Design of tumor biomarker-monitoring trials: a proposal by the European Group on Tumor Markers

Lung cancer tumor marker analysis: A clinical laboratory perspective

 Clinical laboratories are responsible for performing lung cancer tumor marker testing as part of routine clinical care. It is their responsibility to guarantee that the reported tumor marker results are reliable and meet the necessary quality standards for proper clinical use. During the different laboratory phases, pre-analytical, analytical and post-analytical, specific steps and processes can introduce errors and generate incorrect clinical interpretation. This editorial briefly outlines critical laboratory issues related to lung cancer tumor markers, specific for each of these three laboratory phases.

Comparison of serum tumor markers combined with dual-source CT in the diagnosis of lung cancer

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study is to explore the clinical value of serum tumor markers combined with dual-source CT scanning in the diagnosis of lung cancer.

METHODS

One hundred-two patients with lung cancer (malignant tumor group), 50 patients with benign lesions (benign control group) and 50 healthy patients (normal control group) were selected as the research objects. The levels of serum carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), cytokeratin 19 fragment antigen 21-1 (CYFRA21-1) and gastrin releasing peptide precursor 31-98 (Pro-GRP31-98) were detected using the electrochemiluminescence and enzyme-linked immunoassay in three groups of people. Simultaneously, Siemens' second-generation dual-source CT (Siemens AG, Munich, Germany) is used to scan the lungs of patients with lung cancer and benign lesions. Retrospective statistical analysis is utilized to explore the clinical value of serum tumor markers combined with dual-source CT examination in the diagnosis of lung cancer.

RESULTS

The levels of serum CEA, CYFRA21-1 and Pro-GRP31-98 in lung cancer patients were significantly higher than those in the benign control group and normal control group, and the difference was statistically significant (P<0.01). There was no statistical difference between the benign control group and the normal control group (P>0.05). The levels of serum CEA, CYFRA21-1, Pro-GRP31-98 had no significant correlation with the age, sex, and tumor site of lung cancer patients (P>0.05). However, the levels of serum CEA, CYFRA21-1, Pro-GRP31-98 have an obvious correlation with tumor size, clinical stage, histological type, combined pleural effusion, recurrence and metastasis after treatment (P<0.05). CT scans of 102 lung cancer patients showed 35 cases of central type, 67 cases of peripheral type, 71 cases with tumor diameter >5cm, 31 cases of ≤5cm and 67 cases of lymph node metastasis. The sensitivities of CEA, CYFRA21-1, Pro-GRP31-98, and dual-source CT in the diagnosis of lung cancer were 64.70%, 60.11%, 56.86% and 77.45%, and the accuracy was 75.00%, 72.37%, 69.74% and 82.89%, respectively. Compared with a single examination, the sensitivity and accuracy of combined examination for the diagnosis of lung cancer were significantly improved, which were 95.10% and 92.76%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Joint examinations can effectively improve the rate of lung cancer diagnosis.

The emerging role of cell-free DNA as a molecular marker for cancer management

An increasing number of studies demonstrate the potential use of cell-free DNA (cfDNA) as a surrogate marker for multiple indications in cancer, including diagnosis, prognosis, and monitoring. However, harnessing the full potential of cfDNA requires (i) the optimization and standardization of preanalytical steps, (ii) refinement of current analysis strategies, and, perhaps most importantly, (iii) significant improvements in our understanding of its origin, physical properties, and dynamics in circulation. The latter knowledge is crucial for interpreting the associations between changes in the baseline characteristics of cfDNA and the clinical manifestations of cancer. In this review we explore recent advancements and highlight the current gaps in our knowledge concerning each point of contact between cfDNA analysis and the different stages of cancer management.

Methods for the evaluation of biomarkers in patients with kidney and liver diseases: multicentre research programme including ELUCIDATE RCT

Background

Protein biomarkers with associations with the activity and outcomes of diseases are being identified by modern proteomic technologies. They may be simple, accessible, cheap and safe tests that can inform diagnosis, prognosis, treatment selection, monitoring of disease activity and therapy and may substitute for complex, invasive and expensive tests. However, their potential is not yet being realised.

