Biospecimens and biorepositories for the community pathologist

Inhibition of Scavenger Receptor Class B Type 1 (SR-B1) Expression and Activity as a Potential Novel Target to Disrupt Cholesterol Availability in Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer

There have been several studies that have linked elevated scavenger receptor class b type 1 (SR-B1) expression and activity to the development and progression of castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). SR-B1 facilitates the influx of cholesterol to the cell from lipoproteins in systemic circulation. This influx of cholesterol may be important for many cellular functions, including the synthesis of androgens. Castration-resistant prostate cancer tumors can synthesize androgens de novo to supplement the loss of exogenous sources often induced by androgen deprivation therapy. Silencing of SR-B1 may impact the ability of prostate cancer cells, particularly those of the castration-resistant state, to maintain the intracellular supply of androgens by removing a supply of cholesterol. SR-B1 expression is elevated in CRPC models and has been linked to poor survival of patients. The overarching belief has been that cholesterol modulation, through either synthesis or uptake inhibition, will impact essential signaling processes, impeding the proliferation of prostate cancer. The reduction in cellular cholesterol availability can impede prostate cancer proliferation through both decreased steroid synthesis and steroid-independent mechanisms, providing a potential therapeutic target for the treatment of prostate cancer. In this article, we discuss and highlight the work on SR-B1 as a potential novel drug target for CRPC management.

How Semantics Connotations May Influence Concerns About Donation of Biospecimens

Introduction: Human biological specimen (biospecimen) donation is routinely requested for clinical care and research purposes. Successfully engaging patients and research participants in biospecimen donation depends on what they understand these initiatives entail, including their perceptions of risk. Human biospecimens are stored in facilities routinely referenced as biobanks or biorepositories, both of which labels are known to embody a variety of connotations. The words chosen to describe biospecimen facilities may influence decisions about donation. Objective: To explore differences in likelihood of donation as a function of the words chosen to represent human biospecimen storage facilities and the commensurate concerns each label evokes. Materials and Methods: Two-group experimental design. Participants completed a survey about a fictitious undertaking requesting that they consider biospecimen donation. The term used to describe the facility housing the biospecimens differed; one half of the surveys referenced a biobank, and one half referenced a biorepository. Results: Two thousand five hundred ninety-six surveys were distributed; 586 completed surveys were received (response rate: 22.6%). Sixty-three percent of respondents, regardless of whether the label referenced a biobank or biorespository, reported being extremely likely to donate. There were no significant differences between the 2 groups on the 11 concerns sampled. Factor analyses revealed that concerns could be classified in two groups: use-related concerns and person-related concerns. The label biobank evoked significantly lower perception of importance of the person-related concerns sampled (e.g., personal or other benefit, discomfort or inconvenience). Conclusions: Our results suggest that researchers may consider using the word biobank to describe the facility housing the biospecimen, as this term appears less subject to concern biases. These outcomes confirm that misunderstandings or misattributions of words used to refer to biospecimen facilities could deter participation in clinical care or research. Participation may be enhanced through ensuring clear understanding of what biospecimen donation entails and by directly addressing common semantic misunderstandings and associations.

Pathology and Biobanking

Biobanks are units where high quality and long-term protection of biomaterials is maintained. This system, in which biological materials and data are systematically recorded and stored, is a unique resource for the study of the pathophysiology of disease, the development of diagnostic biomarkers, and working with human tissues for the potential discovery of targeted therapeutic agents. At this point, the pathology unit plays a unifying and complementary role between the clinical and core disciplines and offers optimal management of the patients' biomaterials for diagnostic and research projects. The aim of this article is to present general information with regard to a biobank constructed for the storage of tumor tissue and blood biospecimens. Ethical issues (informed consent, protection of confidentiality and privacy, and secondary use of biospecimens) and the information technology system (collection, systematic recording, backup and protection of clinical information) are important issues in biobanking. The selection of freezers to be used in storage (mechanical freezers, liquid-vapor nitrogen tanks), and if mechanical freezers are preferred the establishment of the relevant infrastructure and support team (such as additional power units for protection from power outages), the preservation of materials by aliquoting in different freezers, ensuring financing so as to afford the cost of the infrastructure, and implementation of all these dynamics while adhering to international guidelines are of the utmost importance.

Cancer oriented biobanks: A comprehensive review

Biobanks provide a platform for innovative biomedical research and has improvised translational and personalized medicine to a great extent. Time 2009 published 10 ideas changing the world right now with biobanks on the list emphasizing its role in discovery and development of new therapeutic drugs. They form the cornerstone, providing resources for future investigations and biomarker discovery to understand the effects of genetic, environmental and lifestyle factors on human morbidity, mortality and health. The aim of this review paper is to understand the role of biobanking in cancer research, the challenges faced and strategies to overcome these, for long term and sustainable research in the field of oncology.

