Experimental Design and Biospecimens David F. Ransohoff, MD Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology; Dept. of Medicine.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Nick Curry, MD, MPH Infectious Diseases Prevention Section
Advertisements

A Multimedia Approach to Informed Consent Mildred Z. Solomon, EdD Vice President, Education Development Center, Inc (EDC) Director, EDC’s Center for Applied.
Transforming Correlative Science to Predictive Personalized Medicine Richard Simon, D.Sc. National Cancer Institute
Methods: Metabolomics Workflow Introduction Figure 1a: 1 H NMR spectrum of blood serum sample from a breast cancer patient. Results The emerging area of.
Clinical Trial Designs for the Evaluation of Prognostic & Predictive Classifiers Richard Simon, D.Sc. Chief, Biometric Research Branch National Cancer.
Targeted (Enrichment) Design. Prospective Co-Development of Drugs and Companion Diagnostics 1. Develop a completely specified genomic classifier of the.
Multitarget Stool DNA Testing for Colorectal-Cancer Screening NEJM April 3, 2014 Vol 3 Imperiale, T.F. et al Presented by Melissa Spera, MD.
Presenter Anna Daily Ph.D.-Senior Scientist March 9, 2012 Breast Health Providers Conference.
Routine HIV Screening in Health Care Settings David Spach, MD Clinical Director Northwest AIDS Education and Training Center Professor of Medicine, Division.
Advocacy for TB POC Diagnostic Javid Syed TB/HIV 15th Core Group Meeting Nov 3-4, Geneva.
The Genetics of Breast and Ovarian Cancer Susceptibility Patricia Tonin, PhD Associate Professor Depts. Medicine, Human Genetics & Oncology McGill University.
CALGB Fall Committee Meeting October 2006 Correlative Science Protocol Development Paula N. Friedman, PhD Director, Biospecimen & Correlative Science Operations.
Strategic Center for Clinical Cancer Research Clinical Cancer Research using Emerging Advanced Technologies for Health Title Slide.
University of Louisville The Department of Bioinformatics and Biostatistics.
Visualization for Healthcare: Curing Cancer and Controlling Costs Terry S. Yoo VRC Government Liaison Head, 3D Informatics Program Office of High Performance.
Continuous Quality Improvement Evidence-Based Medicine In Practice…
Introduction of Cancer Molecular Epidemiology Zuo-Feng Zhang, MD, PhD University of California Los Angeles.
Sampling and Data Collection
BIOC 401. Blood Sample To Detect Breast Cancer Cancer is actually a group of many related diseases that all have to do with cells. Cells are the very.
Otis W. Brawley, M.D. Chief Medical and Scientific Officer Executive Vice President American Cancer Society Professor of Hematology, Medical Oncology,
Re-Examination of the Design of Early Clinical Trials for Molecularly Targeted Drugs Richard Simon, D.Sc. National Cancer Institute linus.nci.nih.gov/brb.
NCI’s Clinical Proteomic Technologies for Cancer: “Restructuring Proteomics to Succeed in Discovering Cancer Biomarkers” Joe.
Thoughts on Biomarker Discovery and Validation Karla Ballman, Ph.D. Division of Biostatistics October 29, 2007.
Mother and Child Health: Research Methods G.J.Ebrahim Editor Journal of Tropical Pediatrics, Oxford University Press.
Luděk Bláha, PřF MU, RECETOX BIOMARKERS AND TOXICITY MECHANISMS 13 – BIOMARKERS Summary and final notes.
© Dr Whitcomb Familial Pancreatic Cancer Families (and other high-risk people) David C Whitcomb MD PhD Giant Eagle Foundation Professor of Cancer Genetics.
Daniel C. Liebler Vanderbilt University School of Medicine Vanderbilt, Tennessee Performance and Optimization of LC-MS/MS Platforms for Unbiased Discovery.
Genomics Alexandra Hayes. Genomics is the study of all the genes in a person, as well as the interactions of those genes with each other and a person’s.
Darren A. DeWalt, MD, MPH Division of General Internal Medicine Maihan B. Vu, Dr.PH, MPH Center for Health Promotion and Disease Prevention University.
UOG Journal Club: January 2013
Atoosa Adibi MD. Department of Radiology Isfahan University Of Medical Sciences.
Probe into Discovery and Translational Service in Creative BioMart
Applicability of the AGREE II Instrument in Evaluating the Development Process and Quality of Current National Academy of Clinical Biochemistry Guidelines.
OF COLOREATAL CANCER USING SEROLOGIC TUMOR MARKERS DIAGNOSIS & MANAGEMENT.
