[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: In this review, OVA1® (Vermillion, Inc., Austin, TX), the first in vitro diagnostic multivariate index assay (IVDMIA) of protein biomarkers cleared by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), is used to explain the concept behind IVDMIA, the use of multiple markers to improve clinical performance of a diagnostic tool, and the key considerations in the development of IVDMIA.
Reviews in obstetrics and gynecology 01/2012; 5(1):35-41.
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: This article describes the principles of marker research with prospective studies along with examples for diagnostic tumor markers. A plethora of biomarkers have been claimed as useful for the early detection of cancer. However, disappointingly few biomarkers were approved for the detection of unrecognized disease, and even approved markers may lack a sound validation phase. Prospective studies aimed at the early detection of cancer are costly and long-lasting and therefore the bottleneck in marker research. They enroll a large number of clinically asymptomatic subjects and follow-up on incident cases. As invasive procedures cannot be applied to collect tissue samples from the target organ, biomarkers can only be determined in easily accessible body fluids. Marker levels increase during cancer development, with samples collected closer to the occurrence of symptoms or a clinical diagnosis being more informative than earlier samples. Only prospective designs allow the serial collection of pre-diagnostic samples. Their storage in a biobank Upgrades cohort studies to serve for both, marker discovery and validation. Population-based cohort studies, which may collect a wealth of data, are commonly conducted with just one baseline investigation lacking serial samples. However, they can provide valuable information about factors that influence the marker level. Screening programs can be employed to archive serial samples but require significant efforts to collect samples and auxiliary data for marker research. Randomized controlled trials have the highest level of evidence in assessing a biomarker's benefit against usual care and present the most stringent design for the validation of promising markers as well as for the discovery of new markers. In summary, all kinds of prospective studies can benefit from a biobank as they can serve as a platform for biomarker research. This article is part of a Special Issue entitled: Biomarkers: A Proteomic Challenge.
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Ovarian cancer is a lethal gynecologic malignancy with greater than 70% of women presenting with advanced stage disease. Despite new treatments, long term outcomes have not significantly changed in the past 30 years with the five-year overall survival remaining between 20% and 40% for stage III and IV disease. In contrast patients with stage I disease have a greater than 90% five-year overall survival. Detection of ovarian cancer at an early stage would likely have significant impact on mortality rate. Screening biomarkers discovered at the bench have not translated to success in clinical trials. Existing screening modalities have not demonstrated survival benefit in completed prospective trials. Advances in high throughput screening are making it possible to evaluate the development of ovarian cancer in ways never before imagined. Data in the form of human "-omes" including the proteome, genome, metabolome, and transcriptome are now available in various packaged forms. With the correct pooling of resources including prospective collection of patient specimens, integration of high throughput screening, and use of molecular heterogeneity in biomarker discovery, we are poised to make progress in ovarian cancer screening. This review will summarize current biomarkers, imaging, and multimodality screening strategies in the context of emerging technologies.
08/2014; 5(3):286-300. DOI:10.4331/wjbc.v5.i3.286
Note: This list is based on the publications in our database and might not be exhaustive.
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.