The College of American Pathologists Biorepository Accreditation Program: Results from the First 5 Years

The College of American Pathologists (CAP) developed the Biorepository Accreditation Program (BAP) in 2012. This program integrates best practices from the International Society for Biological and Environmental Biorepositories, the National Cancer Institute, the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services, and the CAP Laboratory Accreditation Program. The goal of this elective program is to provide requirements for standardization in biorepository processes that will result in high-quality specimens that can be used to support research, drug discovery, and personalized medicine. CAP uses a peer inspection model to ensure the inspectors have proper expertise and to promote educational efforts through information sharing. Lead inspectors are comprised of pathologists, PhDs, and managers of biorepositories and they are often supported by CAP staff inspectors. Accreditation is a 3-year continuous cycle of quality with a peer inspection occurring at the start of year 1 and a self-inspection and CAP desk assessment at the start of year 2 and 3. At this time 53 biorepositories are fully CAP BAP accredited and 13 are in the process of obtaining accreditation. There are currently 273 established standards with requirement lists customized based on the scope of activities performed by a biorepository. A total of 90 inspections were completed between May 2012 and December 2016. Sixty-one were initial inspections and 29 were reinspections. A total of 527 deficiencies were identified in the areas of Equipment/Instrumentation (22%), Information Technology (18%), Specimen Handling and QC (15%), Quality Management (16%), Personnel (11%), Safety (10%), Facilities (6%), and Regulatory (2%). Assessment of common deficiencies identifies areas of focus for continuous improvement and educational opportunities. Overall success of the program is high based on the current enrollment of 66 biorepositories, anecdotal participant feedback and increasing national recognition of the BAP in federal documents.

Structured Annual Faculty Review Program Accelerates Professional Development and Promotion: Long-Term Experience of the Duke University Medical Center's Pathology Department

This retrospective observational study on faculty development analyzes the Duke University Pathology Department's 18-year experience with a structured mentoring program involving 51 junior faculty members. The majority had MD degrees only (55%). The percentage of young women faculty hires before 1998 was 25%, increasing to 72% after 2005. Diversity also broadened from 9% with varied heritages before 1998 to 37% since then. The mentoring process pivoted on an annual review process. The reviews generally helped candidates focus much earlier, identified impediments they individually felt, and provided new avenues to gain a national reputation for academic excellence. National committee membership effectively helped gain national exposure. Thirty-eight percent of the mentees served on College of American Pathologists (CAP) committees, exponential multiples of any other national society. Some used CAP resources to develop major programs, some becoming nationally and internationally recognized for their academic activities. Several faculty gained national recognition as thought leaders for publishing about work initiated to serve administrative needs in the Department. The review process identified the need for more protected time for research, issues with time constraints, and avoiding exploitation when collaborating with other departments. This review identified a rigorous faculty mentoring and review process that included annual career counseling, goal-oriented academic careers, monitored advancement to promotion, higher salaries, and national recognition. All contributed to high faculty satisfaction and low faculty turnover. We conclude that a rigorous annual faculty review program and its natural sequence, promotion, can greatly foster faculty satisfaction.

Translational Bioinformatics and Clinical Research (Biomedical) Informatics

Translational bioinformatics and clinical research (biomedical) informatics are the primary domains related to informatics activities that support translational research. Translational bioinformatics focuses on computational techniques in genetics, molecular biology, and systems biology. Clinical research (biomedical) informatics involves the use of informatics in discovery and management of new knowledge relating to health and disease. This article details 3 projects that are hybrid applications of translational bioinformatics and clinical research (biomedical) informatics: The Cancer Genome Atlas, the cBioPortal for Cancer Genomics, and the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center clinical variants and results database, all designed to facilitate insights into cancer biology and clinical/therapeutic correlations.

Bar Coding and Tracking in Pathology

Bar coding and specimen tracking are intricately linked to pathology workflow and efficiency. In the pathology laboratory, bar coding facilitates many laboratory practices, including specimen tracking, automation, and quality management. Data obtained from bar coding can be used to identify, locate, standardize, and audit specimens to achieve maximal laboratory efficiency and patient safety. Variables that need to be considered when implementing and maintaining a bar coding and tracking system include assets to be labeled, bar code symbologies, hardware, software, workflow, and laboratory and information technology infrastructure as well as interoperability with the laboratory information system. This article addresses these issues, primarily focusing on surgical pathology.

The Pathologist Workforce in the United States: II. An Interactive Modeling Tool for Analyzing Future Qualitative and Quantitative Staffing Demands for Services

CONTEXT

Pathologists are physicians who make diagnoses based on interpretation of tissue and cellular specimens (surgical/cytopathology, molecular/genomic pathology, autopsy), provide medical leadership and consultation for laboratory medicine, and are integral members of their institutions' interdisciplinary patient care teams.