Design and methods

The study consisted of three workstreams to create a framework for research: workstream 1, methodology – to define current practice and explore methodology innovations for biomarkers for monitoring disease; workstream 2, clinical translation – to create a framework of research practice, high-quality samples and related clinical data to evaluate the validity and clinical utility of protein biomarkers; and workstream 3, the ELF to Uncover Cirrhosis as an Indication for Diagnosis and Action for Treatable Event (ELUCIDATE) randomised controlled trial (RCT) – an exemplar RCT of an established test, the ADVIA Centaur® Enhanced Liver Fibrosis (ELF) test (Siemens Healthcare Diagnostics Ltd, Camberley, UK) [consisting of a panel of three markers – (1) serum hyaluronic acid, (2) amino-terminal propeptide of type III procollagen and (3) tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinase 1], for liver cirrhosis to determine its impact on diagnostic timing and the management of cirrhosis and the process of care and improving outcomes.

Results

The methodology workstream evaluated the quality of recommendations for using prostate-specific antigen to monitor patients, systematically reviewed RCTs of monitoring strategies and reviewed the monitoring biomarker literature and how monitoring can have an impact on outcomes. Simulation studies were conducted to evaluate monitoring and improve the merits of health care. The monitoring biomarker literature is modest and robust conclusions are infrequent. We recommend improvements in research practice. Patients strongly endorsed the need for robust and conclusive research in this area. The clinical translation workstream focused on analytical and clinical validity. Cohorts were established for renal cell carcinoma (RCC) and renal transplantation (RT), with samples and patient data from multiple centres, as a rapid-access resource to evaluate the validity of biomarkers. Candidate biomarkers for RCC and RT were identified from the literature and their quality was evaluated and selected biomarkers were prioritised. The duration of follow-up was a limitation but biomarkers were identified that may be taken forward for clinical utility. In the third workstream, the ELUCIDATE trial registered 1303 patients and randomised 878 patients out of a target of 1000. The trial started late and recruited slowly initially but ultimately recruited with good statistical power to answer the key questions. ELF monitoring altered the patient process of care and may show benefits from the early introduction of interventions with further follow-up. The ELUCIDATE trial was an ‘exemplar’ trial that has demonstrated the challenges of evaluating biomarker strategies in ‘end-to-end’ RCTs and will inform future study designs.

Conclusions

The limitations in the programme were principally that, during the collection and curation of the cohorts of patients with RCC and RT, the pace of discovery of new biomarkers in commercial and non-commercial research was slower than anticipated and so conclusive evaluations using the cohorts are few; however, access to the cohorts will be sustained for future new biomarkers. The ELUCIDATE trial was slow to start and recruit to, with a late surge of recruitment, and so final conclusions about the impact of the ELF test on long-term outcomes await further follow-up. The findings from the three workstreams were used to synthesise a strategy and framework for future biomarker evaluations incorporating innovations in study design, health economics and health informatics.

Trial registration

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN74815110, UKCRN ID 9954 and UKCRN ID 11930.

Funding

This project was funded by the NIHR Programme Grants for Applied Research programme and will be published in full inProgramme Grants for Applied Research; Vol. 6, No. 3. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Aberrantly Methylated DNA as a Biomarker in Breast Cancer

Aberrant DNA hypermethylation at gene promoters is a frequent event in human breast cancer. Recent genome-wide studies have identified hundreds of genes that exhibit differential methylation between breast cancer cells and normal breast tissue. Due to the tumor-specific nature of DNA hypermethylation events, their use as tumor biomarkers is usually not hampered by analytical signals from normal cells, which is a general problem for existing protein tumor markers used for clinical assessment of breast cancer. There is accumulating evidence that DNA-methylation changes in breast cancer patients occur early during tumorigenesis. This may open up for effective screening, and analysis of blood or nipple aspirate may later help in diagnosing breast cancer. As a more detailed molecular characterization of different types of breast cancer becomes available, the ability to divide patients into subgroups based on DNA biomarkers may improve prognosis. Serial monitoring of DNA-methylation markers in blood during treatment may be useful, particularly when the cancer burden is below the detection level for standard imaging techniques. Overall, aberrant DNA methylation has a great potential as a versatile biomarker tool for screening, diagnosis, prognosis and monitoring of breast cancer. Standardization of methods and biomarker panels will be required to fully exploit this clinical potential.