Metrological Experiments in Biomarker Development (Mass Spectrometry—Statistical Issues) Walter Liggett Statistical Engineering Division Peter Barker Biotechnology.
EDRN Approaches to Biomarker Validation DMCC Statisticians Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center Margaret Pepe Ziding Feng, Mark Thornquist, Yingye Zheng,
Bringing Metrology to Clinical Proteomic Research David Bunk Chemical Science and Technology Laboratory National Institute of Standards and Technology.
Introduction of Department of Molecular Biology for Public Health in SCDC Ye Lu Shanghai Municipal Center for Disease Control & Prevention Shanghai Institute.
The Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian Cancer Screening Trial Fifth Annual African-American Prostate Cancer Disparity Summit September 24, 2009 Christine.
Indicators for ACSM.
BIOSPECIMENS: The Source of Biomarkers Carolyn Compton, MD, PhD National Biomarkers Development Alliance Public Forum Arizona State University March 25,
The Use of Predictive Biomarkers in Clinical Trial Design Richard Simon, D.Sc. Chief, Biometric Research Branch National Cancer Institute
The Problem with Individual Risk Beverly Rockhill, Ph.D. Department of Epidemiology University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill.
Using Predictive Classifiers in the Design of Phase III Clinical Trials Richard Simon, D.Sc. Chief, Biometric Research Branch National Cancer Institute.
Nos Commanditaires : IRIC 16 avril, h00 Salle S1-151 Pavillon Jean-Coutu Université de Montréal.
Update Rapid HIV Test Approval Requirements and Standards BPAC September 15, 2000 Kimber Poffenberger, Ph.D.
Chapter 1: The Scientific Method Leaving Certificate Biology Higher Level.
1.
Introduction to Biostatistics and Bioinformatics Experimental Design.
Robert H. Wiltrout Director, CCR Director’s Address.
Upon completion of this lesson, you will be able to: Identify different diagnostic procedures for breast cancer screening Describe different diagnostic.
Cancers of the Digestive System November 19, 2007 NCDD Meeting Chair: John M. Carethers, MD Vice Chair: Robert Sandler, MD, MPH.
Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium (BCSC): A Research Infrastructure sponsored by the National Cancer Institute Breast Cancer Risk Models William Barlow,
This material is protected by United States copyright law, and includes content owned by Discovery Education, The Val Skinner Foundation, and Rutgers,
Cancer 101: A Cancer Education and Training Program for American Indians & Alaska Natives Cancer 101: A Cancer Education and Training Program for American.
S1207: Phase III Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trial Evaluating the Use of Adjuvant Endocrine Therapy +/- One Year of Everolimus in Patients.
WHY IS THIS HAPPENING IN THE PROGRAM? Session 5 Options for Further Investigation & Information Flow.
Lecture Fifteen Biomedical Engineering for Global Health.
The Bridge from Patient to Scientist Comparison: BioBank and Cancer Registry Data Source Distinct Patients Percent BioBank % Cancer Registry %
San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium – December 6-10, 2016
The third Annual Conference On Gynecologic Oncology and Prevention Oncology July 20-21, 2017 Chicago, Illinoid USA PPGYNO1 Poster Title.
TMIST A Breast Cancer Screening Trial
Biomedical Data Science for Precision Medicine
Patient Biospecimen Preanalytics:
National and International Efforts worth knowing about
Performance Comparison of CA125 and the Combination of the Other Serum Biomarkers for the Early Detection of the Ovarian Cancer Hye-Jeong Song1,3,
Knowledge l Action l Impact
Content and Labeling of Tests Marketed as Clinical “Whole-Exome Sequencing” Perspectives from a cancer genetics clinician and clinical lab director Allen.
Lecture 21: Non-experimental intervention studies (cont)
Horizon 2020 EarLy dEtection of cerVical cAncer in hard-to-reach populations: development and implementation of a new HPV test combining self-sampling.
Presentation transcript:

Experimental Design and Biospecimens David F. Ransohoff, MD Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology; Dept. of Medicine Department of Epidemiology, School of Public Health Director, Clinical Research Curriculum (K30) Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

