0 Datasets
0 Files
Get instant academic access to this publication’s datasets.
Yes. After verification, you can browse and download datasets at no cost. Some premium assets may require author approval.
Files are stored on encrypted storage. Access is restricted to verified users and all downloads are logged.
Yes, message the author after sign-up to request supplementary files or replication code.
Join 50,000+ researchers worldwide. Get instant access to peer-reviewed datasets, advanced analytics, and global collaboration tools.
✓ Immediate verification • ✓ Free institutional access • ✓ Global collaborationJoin our academic network to download verified datasets and collaborate with researchers worldwide.
Get Free AccessAbstract BACKGROUND The large, expanding literature on biomarkers is characterized by almost ubiquitous significant results, with claims about the potential importance, but few of these discovered biomarkers are used in routine clinical care. CONTENT The pipeline of biomarker development includes several specific stages: discovery, validation, clinical translation, evaluation, implementation (and, in the case of nonutility, deimplementation). Each of these stages can be plagued by problems that cause failures of the overall pipeline. Some problems are nonspecific challenges for all biomedical investigation, while others are specific to the peculiarities of biomarker research. Discovery suffers from poor methods and incomplete and selective reporting. External independent validation is limited. Selection for clinical translation is often shaped by nonrational choices. Evaluation is sparse and the clinical utility of many biomarkers remains unknown. The regulatory environment for biomarkers remains weak and guidelines can reach biased or divergent recommendations. Removing inefficient or even harmful biomarkers that have been entrenched in clinical care can meet with major resistance. SUMMARY The current biomarker pipeline is too prone to failures. Consideration of clinical needs should become a starting point for the development of biomarkers. Improvements can include the use of more stringent methodology, better reporting, larger collaborative studies, careful external independent validation, preregistration, rigorous systematic reviews and umbrella reviews, pivotal randomized trials, and implementation and deimplementation studies. Incentives should be aligned toward delivering useful biomarkers.
John P A Ioannidis, Patrick M. Bossuyt (2017). Waste, Leaks, and Failures in the Biomarker Pipeline. , 63(5), DOI: https://doi.org/10.1373/clinchem.2016.254649.
Datasets shared by verified academics with rich metadata and previews.
Authors choose access levels; downloads are logged for transparency.
Students and faculty get instant access after verification.
Type
Article
Year
2017
Authors
2
Datasets
0
Total Files
0
Language
en
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1373/clinchem.2016.254649
Access datasets from 50,000+ researchers worldwide with institutional verification.
Get Free Access