OBJECTIVE

To develop a dynamic modeling tool to examine how individual factors and practice variables can forecast demand for pathologist services.

DESIGN

Build and test a computer-based software model populated with data from surveys and best estimates about current and new pathologist efforts.

RESULTS

Most pathologists' efforts focus on anatomic (52%), laboratory (14%), and other direct services (8%) for individual patients. Population-focused services (12%) (eg, laboratory medical direction) and other professional responsibilities (14%) (eg, teaching, research, and hospital committees) consume the rest of their time. Modeling scenarios were used to assess the need to increase or decrease efforts related globally to the Affordable Care Act, and specifically, to genomic medicine, laboratory consolidation, laboratory medical direction, and new areas where pathologists' expertise can add value.

CONCLUSIONS

Our modeling tool allows pathologists, educators, and policy experts to assess how various factors may affect demand for pathologists' services. These factors include an aging population, advances in biomedical technology, and changing roles in capitated, value-based, and team-based medical care systems. In the future, pathologists will likely have to assume new roles, develop new expertise, and become more efficient in practicing medicine to accommodate new value-based delivery models.

Crucial considerations for pipelines to validate circulating biomarkers for breast cancer

Despite decades of progress in breast imaging, breast cancer remains the second most common cause of cancer mortality in women. The rapidly proliferative breast cancers that are associated with high relapse rates and mortality frequently present in younger women, in unscreened individuals, or in the intervals between screening mammography. Biomarkers exist for monitoring metastatic disease, such as CEA, CA27.29 and CA15-3, but there are no circulating biomarkers clinically available for early detection, prognosis, or monitoring for clinical relapse. There has been significant progress in the discovery of potential circulating biomarkers, including proteins, autoantibodies, nucleic acids, exosomes, and circulating tumor cells, but the vast majority of these biomarkers have not progressed beyond initial research discovery, and none have yet been approved for clinical use in early stage disease. Here, the authors review the crucial considerations of developing pipelines for the rapid evaluation of circulating biomarkers for breast cancer.

A Call to Standardize Preanalytic Data Elements for Biospecimens, Part II

CONTEXT

Biospecimens must have appropriate clinical annotation (data) to ensure optimal quality for both patient care and research. Additional clinical preanalytic variables are the focus of this continuing study.

OBJECTIVE

To complete the identification of the essential preanalytic variables (data fields) that can, and in some instances should, be attached to every collected biospecimen by adding the additional specific variables for clinical chemistry and microbiology to our original 170 variables.

DESIGN

The College of American Pathologists Diagnostic Intelligence and Health Information Technology Committee sponsored a second Biorepository Working Group to complete the list of preanalytic variables for annotating biospecimens. Members of the second Biorepository Working Group are experts in clinical pathology and microbiology. Additional preanalytic area-specific variables were identified and ranked along with definitions and potential negative impacts if the variable is not attached to the biospecimen. The draft manuscript was reviewed by additional national and international stakeholders.

RESULTS

Four additional required preanalytic variables were identified specifically for clinical chemistry and microbiology biospecimens that can be used as a guide for site-specific implementation into patient care and research biorepository processes.

CONCLUSIONS

In our collective experience, selecting which of the many preanalytic variables to attach to any specific set of biospecimens used for patient care and/or research is often difficult. The additional ranked list should be of practical benefit when selecting preanalytic variables for a given biospecimen collection.

Bar Coding and Tracking in Pathology

Bar coding and specimen tracking are intricately linked to pathology workflow and efficiency. In the pathology laboratory, bar coding facilitates many laboratory practices, including specimen tracking, automation, and quality management. Data obtained from bar coding can be used to identify, locate, standardize, and audit specimens to achieve maximal laboratory efficiency and patient safety. Variables that need to be considered when implementing and maintaining a bar coding and tracking system include assets to be labeled, bar code symbologies, hardware, software, workflow, and laboratory and information technology infrastructure as well as interoperability with the laboratory information system. This article addresses these issues, primarily focusing on surgical pathology.

Translational Bioinformatics and Clinical Research (Biomedical) Informatics

Translational bioinformatics and clinical research (biomedical) informatics are the primary domains related to informatics activities that support translational research. Translational bioinformatics focuses on computational techniques in genetics, molecular biology, and systems biology. Clinical research (biomedical) informatics involves the use of informatics in discovery and management of new knowledge relating to health and disease. This article details 3 projects that are hybrid applications of translational bioinformatics and clinical research (biomedical) informatics: The Cancer Genome Atlas, the cBioPortal for Cancer Genomics, and the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center clinical variants and results database, all designed to facilitate insights into cancer biology and clinical/therapeutic correlations.

Proceedings of the 1st Puerto Rico Biobanking Workshop

The 1st Puerto Rico Biobanking Workshop took place on August 20st, 2014 in the Auditorium of the Comprehensive Cancer Center of the University of Puerto Rico, Medical Sciences Campus in San Juan Puerto Rico. The program for this 1-day, live workshop included lectures by three biobanking experts, followed by presentations from existing biobanks in Puerto Rico and audience discussion. The need for increasing biobanking expertise in Puerto Rico stems from the fact that Hispanics in general are underrepresented in the biobanks in existence in the US, which limits the research conducted specifically to understand the molecular differences in cancer cells compared to other better studied populations. In turn, this lack of information impairs the development of better diagnostic and therapeutic approaches for our population. Dr. James Robb, M.D., F.C.A.P., consulting pathologist to the National Cancer Institute (NCI) and the Office of Biorepositories and Biospecimen Research (OBBR), opened the workshop with a discussion on the basic aspects of the science of biobanking (e.g., what is a biobank; its goals and objectives; protocols and procedures) in his talk addressing the importance of banking tissues for advancing biomedical research. Next, Dr. Gustavo Stefanoff, from the Cancer Institutes Network of Latin America (RINC by its name in Spanish), explained the mission, objectives, and structure of the Network of Latin-American and Caribbean Biobanks (REBLAC by its name in Spanish), which despite limited resources and many challenges, currently accrue high quality human tissue specimens and data to support cancer research in the region. Dr. Robert Hunter-Mellado, Professor of Internal Medicine, Universidad Central del Caribe, followed with an examination of the ethical and regulatory aspects of biobanking tissues for future research, including informed consent of subjects; protection of human subjects rights; and balancing risks and benefit ratios. In the afternoon, the directors of existing biobanks in Puerto Rico (the Puerto Rico Biobank, the Comprehensive Cancer Center biobank, and an HIV-focused biobank at Universidad Central del Caribe) presented their experiences and challenges with establishing biobanks for research in Puerto Rico. In sum, this workshop presented opportunities to share knowledge in the science of biobanking, for further training, and of networking among the participants (34 from 4 different institutions), which will strengthen the collaborative links between investigators studying cancer in Latin America, the Caribbean, and the US.

A call to standardize preanalytic data elements for biospecimens

CONTEXT

Biospecimens must have appropriate clinical annotation (data) to ensure optimal quality for both patient care and research. Clinical preanalytic variables are the focus of this study.

OBJECTIVE

To define the essential preanalytic variables (data fields) that should be attached to every collected biospecimen and to provide a complete list of such variables, along with their relative importance, which can vary, depending on downstream use, institutional needs, and information technology capabilities.

DESIGN

The College of American Pathologists Diagnostic Intelligence and Health Information Technology Committee sponsored a Biorepository Working Group to develop a ranked list of the preanalytic variables for annotating biospecimens. Members of the working group were experts in anatomic, clinical, and molecular pathology; biobanking; medical informatics; and accreditation. Several members had experience with federal government programs, such as the National Cancer Institute's Biospecimens and Biorepository Branch and the National Cancer Institute's Community Cancer Center Program. Potential preanalytic variables were identified and ranked along with available supporting evidence, definitions, and potential negative effects if the variable was not attached to the biospecimen. Additional national and international stakeholders reviewed the draft manuscript.

RESULTS

The ranked listing of 170 preanalytic variables produced can be used as a guide for site-specific implementation into patient care and/or research biorepository processes. Conclusions.-In our collective experience, it is often difficult to choose which of the many preanalytic variables to attach to any specific set of biospecimens used for patient care and/or research. The provided ranked list should aid in the selection of preanalytic variables for a given biospecimen collection.

Tracking in Anatomic Pathology

Bar code–based tracking solutions, long present in clinical pathology laboratories, have recently made an appearance in anatomic pathology (AP) laboratories. Tracking of AP “assets” (specimens, blocks, slides) can enhance laboratory efficiency, promote patient safety, and improve patient care. Routing of excess clinical material into research laboratories and biorepositories are other avenues that can benefit from tracking of AP assets. Implementing tracking is not as simple as installing software and turning it on. Not all tracking solutions are alike. Careful analysis of laboratory workflow is needed before implementing tracking to assure that this solution will meet the needs of the laboratory. Such analysis will likely uncover practices that may need to be modified before a tracking system can be deployed. Costs that go beyond simply that of purchasing software will be incurred and need to be considered in the budgeting process. Finally, people, not technology, are the key to assuring quality. Tracking will require significant changes in workflow and an overall change in the culture of the laboratory. Preparation, training, buy-in, and accountability of the people involved are crucial to the success of this process. This article reviews the benefits, available technology, underlying principles, and implementation of tracking solutions for the AP and research laboratory.