Performance of seven criteria to assess CA125 increments among ovarian cancer patients monitored during first-line chemotherapy and the post-therapy follow-up period

Aim:

To investigate seven CA125 criteria to monitor progressive ovarian cancer among patients with stage IC–IV disease.

Materials & methods:

Four criteria were used to asses CA125 increments starting from concentrations ≥35 U/ml and three criteria to asses increments starting from concentrations <35 U/ml.

Results:

A total of 231 patients were allocated to CA125 monitoring. The performances of the CA125 criteria were similar with sensitivities of 30–55%, negative predictive values of 28–46%, positive predictive values of 90–100% and median lead times of 26–87 days.

Conclusion:

The criteria showed low sensitivity and inability to exclude progressive ovarian cancer. The study suggests that CA125 information cannot stand alone but should be considered used in conjunction with other investigative procedures.

Few have validated the CA125 progression criteria proposed by Rustin et al. in 1996 and in 2001. These two criteria were officially recommended by the Gynecological Cancer Intergroup to be incorporated into clinical trials in 2010. Among other criteria, we validated the Gynecological Cancer Intergroup CA125 progression criteria in an ovarian cancer population regarding sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value. We found that the criteria had low sensitivity and ability to exclude tumor growth. We believe that the clinical utility of CA125 may be questioned, and there is a need for supplementary markers and alternative assessment criteria.

ANMCO/ISS/AMD/ANCE/ARCA/FADOI/GICR-IACPR/SICI-GISE/SIBioC/SIC/SICOA/SID/SIF/SIMEU/SIMG/SIMI/SISA Joint Consensus Document on cholesterol and cardiovascular risk: diagnostic-therapeutic pathway in Italy

Atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease still represents the leading cause of death in Western countries. A wealth of scientific evidence demonstrates that increased blood cholesterol levels have a major impact on the outbreak and progression of atherosclerotic plaques. Moreover, several cholesterol-lowering pharmacological agents, including statins and ezetimibe, have proved effective in improving clinical outcomes. This document focuses on the clinical management of hypercholesterolaemia and has been conceived by 16 Italian medical associations with the support of the Italian National Institute of Health. The authors discuss in detail the role of hypercholesterolaemia in the genesis of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. In addition, the implications for high cholesterol levels in the definition of the individual cardiovascular risk profile have been carefully analysed, while all available therapeutic options for blood cholesterol reduction and cardiovascular risk mitigation have been explored. Finally, this document outlines the diagnostic and therapeutic pathways for the clinical management of patients with hypercholesterolaemia.

Clinical Use of Cancer Biomarkers in Epithelial Ovarian Cancer: Updated Guidelines From the European Group on Tumor Markers

To present an update of the European Group on Tumor Markers guidelines for serum markers in epithelial ovarian cancer.

Clinical Application of Circulating Tumour Cells in Prostate Cancer: From Bench to Bedside and Back

Prostate cancer is the most common cancer in men worldwide. To improve future drug development and patient management, surrogate biomarkers associated with relevant outcomes are required. Circulating tumour cells (CTCs) are tumour cells that can enter the circulatory system, and are principally responsible for the development of metastasis at distant sites. In recent years, interest in detecting CTCs as a surrogate biomarker has ghiiukjrown. Clinical studies have revealed that high levels of CTCs in the blood correlate with disease progression in patients with prostate cancer; however, their predictive value for monitoring therapeutic response is less clear. Despite the important progress in CTC clinical development, there are critical requirements for the implementation of their analysis as a routine oncology tool. The goal of the present review is to provide an update on the advances in the clinical validation of CTCs as a surrogate biomarker and to discuss the principal obstacles and main challenges to their inclusion in clinical practice.

