Defining Clinical Utility of Tumor Biomarker Tests: A Clinician's Viewpoint

被引:65
作者
Hayes, Daniel F. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Michigan, Breast Canc Res, Rogel Canc Ctr, 1500 E Med Ctr Dr,Room 6312, Ann Arbor, MI 48109 USA
关键词
CANCER AMERICAN SOCIETY; PROGNOSTIC-FACTORS; PATHOLOGISTS; GUIDELINE; DIAGNOSIS; FRAMEWORK; TRIALS; SCALE;
D O I
10.1200/JCO.20.01572
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Tumor biomarker tests (TBTs) are used to guide therapeutic strategies for patients with cancer. However, the regulatory environment for TBTs in the United States is inconsistent and, in general, TBTs are poorly valued. The National Academy of Medicine has recommended that TBTs should not be used in general practice until they are shown to have analytical validity and clinical utility. The latter term, first coined by the Evaluation of Genomic Applications in Practice and Prevention Initiative, has been widely stated but is indeterminately defined. In considering whether a TBT has clinical utility, several factors need to be considered: (1) What is the intended use of the TBT? (2) What are the end points that are used to determine clinical utility? (3) How substantial does the difference in end points between groups defined by the TBT need to be to determine therapeutic strategies? (4) What is the risk tolerance of the stakeholders? and (5) Who are the stakeholders that make the decision? For all these factors, the data used to consider clinical utility must be derived from level I evidence studies. In conclusion, there is no strict definition of clinical utility for a TBT. However, consideration of these factors will lead to more objective conclusions. Doing so will facilitate value-based decisions regarding whether a TBT should be used to guide patient care. (C) 2020 by American Society of Clinical Oncology
引用
收藏
页码:238 / +
页数:12
相关论文
共 37 条
[1]   Estrogen and Progesterone Receptor Testing in Breast Cancer American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists Guideline Update [J].
Allison, Kimberly H. ;
Hammond, M. Elizabeth H. ;
Dowsett, Mitchell ;
McKernin, Shannon E. ;
Carey, Lisa A. ;
Fitzgibbons, Patrick L. ;
Hayes, Daniel F. ;
Lakhani, Sunil R. ;
Chavez-MacGregor, Mariana ;
Perlmutter, Jane ;
Perou, Charles M. ;
Regan, Meredith M. ;
Rimm, David L. ;
Symmans, W. Fraser ;
Torlakovic, Emina E. ;
Varella, Leticia ;
Viale, Giuseppe ;
Weisberg, Tracey F. ;
McShane, Lisa M. ;
Wolff, Antonio C. .
ARCHIVES OF PATHOLOGY & LABORATORY MEDICINE, 2020, 144 (05) :545-563
[2]   Methodological challenges in the evaluation of prognostic factors in breast cancer [J].
Altman, DG ;
Lyman, GH .
BREAST CANCER RESEARCH AND TREATMENT, 1998, 52 (1-3) :289-303
[3]  
Altman DG, 2012, BMC MED, V10, DOI [10.1186/1741-7015-10-51, 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001216]
[4]  
[Anonymous], 2012, EVOLUTION TRANSLATIO
[5]  
Bast RC, 1996, J CLIN ONCOL, V14, P2843
[6]   Comparative Assessment of Clinical Benefit Using the ESMO-Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale Version 1.1 and the ASCO Value Framework Net Health Benefit Score [J].
Cherny, Nathan I. ;
de Vries, Elisabeth G. E. ;
Dafni, Urania ;
Garrett-Mayer, Elizabeth ;
McKernin, Shannon E. ;
Piccart, Martine ;
Latino, Nicola J. ;
Douillard, Jean-Yves ;
Schnipper, Lowell E. ;
Somerfield, Mark R. ;
Bogaerts, Jan ;
Karlis, Dimitris ;
Zygoura, Panagiota ;
Vervita, Katerina ;
Pentheroudakis, George ;
Tabernero, Josep ;
Zielinski, Christoph ;
Wollins, Dana S. ;
Schilsky, Richard L. .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2019, 37 (04) :336-+
[7]   The fragility of phase 3 trials supporting FDA-approved anticancer medicines: a retrospective analysis [J].
Del Paggio, Joseph C. ;
Tannock, Ian F. .
LANCET ONCOLOGY, 2019, 20 (08) :1065-1069
[8]  
Dinan MA, JCO PRECISION ONCOL, V3, P1
[9]  
FDA-NIH-Biomarker-Working-Group, 2016, Best (biomarkers, endpoints, and other tools) resource internet, P47
[10]   Randomized Clinical Trials With Biomarkers: Design Issues [J].
Freidlin, Boris ;
McShane, Lisa M. ;
Korn, Edward L. .
JOURNAL OF THE NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE, 2010, 102 (03) :152-160