Translational pathology of neoplasia

Department of Pathology, Division of Anatomic Pathology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA.
Cancer biomarkers: section A of Disease markers (Impact Factor: 1.19). 01/2011; 9(1-6):7-20. DOI: 10.3233/CBM-2011-0159
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT With the increasing use of individualized medical care (personalized medicine) in treating and managing patients with cancer, the utilization of biomarkers in selecting and tailoring such medical approaches also is increasing and becoming more important. Specifically, many therapies are effective against only a subgroup of a specific type of tumors and exposing patients with different non-responsive subgroups of the same tumor to ineffective therapies, not only exposes these patients needlessly to acute and chronic side effects of the therapy, but also adds to the costs of medical care. For example, the Oncotype Dx test for estrogen receptor positive tumors that are node negative has been used to identify low risk tumors for which surgery alone is an adequate therapy. Biomarkers may be used to aid in multiple aspects of medical care related to cancer, including early detection, diagnosis, risk assessment, as well as in predicting the aggressiveness of cancers (i.e., prognosis) and predicting the therapeutic efficacy of treatments (i.e., prediction). Biomarkers may be also used as surrogate endpoints to aid in evaluating therapies and preventive approaches. Types of biomarkers vary greatly and include histopathologic appearance, stage of the lesion, quantitative morphologic features, size of the lesion, metastatic pattern and extent of metastasis, as well as imaging and molecular features. The types of measurements of biomarkers also vary; for example, molecular features can be measured at the DNA, mRNA or protein levels as well as at regulatory levels (e.g., microRNA). The usefulness of each biomarker is limited by its sensitivity and specificity in fulfilling its role (e.g., in early detection) and the requirements of sensitivity and specificity to accomplish specific tasks are affected by multiple variables. For example, both very high specificity and sensitivity of a test are required to screen a population with a low prevalence of a specific tumor. The goal of this manuscript is to introduce the reader to how biomarkers may be used and the limitations on the uses of biomarkers in translational research.


Available from: Upender Manne, May 27, 2015
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Breast cancer is a complex disease characterized by many morphological, clinical, and molecular features. For many years, breast cancer has been classified according to traditional parameters, such as histological type, grade, tumor size, lymph node involvement and vascular invasion, and biomarkers (eg, estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, and epidermal growth factor receptor 2), which are used in patient management. With emerging imaging techniques (ie, digital mammography, tomosynthesis, ultrasound, magnetic resonance imaging, nuclear medicine, and genomic techniques, such as real-time RT-PCR and microarrays), breast cancer diagnostics is going through a significant evolution. Imaging technologies have improved breast cancer diagnosis, survival, and treatment by early detection of primary or metastatic lesions, differentiating benign from malignant lesions and promoting intraoperative surgical guidance and postoperative specimen evaluation. Genomic and transcriptomic technologies make the analysis of gene expression signatures and mutation status possible so that tumors may be classified more accurately with respect to diagnosis and prognosis. The -omic era has also made possible the identification of new biomarkers involved in breast cancer development, survival, and invasion that can be gradually incorporated into clinical testing. These advances in both imaging and genomics contribute to more personalized and predictive patient management. We review the progress made in breast cancer diagnosis and management using these new tools.
    American Journal Of Pathology 08/2013; 9(4). DOI:10.1016/j.ajpath.2013.07.002 · 4.60 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In clinical practice imaging technologies such as computed tomography (CT), positron emission tomography (PET)/CT and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are well-established methods for monitoring metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patients and for assessing therapeutic efficacy. However, several weeks of treatment are required before these technologies can offer any reliable information on effective disease regression, and, in the meanwhile, the patients are exposed to potentially unnecessary therapy. Circulating tumor cells (CTCs) have been shown to be powerful prognostic and predictive markers and provide clinicians with valuable information. However, in one clinical trial, an early change of chemotherapy based on CTC detection did not result in improved survival. Currently, CTC detection outside clinical trials should be limited to selected clinical situations, i.e. increased treatment toxicity or as risk estimation.
    Breast Care 02/2014; 9(1):16-21. DOI:10.1159/000360438 · 0.91 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The availability of human tissues to support biomedical research is critical to advance translational research focused on identifying and characterizing approaches to individualized (personalized) medical care. Providing such tissues relies on three acceptable models - a tissue banking model, a prospective collection model and a combination of these two models. An unacceptable model is the "catch as catch can" model in which tissues are collected, processed and stored without goals or a plan or without standard operating procedures, i.e., portions of tissues are collected as available and processed and stored when time permits. In the tissue banking model, aliquots of tissues are collected according to SOPs. Usually specific sizes and types of tissues are collected and processed (e.g., 0.1 gm of breast cancer frozen in OCT). Using the banking model, tissues may be collected that may not be used and/or do not meet specific needs of investigators; however, at the time of an investigator request, tissues are readily available as is clinical information including clinical outcomes. In the model of prospective collection, tissues are collected based upon investigator requests including specific requirements of investigators. For example, the investigator may request that two 0.15 gm matching aliquots of breast cancer be minced while fresh, put in RPMI media with and without fetal calf serum, cooled to 4°C and shipped to the investigator on wet ice. Thus, the tissues collected prospectively meet investigator needs, all collected specimens are utilized and storage of specimens is minimized; however, investigators must wait until specimens are collected, and if needed, for clinical outcome. The operation of any tissue repository requires well trained and dedicated personnel. A quality assurance program is required which provides quality control information on the diagnosis of a specimen that is matched specifically to the specimen provided to an investigator instead of an overall diagnosis of the specimen via a surgical pathology report. This is necessary because a specific specimen may not match the diagnosis of the case due to many factors such as necrosis, unsuspected tumor invasion of apparently normal tissue, and areas of fibrosis which are mistaken grossly for tumor. Aliquots for quality control (QC) may or may not be collected at the time of collection and in some cases, QC may not occur until specimens are distributed to investigators. In establishing a tumor repository, multiple issues need to be considered. These include the available resources, long term support, space and equipment. The needs of the potential users need to be identified as to the types of tissues and services needed and the annotation expected. Other specific issues to be considered include collection of specimens potentially infected with blood borne pathogens (e.g., hepatitis B), charge back mechanisms, informatics needs and support, and investigator requirements (e.g., recognition of repository contributions in publications). In general, the repository should not perform the research of the investigators, but should provide the infrastructure necessary to support the research of the investigator. Thus, the goals of the repository must be established. Similarly, ethical and regulatory issues must be evaluated. In general, tissue repositories need ethical (e.g., IRB) and privacy (e.g., HIPAA) review. Also, safety issues need to be considered as well as how biohazards will be addressed by investigator-users. Considerations involving the transfer of specimens to other organization usually require a material transfer agreement (MTA). A MTA should address biohazards as well as indemnification. Thus, many issues must be considered and addressed in order to establish and operate successfully a biorepository.
    Cancer biomarkers: section A of Disease markers 01/2011; 9(1-6):531-49. DOI:10.3233/CBM-2011-0183 · 1.19 Impact Factor