Identifying risk in the use of tumor markers to improve patient safety

Background:

Tumor markers (TM) are a routine test that are not always used well, and can lead to unnecessary additional tests, which are not without risks for the patients. So, to implement appropriate strategies to improve the adequate use of TM and, therefore, improve patient safety, is required to analyze the use of TM, identifying risks and establishing if there are differences in their use as a function of their utility.

Methods:

The study was a descriptive, longitudinal, retrospective and systematic study in the area covered by the University Hospital of Padua. In the follow-up 2-year study, 23,059 analytical requests of TM, corresponding to 14,728 patients, were analyzed. For the level of statistical significance it applies an approximation of the normal law (Z statistic) and χ

Results:

Only 9196 requests (39.88%) out of a total of 23,059 on 5080 patients with neoplastic diseases have been classified as adecuate according to current guidelines. The number of requests per patient was variable (1.57±1.35). In patients with neoplastic diseases this increased to 1.80±1.68. The mean of number of TM per request was 2.4±1.73. The analysis showed an association between the number of requests and the type of marker used.

Conclusions:

The use of TM is variable, mainly of the follow-up markers, when they are used as screening. This inappropriate use, minimizes their utility favoring erroneous interpretations and increases the risk of damage to the patient. So it is essential to implement safe practices in the use of TM.

Clinical Use of Cancer Biomarkers in Epithelial Ovarian Cancer: Updated Guidelines From the European Group on Tumor Markers

OBJECTIVE

To present an update of the European Group on Tumor Markers guidelines for serum markers in epithelial ovarian cancer.

METHODS

Systematic literature survey from 2008 to 2013. The articles were evaluated by level of evidence and strength of recommendation.

RESULTS

Because of its low sensitivity (50-62% for early stage epithelial ovarian cancer) and limited specificity (94-98.5%), cancer antigen (CA) 125 (CA125) is not recommended as a screening test in asymptomatic women. The Risk of Malignancy Index, which includes CA125, transvaginal ultrasound, and menopausal status, is recommended for the differential diagnosis of a pelvic mass. Because human epididymis protein 4 has been reported to have superior specificity to CA125, especially in premenopausal women, it may be considered either alone or as part of the risk of ovarian malignancy algorithm, in the differential diagnosis of pelvic masses, especially in such women. CA125 should be used to monitor response to first-line chemotherapy using the previously published criteria of the Gynecological Cancer Intergroup, that is, at least a 50% reduction of a pretreatment sample of 70 kU/L or greater. The value of CA125 in posttherapy surveillance is less clear. Although a prospective randomized trial concluded that early administration of chemotherapy based on increasing CA125 levels had no effect on survival, European Group on Tumor Markers state that monitoring with CA125 in this situation should occur, especially if the patient is a candidate for secondary cytoreductive surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

At present, CA125 remains the most important biomarker for epithelial ovarian cancer, excluding tumors of mucinous origin.

Validation of new cancer biomarkers: a position statement from the European group on tumor markers

BACKGROUND

Biomarkers are playing increasingly important roles in the detection and management of patients with cancer. Despite an enormous number of publications on cancer biomarkers, few of these biomarkers are in widespread clinical use.

CONTENT

In this review, we discuss the key steps in advancing a newly discovered cancer candidate biomarker from pilot studies to clinical application. Four main steps are necessary for a biomarker to reach the clinic: analytical validation of the biomarker assay, clinical validation of the biomarker test, demonstration of clinical value from performance of the biomarker test, and regulatory approval. In addition to these 4 steps, all biomarker studies should be reported in a detailed and transparent manner, using previously published checklists and guidelines. Finally, all biomarker studies relating to demonstration of clinical value should be registered before initiation of the study.

SUMMARY

Application of the methodology outlined above should result in a more efficient and effective approach to the development of cancer biomarkers as well as the reporting of cancer biomarker studies. With rigorous application, all stakeholders, and especially patients, would be expected to benefit.

