Cargando…

Quantification and expert evaluation of evidence for chemopredictive biomarkers to personalize cancer treatment

Predictive biomarkers have the potential to facilitate cancer precision medicine by guiding the optimal choice of therapies for patients. However, clinicians are faced with an enormous volume of often-contradictory evidence regarding the therapeutic context of chemopredictive biomarkers. We extensiv...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Rao, Shruti, Beckman, Robert A., Riazi, Shahla, Yabar, Cinthya S., Boca, Simina M., Marshall, John L., Pishvaian, Michael J., Brody, Jonathan R., Madhavan, Subha
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Impact Journals LLC 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5514962/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27888622
http://dx.doi.org/10.18632/oncotarget.13544
_version_ 1783250920527626240
author Rao, Shruti
Beckman, Robert A.
Riazi, Shahla
Yabar, Cinthya S.
Boca, Simina M.
Marshall, John L.
Pishvaian, Michael J.
Brody, Jonathan R.
Madhavan, Subha
author_facet Rao, Shruti
Beckman, Robert A.
Riazi, Shahla
Yabar, Cinthya S.
Boca, Simina M.
Marshall, John L.
Pishvaian, Michael J.
Brody, Jonathan R.
Madhavan, Subha
author_sort Rao, Shruti
collection PubMed
description Predictive biomarkers have the potential to facilitate cancer precision medicine by guiding the optimal choice of therapies for patients. However, clinicians are faced with an enormous volume of often-contradictory evidence regarding the therapeutic context of chemopredictive biomarkers. We extensively surveyed public literature to systematically review the predictive effect of 7 biomarkers claimed to predict response to various chemotherapy drugs: ERCC1-platinums, RRM1-gemcitabine, TYMS-5-fluorouracil/Capecitabine, TUBB3-taxanes, MGMT-temozolomide, TOP1-irinotecan/topotecan, and TOP2A-anthracyclines. We focused on studies that investigated changes in gene or protein expression as predictors of drug sensitivity or resistance. We considered an evidence framework that ranked studies from high level I evidence for randomized controlled trials to low level IV evidence for pre-clinical studies and patient case studies. We found that further in-depth analysis will be required to explore methodological issues, inconsistencies between studies, and tumor specific effects present even within high evidence level studies. Some of these nuances will lend themselves to automation, others will require manual curation. However, the comprehensive cataloging and analysis of dispersed public data utilizing an evidence framework provides a high level perspective on clinical actionability of these protein biomarkers. This framework and perspective will ultimately facilitate clinical trial design as well as therapeutic decision-making for individual patients.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5514962
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Impact Journals LLC
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-55149622017-07-24 Quantification and expert evaluation of evidence for chemopredictive biomarkers to personalize cancer treatment Rao, Shruti Beckman, Robert A. Riazi, Shahla Yabar, Cinthya S. Boca, Simina M. Marshall, John L. Pishvaian, Michael J. Brody, Jonathan R. Madhavan, Subha Oncotarget Review Predictive biomarkers have the potential to facilitate cancer precision medicine by guiding the optimal choice of therapies for patients. However, clinicians are faced with an enormous volume of often-contradictory evidence regarding the therapeutic context of chemopredictive biomarkers. We extensively surveyed public literature to systematically review the predictive effect of 7 biomarkers claimed to predict response to various chemotherapy drugs: ERCC1-platinums, RRM1-gemcitabine, TYMS-5-fluorouracil/Capecitabine, TUBB3-taxanes, MGMT-temozolomide, TOP1-irinotecan/topotecan, and TOP2A-anthracyclines. We focused on studies that investigated changes in gene or protein expression as predictors of drug sensitivity or resistance. We considered an evidence framework that ranked studies from high level I evidence for randomized controlled trials to low level IV evidence for pre-clinical studies and patient case studies. We found that further in-depth analysis will be required to explore methodological issues, inconsistencies between studies, and tumor specific effects present even within high evidence level studies. Some of these nuances will lend themselves to automation, others will require manual curation. However, the comprehensive cataloging and analysis of dispersed public data utilizing an evidence framework provides a high level perspective on clinical actionability of these protein biomarkers. This framework and perspective will ultimately facilitate clinical trial design as well as therapeutic decision-making for individual patients. Impact Journals LLC 2016-11-24 /pmc/articles/PMC5514962/ /pubmed/27888622 http://dx.doi.org/10.18632/oncotarget.13544 Text en Copyright: © 2017 Rao et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/) (CC-BY), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Review
Rao, Shruti
Beckman, Robert A.
Riazi, Shahla
Yabar, Cinthya S.
Boca, Simina M.
Marshall, John L.
Pishvaian, Michael J.
Brody, Jonathan R.
Madhavan, Subha
Quantification and expert evaluation of evidence for chemopredictive biomarkers to personalize cancer treatment
title Quantification and expert evaluation of evidence for chemopredictive biomarkers to personalize cancer treatment
title_full Quantification and expert evaluation of evidence for chemopredictive biomarkers to personalize cancer treatment
title_fullStr Quantification and expert evaluation of evidence for chemopredictive biomarkers to personalize cancer treatment
title_full_unstemmed Quantification and expert evaluation of evidence for chemopredictive biomarkers to personalize cancer treatment
title_short Quantification and expert evaluation of evidence for chemopredictive biomarkers to personalize cancer treatment
title_sort quantification and expert evaluation of evidence for chemopredictive biomarkers to personalize cancer treatment
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5514962/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27888622
http://dx.doi.org/10.18632/oncotarget.13544
work_keys_str_mv AT raoshruti quantificationandexpertevaluationofevidenceforchemopredictivebiomarkerstopersonalizecancertreatment
AT beckmanroberta quantificationandexpertevaluationofevidenceforchemopredictivebiomarkerstopersonalizecancertreatment
AT riazishahla quantificationandexpertevaluationofevidenceforchemopredictivebiomarkerstopersonalizecancertreatment
AT yabarcinthyas quantificationandexpertevaluationofevidenceforchemopredictivebiomarkerstopersonalizecancertreatment
AT bocasiminam quantificationandexpertevaluationofevidenceforchemopredictivebiomarkerstopersonalizecancertreatment
AT marshalljohnl quantificationandexpertevaluationofevidenceforchemopredictivebiomarkerstopersonalizecancertreatment
AT pishvaianmichaelj quantificationandexpertevaluationofevidenceforchemopredictivebiomarkerstopersonalizecancertreatment
AT brodyjonathanr quantificationandexpertevaluationofevidenceforchemopredictivebiomarkerstopersonalizecancertreatment
AT madhavansubha quantificationandexpertevaluationofevidenceforchemopredictivebiomarkerstopersonalizecancertreatment