TY - JOUR
T1 - Why your new cancer biomarker may never work
T2 - Recurrent patterns and remarkable diversity in biomarker failures
AU - Kern, Scott E.
PY - 2012/12/1
Y1 - 2012/12/1
N2 - Less than 1% of published cancer biomarkers actually enter clinical practice. Although best practices for biomarker development are published, optimistic investigators may not appreciate the statistical near-certainty and diverse modes by which the other 99% (likely including your favorite new marker) do indeed fail. Here, patterns of failure were abstracted for classification from publications and an online database detailing marker failures. Failure patterns formed a hierarchical logical structure, or outline, of an emerging, deeply complex, and arguably fascinating science of biomarker failure. A new cancer biomarker under development is likely to have already encountered one or more of the following fatal features encountered by prior markers: lack of clinical significance, hidden structure in the source data, a technically inadequate assay, inappropriate statistical methods, unmanageable domination of the data by normal variation, implausibility, deficiencies in the studied population or in the investigator system, and its disproof or abandonment for cause by others. A greater recognition of the science of biomarker failure and its near-complete ubiquity is constructive and celebrates a seemingly perpetual richness of biologic, technical, and philosophical complexity, the full appreciation of which could improve the management of scarce research resources.
AB - Less than 1% of published cancer biomarkers actually enter clinical practice. Although best practices for biomarker development are published, optimistic investigators may not appreciate the statistical near-certainty and diverse modes by which the other 99% (likely including your favorite new marker) do indeed fail. Here, patterns of failure were abstracted for classification from publications and an online database detailing marker failures. Failure patterns formed a hierarchical logical structure, or outline, of an emerging, deeply complex, and arguably fascinating science of biomarker failure. A new cancer biomarker under development is likely to have already encountered one or more of the following fatal features encountered by prior markers: lack of clinical significance, hidden structure in the source data, a technically inadequate assay, inappropriate statistical methods, unmanageable domination of the data by normal variation, implausibility, deficiencies in the studied population or in the investigator system, and its disproof or abandonment for cause by others. A greater recognition of the science of biomarker failure and its near-complete ubiquity is constructive and celebrates a seemingly perpetual richness of biologic, technical, and philosophical complexity, the full appreciation of which could improve the management of scarce research resources.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84870341638&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84870341638&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-12-3232
DO - 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-12-3232
M3 - Review article
C2 - 23172309
AN - SCOPUS:84870341638
SN - 0008-5472
VL - 72
SP - 6097
EP - 6101
JO - Cancer Research
JF - Cancer Research
IS - 23
ER -