Explore the vast range of titles available.

Biomarkers are playing increasingly important roles in the detection and management of patients with cancer. Despite an enormous number of publications on cancer biomarkers, few of these biomarkers are in widespread clinical use. In this review, we discuss the key steps in advancing a newly discovered cancer candidate biomarker from pilot studies to clinical application. Four main steps are necessary for a biomarker to reach the clinic: analytical validation of the biomarker assay, clinical validation of the biomarker test, demonstration of clinical value from performance of the biomarker test, and regulatory approval. In addition to these 4 steps, all biomarker studies should be reported in a detailed and transparent manner, using previously published checklists and guidelines. Finally, all biomarker studies relating to demonstration of clinical value should be registered before initiation of the study. Application of the methodology outlined above should result in a more efficient and effective approach to the development of cancer biomarkers as well as the reporting of cancer biomarker studies. With rigorous application, all stakeholders, and especially patients, would be expected to benefit.

Background: Updated National Academy of Clinical Biochemistry (NACB) Laboratory Medicine Practice Guidelines for the use of tumor markers in the clinic have been developed. Methods: Published reports relevant to use of tumor markers for 5 cancer sites—testicular, prostate, colorectal, breast, and ovarian—were critically reviewed. Results: For testicular cancer, α-fetoprotein, human chorionic gonadotropin, and lactate dehydrogenase are recommended for diagnosis/case finding, staging, prognosis determination, recurrence detection, and therapy monitoring. α-Fetoprotein is also recommended for differential diagnosis of nonseminomatous and seminomatous germ cell tumors. Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) is not recommended for prostate cancer screening, but may be used for detecting disease recurrence and monitoring therapy. Free PSA measurement data are useful for distinguishing malignant from benign prostatic disease when total PSA is <10 μg/L. In colorectal cancer, carcinoembryonic antigen is recommended (with some caveats) for prognosis determination, postoperative surveillance, and therapy monitoring in advanced disease. Fecal occult blood testing may be used for screening asymptomatic adults 50 years or older. For breast cancer, estrogen and progesterone receptors are mandatory for predicting response to hormone therapy, human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 measurement is mandatory for predicting response to trastuzumab, and urokinase plasminogen activator/plasminogen activator inhibitor 1 may be used for determining prognosis in lymph node–negative patients. CA15-3/BR27–29 or carcinoembryonic antigen may be used for therapy monitoring in advanced disease. CA125 is recommended (with transvaginal ultrasound) for early detection of ovarian cancer in women at high risk for this disease. CA125 is also recommended for differential diagnosis of suspicious pelvic masses in postmenopausal women, as well as for detection of recurrence, monitoring of therapy, and determination of prognosis in women with ovarian cancer. Conclusions: Implementation of these recommendations should encourage optimal use of tumor markers.

Background: Updated National Academy of Clinical Biochemistry Laboratory Medicine Practice Guidelines for the use of tumor markers in the clinic have been developed. Methods: Published reports relevant to use of tumor markers for 4 cancer sites—liver, bladder, cervical, and gastric—were critically reviewed. Results: α-Fetoprotein (AFP) may be used in conjunction with abdominal ultrasound for early detection of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in patients with chronic hepatitis or cirrhosis associated with hepatitis B or C virus infection. AFP concentrations >200 μg/L in cirrhotic patients with typical hypervascular lesions >2 cm in size are consistent with HCC. After a diagnosis of HCC, posttreatment monitoring with AFP is recommended as an adjunct to imaging, especially in the absence of measurable disease. Although several urine markers have been proposed for bladder cancer, none at present can replace routine cystoscopy and cytology in the management of patients with this malignancy. Some may, however, be used as complementary adjuncts to direct more effective use of clinical procedures. Although carcinoembryonic antigen and CA 19-9 have been proposed for use gastric cancer and squamous cell carcinoma antigen for use in cervical cancer, none of these markers can currently be recommended for routine clinical use. Conclusions: Implementation of these recommendations should encourage optimal use of tumor markers for patients with liver, bladder, cervical, or gastric cancers.

