Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27888622›Full record

ReviewOncotarget2017

Quantification and expert evaluation of evidence for chemopredictive biomarkers to personalize cancer treatment.

Shruti Rao, Robert A Beckman, Shahla Riazi, Cinthya S Yabar, Simina M Boca, John L Marshall, Michael J Pishvaian, Jonathan R Brody, Subha Madhavan

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Oncotarget, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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

9 authors.

Shruti RaoInnovation Center for Biomedical Informatics, Georgetown University, Washington, DC, USA.
Robert A BeckmanInnovation Center for Biomedical Informatics, Georgetown University, Washington, DC, USA.
Shahla RiaziInnovation Center for Biomedical Informatics, Georgetown University, Washington, DC, USA.
Cinthya S YabarPancreas, Biliary and Related Cancer Center, Department of Surgery, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Simina M BocaInnovation Center for Biomedical Informatics, Georgetown University, Washington, DC, USA.
John L MarshallDepartment of Oncology, Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, DC, USA.
Michael J PishvaianDepartment of Oncology, Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, DC, USA.
Jonathan R BrodyPancreas, Biliary and Related Cancer Center, Department of Surgery, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Subha MadhavanInnovation Center for Biomedical Informatics, Georgetown University, Washington, DC, USA.

Funding

Georgetown University Center of Excellence in Regulatory Science and Innovation (CERSI)U01FD004319 · FDA · GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY · PI DRETCHEN, KENNETH L, MADHAVAN, SUBHA · 2011 to 2016
$3.8M
MACE2K - Molecular And Clinical Extraction: A Natural Language Processing Tool for Personalized MedicineU01HG008390 · NHGRI · GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY · PI MADHAVAN, SUBHA · 2015 to 2017
$1.5M
Utilizing HuR to optimize the treatment of pancreatic cancerR21CA182692 · NCI · THOMAS JEFFERSON UNIVERSITY · PI BRODY, JONATHAN · 2014 to 2015
$371k
FDA HHS U01 FD004319NCI NIH HHS R21 CA182692NHGRI NIH HHS U01 HG008390
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Predictive biomarkers have the potential to facilitate cancer precision medicine by guiding the optimal choice of therapies for patients. However, clinicians are faced with an enormous volume of often-contradictory evidence regarding the therapeutic context of chemopredictive biomarkers.We extensively surveyed public literature to systematically review the predictive effect of 7 biomarkers claimed to predict response to various chemotherapy drugs: ERCC1-platinums, RRM1-gemcitabine, TYMS-5-fluorouracil/Capecitabine, TUBB3-taxanes, MGMT-temozolomide, TOP1-irinotecan/topotecan, and TOP2A-anthracyclines. We focused on studies that investigated changes in gene or protein expression as predictors of drug sensitivity or resistance. We considered an evidence framework that ranked studies from high level I evidence for randomized controlled trials to low level IV evidence for pre-clinical studies and patient case studies.We found that further in-depth analysis will be required to explore methodological issues, inconsistencies between studies, and tumor specific effects present even within high evidence level studies. Some of these nuances will lend themselves to automation, others will require manual curation. However, the comprehensive cataloging and analysis of dispersed public data utilizing an evidence framework provides a high level perspective on clinical actionability of these protein biomarkers. This framework and perspective will ultimately facilitate clinical trial design as well as therapeutic decision-making for individual patients.

Indexed as

Biomarkers, TumorHumansNeoplasmsPrecision MedicineBiomarkers, Tumorbiocurationclinical utilityevidence frameworkprecision medicinepredictive biomarkers

Identifiers

PMID27888622
PMCPMC5514962

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.