Discovery Tissue Proximal fluids Clinical Validation Blood Population Verification Blood Population Bio-Specimens Plasma Tissue Proximal fluids Found in blood? higher in cancer? Biomarkers worth evaluating Biomarkers worth evaluating biomarker candidates A Functioning Pipeline for Cancer Biomarker Development Requires Both Discovery and Directed Assay Components “hypotheses” untargeted proteomics genomics

Experimental design and biospecimens Problem In biomarker research, rate-limiting step is faulty study design, when bias (systematic difference between compared groups) makes results wrong and misleading. Approach (to be described)

Problem: Bias – Example 1 Lancet 2002; 359:

Bias may explain ‘discrimination’ Claim ~100% sensitivity, specificity for ovarian cancer Problem: Compared groups: different, not due to cancer Mass spectrometry measurements done on different days in cancer specimens vs controls Spectrometer drifts over time; ‘signal’ or ‘discrimination’ is hardwired into results. (Baggerly. Bioinformatics 2004)

Problem: Bias – Example 2 Clin Cancer Res 2008;14:1065

Bias may explain ‘discrimination’ Claim ~100% sensitivity, specificity for ovarian cancer Problem: Compared groups: different, not due to cancer Cancers from ‘high-risk clinic’ (pelvic mass) Controls from screening clinic “Stress” protein markers may differ in compared groups; bias may explain results; interpretation should be moderated. (McIntosh. CCR, 2008;14:7574)

Bias may occur in different ‘locations’ in observational study design After specimens are received in lab, differences occur in handling: time, place, etc. (Example #1) Before specimens are received in lab, differences occur in demographics, collection methods, etc. (Example #2) Cancer Control Specimens received in lab

Experimental design and biospecimens Problem In biomarker research, rate-limiting step is faulty study design, when bias (systematic difference between compared groups) makes results wrong and misleading Approach Understand specimens are product of a study. Specimen collection must be designed to avoid bias.

RFA focused on technology, not discovery RFA said “no discovery” Request For Applications (RFA) Number: RFA-CA “This funding opportunity will not support research addressing discovery of... proteins and peptides (biomarker discovery)....” RFA also said “collect specimens” Request For Applications (RFA) Number: RFA-CA “(2a) Availability of Human Clinical Samples....The application must include explicit plans for procuring prospectively collected samples....”

CPTAC approach to experimental design and biospecimens Initial proposal from CPTAC sites Collect blood specimens from Breast Ca vs not, after diagnosis is made Decision of CPTAC Biospecimen Working Gp (S. Skates) Collect before diagnosis, to avoid bias of baseline inequality

CPTAC approach to experimental design and biospecimens Source BrCa screening clinics at 4 CPTAC sites, 500 patients/site Patients with breast masses on x-ray, before biopsy Patients (accrual goal: 2000 patients with breast masses) Expected cases: 500 BrCa (250 invasive, 250 DCIS) Expected controls: 1500 Comment: Design of ‘prospective collection’ (before diagnosis) avoids bias occurring before specimens reach lab (Example 2).

CPTAC approach to experimental design and biospecimens Source BrCa screening clinics at 4 CPTAC sites, 500 patients/site Patients with breast masses on x-ray, before biopsy Patients (accrual goal: 2000 patients with breast masses) Expected cases: 500 BrCa (250 invasive, 250 DCIS) Expected controls: 1500 Comment: Design of ‘prospective collection’ (before diagnosis) avoids bias occurring before specimens reach lab (Example 2). Is ‘PRoBE design’ (Pepe, JNCI 2008; 100:1432)

CPTAC approach to experimental design and biospecimens Future direction High-quality specimens: resource for ‘discovery’ questions, to assess technology Positive result (technology discriminates cancer vs not, or different kinds of cancer), demonstrates ‘proof of principle’ that ‘protein signal exists and can be detected’ (i.e., not due to bias). Caveat Negative result does not say “technology doesn’t work” RFA focus: not to design process for ‘discovery’. But perhaps CPTAC approach may be useful in future efforts.

Accomplishments Problem In biomarker research, rate-limiting step is faulty study design, when bias (systematic difference between compared groups) makes results wrong and misleading Accomplishments provide direction for future: High quality specimens PRoBE study design Advanced technology