ObjectiveTo present an update of the European Group on Tumor Markers guidelines for serum markers in epithelial ovarian cancer.MethodsSystematic literature survey from 2008 to 2013. The articles were evaluated by level of evidence and strength of recommendation.ResultsBecause of its low sensitivity (50–62% for early stage epithelial ovarian cancer) and limited specificity (94–98.5%), cancer antigen (CA) 125 (CA125) is not recommended as a screening test in asymptomatic women. The Risk of Malignancy Index, which includes CA125, transvaginal ultrasound, and menopausal status, is recommended for the differential diagnosis of a pelvic mass. Because human epididymis protein 4 has been reported to have superior specificity to CA125, especially in premenopausal women, it may be considered either alone or as part of the risk of ovarian malignancy algorithm, in the differential diagnosis of pelvic masses, especially in such women. CA125 should be used to monitor response to first-line chemotherapy using the previously published criteria of the Gynecological Cancer Intergroup, that is, at least a 50% reduction of a pretreatment sample of 70 kU/L or greater. The value of CA125 in posttherapy surveillance is less clear. Although a prospective randomized trial concluded that early administration of chemotherapy based on increasing CA125 levels had no effect on survival, European Group on Tumor Markers state that monitoring with CA125 in this situation should occur, especially if the patient is a candidate for secondary cytoreductive surgery.ConclusionsAt present, CA125 remains the most important biomarker for epithelial ovarian cancer, excluding tumors of mucinous origin.

Results between different clinical laboratory measurement procedures (CLMP) should be equivalent, within clinically meaningful limits, to enable optimal use of clinical guidelines for disease diagnosis and patient management. When laboratory test results are neither standardized nor harmonized, a different numeric result may be obtained for the same clinical sample. Unfortunately, some guidelines are based on test results from a specific laboratory measurement procedure without consideration of the possibility or likelihood of differences between various procedures. When this happens, aggregation of data from different clinical research investigations and development of appropriate clinical practice guidelines will be flawed. A lack of recognition that results are neither standardized nor harmonized may lead to erroneous clinical, financial, regulatory, or technical decisions. Standardization of CLMPs has been accomplished for several measurands for which primary (pure substance) reference materials exist and/or reference measurement procedures (RMPs) have been developed. However, the harmonization of clinical laboratory procedures for measurands that do not have RMPs has been problematic owing to inadequate definition of the measurand, inadequate analytical specificity for the measurand, inadequate attention to the commutability of reference materials, and lack of a systematic approach for harmonization. To address these problems, an infrastructure must be developed to enable a systematic approach for identification and prioritization of measurands to be harmonized on the basis of clinical importance and technical feasibility, and for management of the technical implementation of a harmonization process for a specific measurand.

Background: The 1st WHO International Reference Reagents (IRRs) for 6 human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG)-related molecular variants, highly purified and calibrated in substance concentrations by the IFCC Working Group for hCG, permit experimental elucidation of what commercially available hCG methods measure in molar terms and enable assessment of their fitness for clinical purposes. Methods: Pools containing known amounts of the IRRs spiked into normal human serum were issued to participants through the UK National External Quality Assessment Service for hCG for a period of 7 years. Among 16 assays used, 4 recognized only hCG, whereas 6 recognized hCG and its free β-subunit (hCGβ), and 6 recognized hCG, hCGβ, and the beta core fragment. Results: Differences in calibration of current hCG assays are moderate. Mean recovery of the current International Standard (IS), hCG IS 75/589, was 107% (range 93% to 126%), whereas that of the IRR 99/688 for hCG was 139% (range 109%–164%). Between-method variation for the latter (CV 12.3%) was also greater than for IS 75/589 (CV 8.8%). Recognition of hCGβ varied markedly (CV 37%). Most assays overestimated it, but 2 RIAs produced results that were slight underestimations. Recognition of the beta core fragment was even more variable (CV 57%) and was closest to equimolarity for the RIAs. Conclusions: Assays for hCG show considerable variation in their recognition of various forms of hCG, and this variablility is the most important cause of method-related differences in hCG results in serum and an even more important cause of method-related differences in urine measurements. Equimolar recognition of the major hCG isoforms is essential if between-method comparability for hCG is to be improved.

