National Academies Press: OpenBook
« Previous: Glossary
Suggested Citation:"References." Institute of Medicine. 2006. Developing Biomarker-Based Tools for Cancer Screening, Diagnosis, and Treatment: The State of the Science, Evaluation, Implementation, and Economics: Workshop Summary. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/11768.
×

REFERENCES

Check E. 2004. Proteomics and cancer: Running before we can walk? Nature (429), 6991:496-497.

Ellis IO, et al. 2004. Best Practice No 176: Updated recommendations for HER2 testing in the UK. Journal of Clinical Pathology 57:233-237.

FDA (Food and Drug Administration), Center for Devices and Radiological Health, OVID (Office of In-Vitro Devices), Analyte Specific Reagents; Small Entity Compliance Guidance; Guidance for Industry.

Letter from OIVD to Roche Molecular Diagnostics Re: AmpliChip, http://www.fda.gov/cdrh/oivd/amplichip.html.

Medical Devices; Classification/Reclassification; Restricted Devices; Analyte Specific Reagents, 61 Fed. Reg. at 10,484. March 14, 1996.

Michiels S, et al. 2005. Prediction of cancer outcome with microarrays: a multiple random validation strategy. Lancet 365(9458):488-492.

Paik S, et al. 2002. Real-world performance of HER2 testing—National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project experience. Journal of the National Cancer Instititute 94(11):852-854.

Perez EA, et al. 2006. HER2 testing by local, central, and reference laboratories in specimens from the North Central Cancer Treatment Group N9831 intergroup adjuvant trial. Journal of Clinical Oncology 24(19):3032-3038.

Petricoin EF, et al. 2002. Use of proteomic patterns in serum to identify ovarian cancer. Lancet 359(9306):572-577.

Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America Biomarker Working Group presentation (2004). FDA Advisory Committee Meeting.

Reddy JC, et al. 2006. Concordance between central and local laboratory HER2 testing from a community-based clinical study. Clinical Breast Cancer 7(2):153-157.

Rhodes A, et al. 2004. The use of cell line standards to reduce HER-2/neu assay variation in multiple European cancer centers. American Journal of Clinical Pathology 122:51-60.

Simon R, et al. 2003. Pitfalls in the use of DNA microarray data for diagnostic and prognostic classification. Journal of the National Cancer Institute 95(1):14-18.

Van de Vijver MJ, et al. 2002. Agene-expressionsignatureasapredictorofsurvivalinbreastA gene-expression signature as a predictor of survival in breast cancer. New England Journal of Medicine 347(25):1999-2009.

Wagner JA. 2002. Overview of biomarkers and surrogate endpoints in drug development. Disease Markers 18(2):41-46.

Suggested Citation:"References." Institute of Medicine. 2006. Developing Biomarker-Based Tools for Cancer Screening, Diagnosis, and Treatment: The State of the Science, Evaluation, Implementation, and Economics: Workshop Summary. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/11768.
×
Page 92
Next: Appendix A Workshop Agenda »
Developing Biomarker-Based Tools for Cancer Screening, Diagnosis, and Treatment: The State of the Science, Evaluation, Implementation, and Economics: Workshop Summary Get This Book
×
Buy Paperback | $41.00 Buy Ebook | $32.99
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

Research has long sought to identify biomarkers that could detect cancer at an early stage, or predict the optimal cancer therapy for specific patients. Fueling interest in this research are recent technological advances in genomics, proteomics, and metabolomics that can enable researchers to capture the molecular fingerprints of specific cancers and fine-tune their classification according to the molecular defects they harbor. The discovery and development of new markers of cancer could potentially improve cancer screening, diagnosis, and treatment. Given the potential impact cancer biomarkers could have on the cost effectiveness of cancer detection and treatment, they could profoundly alter the economic burden of cancer as well.

Despite the promise of cancer biomarkers, few biomarker-based cancer tests have entered the market, and the translation of research findings on cancer biomarkers into clinically useful tests seems to be lagging. This is perhaps not surprising given the technical, financial, regulatory, and social challenges linked to the discovery, development, validation, and incorporation of biomarker tests into clinical practice.

To explore those challenges and ways to overcome them, the National Cancer Policy Forum held the conference "Developing Biomarker-Based Tools for Cancer Screening, Diagnosis and Treatment: The State of the Science, Evaluation, Implementation, and Economics" in Washington, D.C., from March 20 to 22, 2006.

At this conference, experts gave presentations in one of six sessions. In addition, seven small group discussions explored the policy implications surrounding biomarker development and adoption into clinical practice. Developing Biomarker-based Tools for Developing Cancer Screening, Diagnosis, and Treatment: The State of the Science, Evaluation, Implementation, and Economics-Workshop Summary presents the conference proceedings and will be used by an Institute of Medicine (IOM) committee to develop consensus-based recommendations for moving the field of cancer biomarkers forward.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    Switch between the Original Pages, where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  9. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!