What is a biomarker? Research investments and lack of clinical integration necessitate a review of biomarker terminology and validation schema

References

• Rifai N, Gillette MA, Carr SA. Protein biomarker discovery and validation: the long and uncertain path to clinical utility. Nat Biotechnol 2006;24:971–83.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anderson NL. The clinical plasma proteome: a survey of clinical assays for proteins in plasma and serum. Clin Chem 2010;56:177–85.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Group BDW. Biomarkers and surrogate endpoints: preferred definitions and conceptual framework. Clin Pharmacol Ther 2001;69:89–95.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DeGruttola VG, Clax P, DeMets DL, Downing GJ, Elenberg SS, Friedmann L, . Considerations in the evaluation of surrogate endpoints in clinical trails: summary of a national institutes of health workshop. Control Clin Trials 2001;22: 485–502.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Wagner JA. Overview of biomarkers and surrogate endpoints in drug development. Disease Markers 2002;18:41–6.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boissel J-P, Collet J-P, Moleur P, Haugh M. Surrogate endpoints: a basis for a rational approach. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 1992;43:235–44.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Katz R. Biomarkers and surrogate markers: an FDA perspective. Journal of the American Society for NeuroTherapeutics 2004;1:189–95.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Johnson JR, Williams G, Pazdur R. End points and united states food and drug approval on oncology drugs. J Clin Oncol 2003;21:1404–11.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• , Wied CCG-dKritsidima M, Elferink AJA. The validity of biomarkers as surrogate endpoints in Alzheimer’s disease by means of the quantitative surrogate validation level of evidence scheme (QSVLES). J Nutr Health Aging 2009; 13:376–87.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lassere MN. The biomarker-surrogacy evaluation schema: a review of the biomarker-surrogate literature and a proposal for criterion-based, quantitative, multidimensional hierarchial levels of evidence schema for evaluating the status of biomarkers as surrogate endpoints. Stat Methods Med Res 2008;17:303–40.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pepe MS, Etzioni R, Feng Z, Potter JD, Thompson ML, Thornquist M, . Phases of biomarker development for early detection of cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 2001;93:1054–61.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Feng Z, Prentice R, Srivastava S. Research issues and strategies for genomic and proteomic biomaker discovery and validation: a statistical perspective. Pharmacogenomics 2004;5:709–19.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cook NR. Statistical evaluation of the prognostic versus diagnostic models: beyond the ROC curve. Clin Chem 2008;54:17–23.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dupuy A, Simon RM. Critical review of published microarray studies for cancer outcome and guidelines on statistical analysis and reporting. J Natl Cancer Inst 2007;99:147–57.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tahara H, Sato M, Thurin M, Wang E, Butterfield LH, Disis ML, . Emerging concepts in biomarker discovery; the US-Japan workshop on immunological molecular markers in oncology. J Transl Med 2009;7:45.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mullins C, Lucia MS, Hayward SW, Lee JY, Levitt JM, Lin VK, . A comprehensive approach toward novel serum biomarkers for benign prostatic hyperplasia: the MPSA consortium. J Urol 2008;179:1243–56.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hlatky MA, Greenland P, Arnett DK, Ballantyne CM, Cirqui MH, Elkind MSV, . Criteria for evaluation of novel markers of cardiovascular risk: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association. Circulation 2009;119:2408–16.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ransohoff DF. How to improve reliability and efficiency of research about molecular markers: roles of phases, guidelines, and study design J Clin Epidemiol 2007;60:1205–19.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Butterfield LH, Disis ML, Fox BA, Lee PP, Khleif SN, Thurin M, . A systemic approach to biomarker discovery; preamble to the “iSBTc-FDA taskforce on immunotherapy biomarkers”. J Trans Med 2008;6:81.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Osborne M. Breast cancer prevention – biomarkers and intervention. National Cancer Institute, 1986; Project Number: 5P01CA38401-03.
   Google Scholar
• Bowden DM. Primate resource and biomarker development. National Institute of Aging 1986; Project Number: Contract.
   Google Scholar
• Chatterjee B. Age and hormone dependent regulation of hepatic protein. National Institute on Aging, 1986; Project Number: 2R01AG003527-04.
   Google Scholar
• Hede K. $104 million proteomics initiative gets green light. J Natl Cancer Inst 2005;97:1324–5.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Goldberg KB. Advisors reject NCI’s $89 million plan for proteomics as too much too soon. Cancer Lett 2005;31: 1–10.
   Google Scholar
• Food and Drug Administration Department of Health and Human Services, Approval based on a surrogate endpoint or on an effect on a clinical endpoint other than survival or irreversible morbidity, 2009;5:21CFR314.510.
   Google Scholar
• Simon R. Lost in translation: problems and pitfalls in translating laboratory observations into clinical utility. Eur J Cancer 2008;44:2707–13.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mankoff SP, Brander C, Ferrone S, Marincola FM. Lost in translation: obstacles to translational medicine. J Trans Med 2004;2:14.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Simon R. The use of genomics in clinical trial design. Clin Cancer Res 2008;14:5984–93.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pepe MS, Feng Z, Janes H, Bossuyt PM, Potter JD. Pivotal evaluation of the accuracy of a biomarker used for classification or prediction: standards for study design. J Natl Cancer Inst 2008;100:1432–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bossuyt PM, Reitsma JB, Burns DE, Gatsonis CA, Glasziou PP, Irwig LM, . Towards complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy: the STARD initiative. Ann Intern Med 2003;138:40–4.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shane LM, Altman DG, Sauerbrei W, Taube SE, Gion M, Clark GM. Reporting recommendations for tumour marker prognostic studies (REMARK). J Natl Cancer Inst 2005;97: 1180–4.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Brazma A, Hingamp P, Quackenbush J, Sherlock G, Spellman P, Stoeckert C, . Minimum information about a microarray experiment (MIAME)-towards standards for microarray data. Nat Genet 2001;29:365–71.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pepe MS, Feng Z, Longton G, Koopmeiners J. Conditional estimation of sensitivity and specificity from a phase 2 biomarker study allowing early termination for futility. Stat Med 2009;28:762–79.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lijmer JG, Leeflang M, Bossuyt PMM. Proposal for phased evaluation of medical tests. Med Decis Making 2009;29: E13–E21.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar