clin Oncol 2009;27:328-33.
59. Sobrero A, Bruzzi P. Incremental advance or seismic shift? The need to raise the bar of efficacy for drug approval. J Clin Oncol 2009;27:5868-73.
60. I-SPY 2 TRIAL. Available from: http://ispy2.org/.
61. I-SPY 2 TRIAL: Neoadjuvant and personalized adaptive novel agents to treat breast cancer. Available from: http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/ NCT01042379.
62. Barker AD, Sigman CC, Kelloff GJ, Hylton NM, Berry DA, Esserman LJ. I-SPY 2: an adaptive breast cancer trial design in the setting of neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Clin Pharmacol Ther 2009;86:97-100.
63. Kim ES, Herbst RS, Wistuba II, Lee JJ, Blumenschein GR, Tsao A, et al. The BATTLE trial: personalizing therapy for lung cancer. Cancer Discov 2011;1:44-53.
64. Berry DA, Herbst RA, Rubin EH. Reports from the 2010 Clinical and Translational Cancer Research Think Tank Meeting: design strategies for personalized therapy trials. Clin Cancer Res 2012;18:638-44.
65. Grossman I. Routine pharmacogenetic testing in clinical practice: dream or reality? Pharmacogenomics 2007;8:1449-59. (Pubitemid 350162857)
66. Grove A. Rethinking clinical trials. Science 2011;333:1679.