Current Evidence and Future Perspectives on the Effective Practice of Patient-Centered Laboratory Medicine

BACKGROUND

Systematic evidence of the contribution made by laboratory medicine to patient outcomes and the overall process of healthcare is difficult to find. An understanding of the value of laboratory medicine, how it can be determined, and the various factors that influence it is vital to ensuring that the service is provided and used optimally.

CONTENT

This review summarizes existing evidence supporting the impact of laboratory medicine in healthcare and indicates the gaps in our understanding. It also identifies deficiencies in current utilization, suggests potential solutions, and offers a vision of a future in which laboratory medicine is used optimally to support patient care.

SUMMARY

To maximize the value of laboratory medicine, work is required in 5 areas: (a) improved utilization of existing and new tests; (b) definition of new roles for laboratory professionals that are focused on optimizing patient outcomes by adding value at all points of the diagnostic brain-to-brain cycle; (c) development of standardized protocols for prospective patient-centered studies of biomarker clinical effectiveness or extraanalytical process effectiveness; (d) benchmarking of existing and new tests in specified situations with commonly accepted measures of effectiveness; (e) agreed definition and validation of effectiveness measures and use of checklists for articles submitted for publication. Progress in these areas is essential if we are to demonstrate and enhance the value of laboratory medicine and prevent valuable information being lost in meaningless data. This requires effective collaboration with clinicians, and a determination to accept patient outcome and patient experience as the primary measure of laboratory effectiveness.

Mucins and Cytokeratins as Serum Tumor Markers in Breast Cancer

Structural and functional characteristics of mucins and cytokeratins are shortly described. Thereafter, those commonly used in breast cancer as serum tumor markers are considered. First CA15.3, MCA, CA549, CA27.29 mucins and CYFRA21.1, TPA, TPS cytokeratins alone or in association have been examined in different stages and conditions. Then their usefulness in monitoring disease-free breast cancer patients is evaluated. The central role of the established cut-off and critical change, the "early" treatment of recurrent disease and the potential benefit in survival are other issues that have been highlighted and discussed. The successive sections and subsections deal with the monitoring of advanced disease. In them, the current recommendations and the principal findings on using the above mentioned mucins and cytokeratins have been reported. A computer program for interpreting consecutive measurements of serum tumor markers also has been illustrated. The final part of the chapter is devoted to mucins and cytokeratins as markers of circulating and disseminated tumor cells and their usefulness for prognosis.

Bone turnover markers in serum and urine as diagnostic, prognostic and monitoring biomarkers of bone metastasis

Bone metastases are characterized by increased osteoblastic and/or osteolytic processes depending on the tumor type. The altogether destructive effect of metastasis formation promoted by increased metabolic activity raises the release of components from the osseous metabolism into the blood stream. These components are either enzymes directly involved in the alteration processes, metabolites/proteins that develop during this or bone matrix proteins released during this. These biomarkers are categorized in relation to their involvement in the bone formation or resorption as bone formation and resorption markers. Based on a PubMed literature search, a critical appraisal of the various biomarkers for diagnostic, prognostic, and monitoring purposes is given for patients with skeletal metastases caused by breast, prostate, lung, or renal cell carcinomas.

miRNA panels as biomarkers for bladder cancer

Aim: Specific miRNA profiles have been identified for several samples from patients with bladder cancer. The results are not always congruent and partly contradictory. A comparison of published data was performed to select potential markers. Materials & methods: A literature search in PubMed identified 79 articles published prior to June 2013. Reports regarding the detection of miRNAs in urine and blood have rarely been published; to date, nine respectively three articles are available. Results: The comparison of published data proved the utility of miRNAs as diagnostic and prognostic indicators of bladder cancer. In urine samples from bladder cancer patients, seven miRNAs were concordantly expressed with tumor tissues. Conclusion: Standardization is strictly required in pre-analytics and methods of miRNA measurements.

