Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2023 Oct 4;21(1):383.
doi: 10.1186/s12916-023-03075-3.

The Biomarker Toolkit - an evidence-based guideline to predict cancer biomarker success and guide development

Affiliations

The Biomarker Toolkit - an evidence-based guideline to predict cancer biomarker success and guide development

Katerina-Vanessa Savva et al. BMC Med. .

Abstract

Background: An increased number of resources are allocated on cancer biomarker discovery, but very few of these biomarkers are clinically adopted. To bridge the gap between Biomarker discovery and clinical use, we aim to generate the Biomarker Toolkit, a tool designed to identify clinically promising biomarkers and promote successful biomarker translation.

Methods: All features associated with a clinically useful biomarker were identified using mixed-methodology, including systematic literature search, semi-structured interviews, and an online two-stage Delphi-Survey. Validation of the checklist was achieved by independent systematic literature searches using keywords/subheadings related to clinically and non-clinically utilised breast and colorectal cancer biomarkers. Composite aggregated scores were generated for each selected publication based on the presence/absence of an attribute listed in the Biomarker Toolkit checklist.

Results: Systematic literature search identified 129 attributes associated with a clinically useful biomarker. These were grouped in four main categories including: rationale, clinical utility, analytical validity, and clinical validity. This checklist was subsequently developed using semi-structured interviews with biomarker experts (n=34); and 88.23% agreement was achieved regarding the identified attributes, via the Delphi survey (consensus level:75%, n=51). Quantitative validation was completed using clinically and non-clinically implemented breast and colorectal cancer biomarkers. Cox-regression analysis suggested that total score is a significant driver of biomarker success in both cancer types (BC: p>0.0001, 95.0% CI: 0.869-0.935, CRC: p>0.0001, 95.0% CI: 0.918-0.954).

Conclusions: This novel study generated a validated checklist with literature-reported attributes linked with successful biomarker implementation. Ultimately, the application of this toolkit can be used to detect biomarkers with the highest clinical potential and shape how biomarker studies are designed/performed.

Keywords: Biomarkers; Breast cancer; Clinical utility; Colorectal cancer; Translational research.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Scores and impact factor of successful and stalled breast and colorectal cancer BM publications. A) Bar chart indicating the total average scores between successful. (n=105) and stalled Biomarkers (n=80). B) Bar chart showing the individual average scores in CV, AV and CU categories. C) Bar chart indicating the total average scores between successful (n=132) and stalled CRC Biomarkers (n=123). D) Bar chart showing the individual average scores in CV, AV and CU categories. Asterisks denote the level of significance where ns: P > 0.05 *: P≤ 0.05, **: P ≤0.01, ***: P ≤0.001, ****: P ≤0.0001. All of the evaluated publications were independently scored by two assessors (BC: 50% of the journals by SM and 50% by MS; CRC 50% IP and 50% MK) as a validation of toolkit scoring strategy, with less than 12% difference between original and reviewer 1 and 2 scores, suggesting low inter-rater variability. AV, analytical validity; CV, clinical utility; CU, clinical utility; BM, biomarkers; CRC, colorectal cancer; BC, breast cancer
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Successful and stalled biomarker clinical utility studies. Stacked bar chart showing AV, analytical validity; CE, cost-effectiveness; CUs, clinical usefulness; FEAS, feasibility; HF, human factor; IMPL, implementation; and DA, decisional analysis studies in successful A) BC, B) CRC biomarkers and stalled C) BC and D) CRC biomarkers. BC, breast cancer, CRC, colorectal cancer
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Performance outcomes in successful and stalled breast and CRC biomarkers studies: scatter plot showing PPV, positive predictive value; NPV, negative predictive value; Spec., specificity; Sens, sensitivity; AUROC, area under the curve in A) BC and B) CRC successful (open circles) and stalled (closed circles) biomarkers. BC, breast cancer, CRC, colorectal cancer

References

    1. Sturgeon C, Hill R, Hortin GL, Thompson D. Taking a new biomarker into routine use - a perspective from the routine clinical biochemistry laboratory. Proteomics Clin Appl. 2010;4:892–903. doi: 10.1002/prca.201000073. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Diamandis EP. The failure of protein cancer biomarkers to reach the clinic: why, and what can be done to address the problem? BMC Med. 2012;10:87. doi: 10.1186/1741-7015-10-87. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Ioannidis JPA, Bossuyt PMM. Waste, leaks, and failures in the biomarker pipeline. Clin Chem. 2017;63(5):963–72. doi: 10.1373/clinchem.2016.254649. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Mordente A, Meucci E, Martorana GE, Silvestrini A. Cancer biomarkers discovery and validation: state of the art, problems and future perspectives. Adv Exp Med Biol. 2015;867:9–26. doi: 10.1007/978-94-017-7215-0_2. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Salgado R, Moore H, Martens JWM, Lively T, Malik S, McDermott U, et al. Societal challenges of precision medicine: bringing order to chaos. Eur J Cancer. 2017;84:325–34. doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2017.07.028. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

Substances