This report presents updated National Academy of Clinical Biochemistry Laboratory Medicine Practice Guidelines summarizing quality requirements for the use of tumor markers. One subcommittee developed guidelines for analytical quality relevant to serum and tissue-based tumor markers in current clinical practice. Two other subcommittees formulated recommendations particularly relevant to the developing technologies of microarrays and mass spectrometry. Prerequisites for optimal use of tumor markers in routine practice include formulation of the correct clinical questions to ensure selection of the appropriate test, adherence to good clinical and laboratory practices (e.g., minimization of the risk of incorrect patient and/or specimen identification, tube type, or timing), use of internationally standardized and well-characterized methods, careful adherence to manufacturer instructions, and proactive and timely reactions to information derived from both internal QC and proficiency-testing specimens. Highly desirable procedures include those designed to minimize the risk of the reporting of erroneous results attributable to interferences such as heterophilic antibodies or hook effects, to facilitate the provision of informative clinical reports (e.g., cumulative and/or graphical reports, appropriately derived reference intervals, and interpretative comments), and when possible to integrate these reports with other patient information through electronic health records. Also mandatory is extensive validation encompassing all stages of analysis before introduction of new technologies such as microarrays and mass spectrometry. Provision of high-quality tumor marker services is facilitated by dialogue involving researchers, diagnostic companies, clinical and laboratory users, and regulatory agencies. Implementation of these recommendations, adapted to local practice, should encourage optimization of the clinical use of tumor markers.

A major application of tumor biomarkers is in serial monitoring of cancer patients, but there are no published guidelines on how to evaluate biomarkers for this purpose. The European Group on Tumor Markers has convened a multidisciplinary panel of scientists to develop guidance on the design of such monitoring trials. The panel proposes a 4-phase model for biomarker-monitoring trials analogous to that in use for the investigation of new drugs. In phase I, biomarker kinetics and correlation with tumor burden are assessed. Phase II evaluates the ability of the biomarker to identify, exclude, and/or predict a change in disease status. In phase III, the effectiveness of tumor biomarker–guided intervention is assessed by measuring patient outcome in randomized trials. Phase IV consists of an audit of the long-term effects after biomarker monitoring has been included into standard patient care. Systematic well-designed evaluations of biomarkers for monitoring may provide a stronger evidence base that might enable their earlier use in evaluating responses to cancer therapy.

Purpose Hypogonadism has been linked with systemic inflammation and opioid use in males with advanced cancer. We aimed to investigate the interaction of gonadal status with systemic inflammation and opioids in determining nutritional status and prognosis in advanced pancreatic cancer. Methods One hundred and seventy-five patients (92 males, 83 postmenopausal females) with unresectable pancreatic cancer were studied. Serum sex steroids (total testosterone [TT], calculated free testosterone [cFT], oestradiol, sex hormone binding globulin), gonadotropins (follicle-stimulating hormone and luteinising hormone) and pro-inflammatory mediators (C-reactive protein [CRP], interleukin-6 [IL-6], soluble tumour necrosis factor receptor 75 [sTNFR75]) were measured, and nutritional assessment and opioid use recorded. Results Seventy-three percent of males were hypogonadal (by cFT definition). cFT correlated positively with BMI ( r 2  = 0.349; p  < 0.001) and grip strength ( r 2  = 0.229; p  = 0.034) and inversely with weight loss ( r 2  = −0.287; p  = 0.007), CRP ( r 2  = −0.426; p  < 0.001) and IL-6 ( r 2  = −0.303; p  = 0.004). CRP ( p  = 0.007), opioid dosage ( p  = 0.009) and BMI ( p  = 0.005) were independent determinants of cFT on ANOVA. Hypogonadal males demonstrated worsened survival compared with eugonadal patients (TT: OR of death = 2.87; p  < 0.001; cFT: OR = 2.26; p  = 0.011). Furthermore, male opioid use was associated with decreased TT ( p  < 0.001) and cFT ( p  < 0.001) and worsened survival (OR = 1.96; p  = 0.012). In contrast, 18% of postmenopausal females exhibited premenopausal (“hyperoestrogenic”) oestradiol levels. Oestradiol correlated positively with sTNFR75 ( r 2  = 0.299; p  = 0.008). CRP ( p  < 0.001) was an independent determinant of oestradiol. Hyperoestrogenic females demonstrated worsened survival compared with eugonadal patients (OR = 2.43; p  = 0.013). Conclusions In males with pancreatic cancer, systemic inflammation and opioid use are associated with hypogonadism. Male hypogonadism and female hyperoestrogenism are associated with shortened survival in advanced pancreatic cancer.