Breaking a vicious cycle

Despite prodigious advances in tumor biology research, few tumor-biomarker tests have been adopted as standard clinical practice. This lack of reliable tests stems from a vicious cycle of undervaluation, resulting from inconsistent regulatory standards and reimbursement, as well as insufficient investment in research and development, scrutiny of biomarker publications by journals, and evidence of analytical validity and clinical utility. We offer recommendations designed to serve as a roadmap to break this vicious cycle and call for a national dialogue, as changes in regulation, reimbursement, investment, peer review, and guidelines development require the participation of all stakeholders.

Calculation of limits for significant unidirectional changes in two or more serial results of a biomarker based on a computer simulation model

Background

Reference change values (RCVs) were introduced more than 30 years ago and provide objective tools for assessment of the significance of differences in two consecutive results from an individual. However, in practice, more results are usually available for monitoring, and using the RCV concept on more than two results will increase the number of false-positive results. Therefore, a simple method is needed to interpret the significance of a difference when all available serial biomarker results are considered.

Methods

A computer simulation model using Excel was developed. Based on 10,000 simulated data from healthy individuals, a series of up to 20 results from an individual was generated using different values for the within-subject biological variation plus the analytical variation. Each new result in this series was compared to the initial measurement result. These successive serial relative differences were computed to give limits for significant unidirectional differences with a constant cumulated maximum probability of both 95% ( P < 0.05) and 99% ( P < 0.01).

Results

Factors used to multiply the first result from an individual were calculated to create the limits for constant cumulated significant differences. The factors were shown to become a simple function of the number of results and the total coefficient of variation.

Conclusions

To interpret unidirectional differences in two or more serial results of a biomarker, the limits for significances are easily calculated using the presented factors. The first result is multiplied by the appropriate factor for increase or decrease, which gives the limits for a significant difference.

Methylated DNA for monitoring tumor growth and regression: how do we get there?

A wide range of protein cancer biomarkers is currently recommended in international guidelines for monitoring the growth and regression of solid tumors. However, a number of these markers are also present in low concentrations in blood obtained from healthy individuals and from patients with benign diseases. In contrast, evidence has accumulated that suggests that modified methylated DNA is strongly related to the cancer phenotype. The modifications found in modified methylated DNA include a global loss of methylation in the genomes of the tumor cells as well as focal hypermethylation of gene promoters. Because tumor cells naturally secrete DNA and upon cell death leak DNA, modified methylated DNA can be detected in blood, urine, sputum and other body fluids. At present international guidelines do not include recommendations for monitoring modified methylated DNA. The low level of evidence can partly be explained by incomplete collection of serial blood samples, by analytical challenges, and by lack of knowledge of how monitoring studies should be designed and how serial marker data obtained from individual patients should be interpreted. Here, we review the clinical validity and utility of methylated DNA for monitoring the activity of malignant disease.

Omic-profiling in breast cancer metastasis to bone: implications for mechanisms, biomarkers and treatment

Despite well-recognised advances in breast cancer treatment, there remain substantial numbers of patients who develop metastatic disease, of which up to 70% involves spread to bone, resulting in skeletal complications which have a major negative impact on mortality and quality of life. Bisphosphonates and newer bone-targeted agents have reduced the prevalence of skeletal complications, yet there remains significant unmet clinical need, particularly for the development of more specific therapies for the prevention and treatment of metastatic bone disease, for the prediction of risk of its development in individual patients and for the prediction of response to treatments. Modern 'omic' strategies can potentially make a major contribution to meeting this need. Technological advances in the field of nucleic acid sequencing, mass spectrometry and metabolic profiling have driven progress in genomics, transcriptomics (functional genomics), proteomics and metabolomics. This review appraises the recent application of these approaches to studies of breast cancer metastasis (particularly to bone), with a focus on understanding how omic approaches may lead to new therapeutic options and to novel biomarker molecules or molecular signatures with potential value in clinical practise. The increasingly recognised need for rigorous sample quality control and both pre-clinical and clinical validation to meet the ultimate goals of clinical utility and patient benefit is discussed. Future directions of omic driven research in breast cancer metastasis are considered, in particular micro-RNAs and their role in the post-transcriptional regulation of gene function and the possible role of cancer-stem cells and epigenetic modifications in the development of distant metastases.