Reporting Recommendations for Tumor Marker Prognostic Studies (REMARK)

US National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD 20892, USA.
British Journal of Cancer (Impact Factor: 4.82). 09/2005; DOI: 10.1093/jnci/dji237
Source: OAI

ABSTRACT Despite years of research and hundreds of reports on tumor markers in oncology, the number of markers that have emerged as clinically useful is pitifully small. Often, initially reported studies of a marker show great promise, but subsequent studies on the same or related markers yield inconsistent conclusions or stand in direct contradiction to the promising results. It is imperative that we attempt to understand the reasons that multiple studies of the same marker lead to differing conclusions. A variety of methodologic problems have been cited to explain these discrepancies. Unfortunately, many tumor marker studies have not been reported in a rigorous fashion, and published articles often lack sufficient information to allow adequate assessment of the quality of the study or the generalizability of study results. The development of guidelines for the reporting of tumor marker studies was a major recommendation of the National Cancer Institute–European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (NCI-EORTC) First International Meeting on Cancer Diagnostics in 2000. As for the successful CONSORT initiative for randomized trials and for the STARD statement for diagnostic studies, we suggest guidelines to provide relevant information about the study design, preplanned hypotheses, patient and specimen characteristics, assay methods, and statistical analysis methods. In addition, the guidelines suggest helpful presentations of data and important elements to include in discussions. The goal of these guidelines is to encourage transparent and complete reporting so that the relevant information will be available to others to help them to judge the usefulness of the data and understand the context in which the conclusions apply.

  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: SMAD4 immunohistochemistry is considered a valuable prognostic marker in colorectal cancer, but individual studies have often been small and the results variable. A meta-analysis could potentially clarify these findings. In September 2014, a Pubmed and Google Scholar search was conducted to find publications that reported the prognostic value of SMAD4 expression. A meta-analysis was performed to clarify the association between SMAD4 expression and survival outcomes. 137 studies were found, of which 13 were considered eligible. The studies consisted of a total of 3800 patients. Three different endpoints were taken into account, namely, overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), and cancer-specific survival (CSS). In addition, the studies were divided into univariate and multivariate analyses. The pooled hazard ratios were given as follows: univariate CSS = 1.75 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.93-3.32; z= 1.69; P= .09]; multivariate CSS = 2.17 (95% CI: 1.56-3.01; z= 4.65; P= .000); univariate DFS = 2.11 (95% CI: 1.36-3.28; z= 3.32; P= .001); multivariate DFS = 2.15 (95% CI: 1.56-3.01; z= 4.65; P= .000); univariate OS and DFS = 2.30 (95% CI: 1.41-3.73; z= 3.36; P= .001); univariate OS = 2.28 (95% CI: 1.30-4.00; z= 2.89; P= .004). The results of the presented meta-analyses indicate that SMAD4 expression status using immunohistochemistry is a prognostic marker for patient survival. Copyright © 2014 Neoplasia Press, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: A subset of patients with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) will develop invasive breast cancer (IBC). To date, there are no effective predictive biomarkers for identifying this subset with worse prognosis whose lesions are essentially indistinguishable histologically from those with favorable outcomes. We hypothesized that measurable parameters that discriminate DCIS from DCIS with concurrent invasion may serve as diagnostic biomarkers (BM) of progressive cancer in situ (CIS). Using a novel imaging-based method of tissue testing, we measured the relative expression levels of three candidate BM proteins specifically implicated in IBC progression - the insulin-like growth factor I receptor (IGF-IR), Ras-related protein 1 (Rap1), and Vav2 oncoprotein. Protein profiles were compared in 42 histologically normal mammary epithelial samples, 71 CIS (35 without/36 with invasion either on diagnostic biopsy or final surgical excision), and 98 IBC of known estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR) and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) status. The levels of the IGF-IR and Rap1 protein expression were significantly elevated in ER-positive (ER+/PR+/-/HER2 -) DCIS relative to normal epithelium (P <0.0001). The IGF-IR protein expression was also significantly up regulated in HER2-positive (ER+/-/PR+/-/HER2+) DCIS relative to normal epithelium (P = 0.0002). IGF-IR and Rap1 protein expression levels were similar among DCIS patients without or with concurrent invasion. Vav2 upregulation in DCIS relative to normal group was not associated with steroid hormone receptor and HER2 status, but was associated with the presence of concurrent invasion, including microinvasion (invasive foci of less than 1 mm). DCIS with high Vav2 were more than twice as likely to progress to invasive cancers as DCIS with low Vav2 (odds ratio, 2.42; 95% CI, 1.26-4-65; P =0.008). Furthermore, a receiver operating characteristic curve analysis revealed moderate ability of Vav2 protein expression measurements in DCIS to predict the existence of invasion concurrent with DCIS (area under the curve, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.59- 0.84). Our novel findings hold promise for utilizing Vav2 protein as a predictive BM for differentiating progressive from non-progressive DCIS.
    01/2014; 2:22. DOI:10.1186/2050-7771-2-22
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Perioperatory chemoradiotherapy (CRT) improves local control and survival in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC). The objective of the current study was to evaluate the addition of bevacizumab (BEV) to preoperative capecitabine (CAP)-based CRT in LARC, and to explore biomarkers for downstaging. Patients (pts) were randomized to receive 5 weeks of radiotherapy 45 Gy/25 fractions with concurrent CAP 825 mg/m(2) twice daily 5 days per week and BEV 5 mg/kg once every 2 weeks (3 doses) (arm A), or the same schedule without BEV (arm B). The primary end point was pathologic complete response (ypCR: ypT0N0). Ninety pts were included in arm A (44) or arm B (46). Grade 3-4 treatment-related toxicity rates were 16% and 13%, respectively. All patients but one (arm A) proceeded to surgery. The ypCR rate was 16% in arm A and 11% in arm B (p =0.54). Fifty-nine percent vs 39% of pts achieved T-downstaging (arm A vs arm B; p =0.04). Serial samples for biomarker analyses were obtained for 50 out of 90 randomized pts (arm A/B: 22/28). Plasma angiopoietin-2 (Ang-2) levels decreased in arm A and increased in arm B (p <0.05 at all time points). Decrease in Ang-2 levels from baseline to day 57 was significantly associated with tumor downstaging (p =0.02). The addition of BEV to CAP-based preoperative CRT has shown to be feasible in LARC. The association between decreasing Ang-2 levels and tumor downstaging should be further validated in customized studies. identifier NCT01043484. Trial registration date: 12/30/2009.
    BMC Cancer 12/2015; 15(1). DOI:10.1186/s12885-015-1053-z · 3.32 Impact Factor

Full-text (2 Sources)

Available from
May 30, 2014