Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24831280›Full record

ArticleClinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research2014

Implementation of validated pharmacodynamic assays in multiple laboratories: challenges, successes, and limitations.

Robert Kinders, Kate Ferry-Galow, Lihua Wang, Apurva K Srivastava, Jiuping Jay Ji, Ralph E Parchment

Abstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Pharmacologic biomarkers in the development of stratified cancer medicine.Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research · 2014
    Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Robert KindersAuthors' Affiliations: Laboratory of Human Toxicology and Pharmacology; National Cancer Target Validation Laboratory, Applied/Developmental Research Directorate, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research and Leidos Biomedical Research, Inc., Frederick, Maryland kindersr@mail.nih.gov.
Kate Ferry-GalowAuthors' Affiliations: Laboratory of Human Toxicology and Pharmacology; National Cancer Target Validation Laboratory, Applied/Developmental Research Directorate, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research and Leidos Biomedical Research, Inc., Frederick, Maryland.
Lihua WangAuthors' Affiliations: Laboratory of Human Toxicology and Pharmacology; National Cancer Target Validation Laboratory, Applied/Developmental Research Directorate, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research and Leidos Biomedical Research, Inc., Frederick, Maryland.
Apurva K SrivastavaAuthors' Affiliations: Laboratory of Human Toxicology and Pharmacology; National Cancer Target Validation Laboratory, Applied/Developmental Research Directorate, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research and Leidos Biomedical Research, Inc., Frederick, Maryland.
Jiuping Jay JiAuthors' Affiliations: Laboratory of Human Toxicology and Pharmacology; National Cancer Target Validation Laboratory, Applied/Developmental Research Directorate, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research and Leidos Biomedical Research, Inc., Frederick, Maryland.
Ralph E ParchmentAuthors' Affiliations: Laboratory of Human Toxicology and Pharmacology; National Cancer Target Validation Laboratory, Applied/Developmental Research Directorate, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research and Leidos Biomedical Research, Inc., Frederick, Maryland.
Leidos Biomedical Research Inc. (United States)Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research · US

Funding

Intramural NIH HHS Z99 CA999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There is a "life cycle" of pharmacodynamic (PD) biomarker assays that guides the development and clinical implementation in our laboratories. The well-recognized elements of analytical assay validation and demonstration of fitness-for-purpose of the biomarker, specimen collection, handling, and assay methods are only a part of the required activities. Assay transfer across laboratories and testing on actual human clinical specimens are vital for understanding assay performance and robustness. In our experience, this patient specimen-centered approach has required assay method modifications, some unexpected, but which were critical to successful implementation in clinical trials. In addition, dispersing assays throughout the National Cancer Institute's clinical trials network has required the development of calibrator and control materials as well as formal training courses for smooth implementation. One measure of success of this approach has been that a number of the assays developed at NCI's Frederick National Laboratory have ultimately reached the stage of commercialization, enabling wide accessibility of the PD biomarker assays by the research community. See all articles in this ccr focus section, "Progress in pharmacodynamic endpoints."

Indexed as

Antineoplastic AgentsBiomarkers, TumorClinical Laboratory TechniquesHumansLaboratoriesNational Cancer Institute (U.S.)NeoplasmsReproducibility of ResultsSpecimen HandlingUnited StatesAntineoplastic AgentsBiomarkers, Tumor

Identifiers

PMID24831280
PMCPMC4096894
OpenAlexW1977345811

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.