Recommendations for Biomarker Identification and Qualification in Clinical Proteomics

Recommendations about structuring proteomic biomarker studies should increase the probability that such markers will be clinically useful. Clinical proteomics has yielded some early positive results—the identification of potential disease biomarkers—indicating the promise for this analytical approach to improve the current state of the art in clinical practice. However, the inability to verify some candidate molecules in subsequent studies has led to skepticism among many clinicians and regulatory bodies, and it has become evident that commonly encountered shortcomings in fundamental aspects of experimental design mainly during biomarker discovery must be addressed in order to provide robust data. In this Perspective, we assert that successful studies generally use suitable statistical approaches for biomarker definition and confirm results in independent test sets; in addition, we describe a brief set of practical and feasible recommendations that we have developed for investigators to properly identify and qualify proteomic biomarkers, which could also be used as reporting requirements. Such recommendations should help put proteomic biomarker discovery on the solid ground needed for turning the old promise into a new reality.

[1]  Robert V. Hogg,et al.  Probability and Statistical Inference , 1978, An R Companion for the Third Edition of The Fundamentals of Political Science Research.

[2]  Elisabeth Gerver,et al.  Promises and Pitfalls , 1986 .

[3]  A. Gupta,et al.  A Bayesian Approach to , 1997 .

[4]  Donald M. Steinwachs,et al.  Promises and pitfalls of the , 1997 .

[5]  Jason E. Stewart,et al.  Minimum information about a microarray experiment (MIAME)—toward standards for microarray data , 2001, Nature Genetics.

[6]  E. Petricoin,et al.  Use of proteomic patterns in serum to identify ovarian cancer , 2002, The Lancet.

[7]  S. Dudoit,et al.  Comparison of Discrimination Methods for the Classification of Tumors Using Gene Expression Data , 2002 .

[8]  David Moher,et al.  Towards complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy: the STARD initiative. Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy. , 2003, Clinical chemistry.

[9]  Johannes B Reitsma,et al.  The STARD initiative , 2003, The Lancet.

[10]  David Moher,et al.  Towards complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy: the STARD initiative. , 2004, Family practice.

[11]  Edward R. Dougherty,et al.  Is cross-validation valid for small-sample microarray classification? , 2004, Bioinform..

[12]  Jeffrey S. Morris,et al.  The importance of experimental design in proteomic mass spectrometry experiments: some cautionary tales. , 2005, Briefings in functional genomics & proteomics.

[13]  A. Alaiya,et al.  Clinical cancer proteomics: promises and pitfalls. , 2005, Journal of proteome research.

[14]  Viswanath Devanarayan,et al.  Fit-for-Purpose Method Development and Validation for Successful Biomarker Measurement , 2006, Pharmaceutical Research.

[15]  J. Ioannidis.  Why Most Published Research Findings Are False , 2005, PLoS medicine.

[16]  Constantin F. Aliferis,et al.  A comprehensive evaluation of multicategory classification methods for microarray gene expression cancer diagnosis , 2004, Bioinform..

[17]  H. Mischak,et al.  Predicting the clinical outcome of congenital unilateral ureteropelvic junction obstruction in newborn by urinary proteome analysis , 2006, Nature Medicine.

[18]  Steven A Carr,et al.  Protein biomarker discovery and validation: the long and uncertain path to clinical utility , 2006, Nature Biotechnology.

[19]  Douglas B. Kell,et al.  Statistical strategies for avoiding false discoveries in metabolomics and related experiments , 2007, Metabolomics.

[20]  F. Goodsaid,et al.  Grand Rounds in Proteomics at the FDA White Oak, Silver Spring, MD, USA, April 3, 2007 , 2007, Proteomics. Clinical applications.

[21]  S. Pocock,et al.  Guidelines for Reporting Observational Studies , 2007 .

[22]  S. Dudoit,et al.  Multiple Testing Procedures with Applications to Genomics , 2007 .

[23]  Matthias Egger,et al.  The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement: Guidelines for Reporting Observational Studies , 2007, PLoS medicine.

[24]  M. Girolami,et al.  Clinical proteomics: A need to define the field and to begin to set adequate standards , 2007, Proteomics. Clinical applications.

[25]  A. Ganser,et al.  Proteomic patterns predict acute graft-versus-host disease after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. , 2007, Blood.

[26]  Douglas G Altman,et al.  The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. , 2014, International journal of surgery.

[27]  A. Dominiczak,et al.  Body fluid proteomics for biomarker discovery: lessons from the past hold the key to success in the future. , 2007, Journal of proteome research.

[28]  J. Ioannidis.  Why Most Discovered True Associations Are Inflated , 2008, Epidemiology.

[29]  J. Wagner.  Strategic approach to fit-for-purpose biomarkers in drug development. , 2008, Annual review of pharmacology and toxicology.

[30]  Harald Mischak,et al.  Urine in Clinical Proteomics* , 2008, Molecular & Cellular Proteomics.

[31]  D. Chan,et al.  Analytical validation of serum proteomic profiling for diagnosis of prostate cancer: sources of sample bias. , 2008, Clinical chemistry.

[32]  Douglas G Altman,et al.  [The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology [STROBE] statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies]. , 2007, Gaceta sanitaria.

[33]  Harald Mischak,et al.  Urinary proteomics in diabetes and CKD. , 2008, Journal of the American Society of Nephrology : JASN.

[34]  Manuela Buzoianu,et al.  Adjusting for verification bias in diagnostic test evaluation: A Bayesian approach , 2008, Statistics in medicine.

[35]  D Amakye,et al.  A Prototypical Process for Creating Evidentiary Standards for Biomarkers and Diagnostics , 2008, Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics.

[36]  A. Vlahou,et al.  2nd Combined Working Group and Management Committee Meeting of Urine and Kidney Proteomics COST Action 29–30 March 2009, Nafplio, Greece , 2009, Proteomics. Clinical applications.

[37]  Andrea Rotnitzky,et al.  Estimation of the disease-specific diagnostic marker distribution under verification bias , 2009, Comput. Stat. Data Anal..

[38]  Harald Mischak,et al.  Identification and Validation of Urinary Biomarkers for Differential Diagnosis and Evaluation of Therapeutic Intervention in Anti-neutrophil Cytoplasmic Antibody-associated Vasculitis* , 2009, Molecular & Cellular Proteomics.

[39]  M. Knepper.  Common sense approaches to urinary biomarker study design. , 2009, Journal of the American Society of Nephrology : JASN.

[40]  A. Dominiczak,et al.  Capillary electrophoresis-mass spectrometry as a powerful tool in biomarker discovery and clinical diagnosis: an update of recent developments. , 2009, Mass spectrometry reviews.

[41]  Matthew Sperrin,et al.  Multiple Testing Procedures with Applications to Genomics , 2010 .

[42]  D. Moher,et al.  CONSORT 2010 statement: Updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials , 2010, Journal of pharmacology & pharmacotherapeutics.

[43]  H. Mischak,et al.  Proteomic biomarkers in diabetic nephropathy--reality or future promise? , 2010, Nephrology, dialysis, transplantation : official publication of the European Dialysis and Transplant Association - European Renal Association.

[44]  D. Moher,et al.  CONSORT 2010 Explanation and Elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials , 2011, BMJ : British Medical Journal.