From: Revisiting the technical validation of tumour biomarker assays: how to open a Pandora's box
Phase | Means/instruments | Main challenges and sources of bias |
---|---|---|
Discovery of a potential biomarker | Hypothesis-generating preclinical or exploratory studies | Selection of biomarker based on the availability of antibodies on the market |
Development and technical validation of the assay for the identification of the biomarker | Optimisation of IHC-based assays for formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded samples | - Use of clinical samples not suitable for the analysis (for example core biopsies instead of surgical samples and TMA instead of full sections) - Lack of reliable positive and negative controls - Poor fixation of clinical samples - Wrong antigen retrieval procedure - Wrong detection method Misinterpretation of the results - Training/competency of the staff - Suboptimal performance of the antibody due to poor fixation of archival tissues (in particular for retrospective studies) |
Validation of the clinical significance of the biomarker | First retrospective studies and subsequent prospective studies | - Training/competency of the staff - Use of small cohorts or large cohorts that include series of cases in which the biomarker has been previously validated |
Continued assessment of the validity of the biomarker in routine practice | Internal and external quality assurance program | - Poor participation/adhesion to the programme - Lack of competency of pathologists participating in the program - No action taken if failing quality assurance |