Guidelines for the use of biomarkers: principles, processes and practical considerations.

Andrea R Horvath, Erika Kis, Eva Dobos
{"title":"Guidelines for the use of biomarkers: principles, processes and practical considerations.","authors":"Andrea R Horvath,&nbsp;Erika Kis,&nbsp;Eva Dobos","doi":"10.3109/00365513.2010.493424","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>With the growing availability of new health care technologies and rapidly emerging biomarker discoveries, clinicians need advice on the clinical validity and utility of new tests and whether they improve clinical, patient-centred, organizational or economic outcomes. High quality clinical practice guidelines (CPGs), based on well-designed and conducted test evaluation studies, are tools for translating research into practice and in promoting a value- and evidence-based approach for clinical utilization and reimbursement of new biomarkers. Such study protocols should be appropriate for the questions addressed at each stage of biomarker development: 1/ Basic research into the association of disease with the new biomarker; 2/ Modelling the potential use of the new biomarker in clinical practice; Studies on the 3/ analytic validity; 4/ clinical validity (efficacy); 5/ clinical utility (effectiveness); and 6/ clinical impact (efficiency) of testing. Irrespective of the facts that CPGs potentially influence important clinical decisions and thus patient outcomes, current approaches to CPG development often do not follow the rigorous processes of scientific publications. Guidelines should be outcome oriented; reliable and free from any forms of bias; based on high quality research or on formal consensus when evidence is conflicting or lacking; multidisciplinary; flexible and applicable to various clinical circumstances and patient preferences; clear; cost-effective; appropriately disseminated and implemented; amenable to measurement of their impact in practice; and regularly reviewed and updated. Therefore until guideline-making and reporting standards are improved, all CPGs should be carefully scrutinized for methodological and content validity before being adopted, adapted and used in clinical practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":76518,"journal":{"name":"Scandinavian journal of clinical and laboratory investigation. Supplementum","volume":"242 ","pages":"109-16"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2010-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.3109/00365513.2010.493424","citationCount":"17","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Scandinavian journal of clinical and laboratory investigation. Supplementum","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3109/00365513.2010.493424","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 17

Abstract

With the growing availability of new health care technologies and rapidly emerging biomarker discoveries, clinicians need advice on the clinical validity and utility of new tests and whether they improve clinical, patient-centred, organizational or economic outcomes. High quality clinical practice guidelines (CPGs), based on well-designed and conducted test evaluation studies, are tools for translating research into practice and in promoting a value- and evidence-based approach for clinical utilization and reimbursement of new biomarkers. Such study protocols should be appropriate for the questions addressed at each stage of biomarker development: 1/ Basic research into the association of disease with the new biomarker; 2/ Modelling the potential use of the new biomarker in clinical practice; Studies on the 3/ analytic validity; 4/ clinical validity (efficacy); 5/ clinical utility (effectiveness); and 6/ clinical impact (efficiency) of testing. Irrespective of the facts that CPGs potentially influence important clinical decisions and thus patient outcomes, current approaches to CPG development often do not follow the rigorous processes of scientific publications. Guidelines should be outcome oriented; reliable and free from any forms of bias; based on high quality research or on formal consensus when evidence is conflicting or lacking; multidisciplinary; flexible and applicable to various clinical circumstances and patient preferences; clear; cost-effective; appropriately disseminated and implemented; amenable to measurement of their impact in practice; and regularly reviewed and updated. Therefore until guideline-making and reporting standards are improved, all CPGs should be carefully scrutinized for methodological and content validity before being adopted, adapted and used in clinical practice.

生物标记物使用指南:原则、过程和实际考虑。
随着新的卫生保健技术的日益普及和生物标志物的迅速发现,临床医生需要关于新测试的临床有效性和效用的建议,以及它们是否改善了临床、以患者为中心、组织或经济结果。基于精心设计和实施的测试评估研究的高质量临床实践指南(cpg)是将研究转化为实践并促进临床利用和补偿新生物标志物的价值和循证方法的工具。此类研究方案应适用于生物标志物开发的每个阶段所解决的问题:1/疾病与新生物标志物相关性的基础研究;2/模拟新生物标志物在临床实践中的潜在应用;3/分析效度研究4/临床效度(疗效);5/临床效用(有效性);6/临床影响(效率)检测。尽管CPG可能会影响重要的临床决策,从而影响患者的预后,但目前的CPG开发方法往往没有遵循科学出版物的严格流程。准则应以结果为导向;可靠的,没有任何形式的偏见;当证据相互矛盾或缺乏时,基于高质量的研究或正式的共识;多学科;灵活适用于各种临床情况和患者偏好;清晰;成本效益;适当传播和执行;能够衡量其在实践中的影响;并定期审查和更新。因此,在指南制定和报告标准得到改进之前,在临床实践中采用、调整和使用所有CPGs之前,应仔细审查其方法和内容的有效性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信