ReviewBiopreservation and biobanking2018
Lessons Learned During Three Decades of Operations of Two Prospective Bioresources.
Review in Biopreservation and biobanking, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Utilization Patterns of Hospital Biobank Samples: Time to First Use and Material-Specific Demand.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Current Assessment of Existing Biospecimen Use in Population-Based Cancer Research.Biopreservation and biobanking · 2026Article
- The Cooperative Human Tissue Network of the National Cancer Institute: Supporting Cancer Research for 35 Years.Molecular cancer therapeutics · 2023Article
- The Use of Human Tissues for Research: What Investigators Need to Know.Alternatives to laboratory animals : ATLA · 2022Article
- The Availability of Human Biospecimens to Support Biomarker Research.Biomarker insights · 2022Review
- The Andalusian Registry of Donors for Biomedical Research: Five Years of History.Biotech (Basel (Switzerland)) · 2021Article
- Biospecimen Utilization: A Critical Challenge in Global Bioresource/Biobanking Operations.Biopreservation and biobanking · 2019Article
- Ensuring Effective Utilization of Biospecimens: Design, Marketing, and Other Important Approaches.Biopreservation and biobanking · 2019Article
- The Utilization of Biospecimens: Impact of the Choice of Biobanking Model.Biopreservation and biobanking · 2019Article
- The Importance of Human Tissue Bioresources in Advancing Biomedical Research.Biopreservation and biobanking · 2019Article
- Biological, Medical, and Other Tissue Variables Affecting Biospecimen Utilization.Biopreservation and biobanking · 2019Article
- Commentary on Improving Biospecimen Utilization by Classic Biobanks: Identifying Past and Minimizing Future Mistakes.Biopreservation and biobanking · 2019Article
- Issues in the Use of Human Tissues to Support Precision Medicine.Journal of health care for the poor and underserved · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Prospective collection is a model through which biospecimens are provided for research. Using this model, biospecimens are collected based on real-time requests from the research community instead of being collected based on the prediction of future requests. We describe the lessons learned by two bioresources that have operated successfully using a prospective model for over three decades. Our goal is to improve other bioresources by increasing utilization of biospecimens that honor consented donors who provide biospecimens to the research community; this provides strong evidence of stewardship of the public trust. The operation of these sites requires flexibility, close communication, and cooperation with the investigator in developing a standard operating procedure (protocol) based on the investigator's needs described in their initial request. If practicable, almost any preparation can be provided, including fresh (nonfrozen) biospecimens and tissue blots. A quality management system includes rigorous quality control of the specific biospecimens provided to an investigator. The informatics approach focuses on the investigator, the investigator's request, and the biospecimens collected for the investigator; the informatics focus of classic biobanks is on the biospecimens collected to match expected future requests. These lessons have been incorporated into our current operations. Standard investigator agreements (e.g., indemnification and no unapproved biospecimen transfers to third parties) replace material transfer agreements. We have operated under the prospective model of the Cooperative Human Tissue Network (CHTN), which has been successful and has provided over 1.2 million biospecimens since it began in 1987. These tissues have supported over 4300 peer-reviewed scientific articles. Since 2012, about 1000 publications have indicated support by CHTN tissues; their average citation rate is 31 with an H factor of 61. Also, during this period, 114 patents cited the CHTN. We also describe disadvantages of prospective bioresources (e.g., inadequate distribution of rare tissues, biospecimens not immediately available, and delayed clinical outcomes).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.