PMCC PMCC

Search tips
Search criteria

Advanced
Results 1-4 (4)
 

Clipboard (0)
None
Journals
Year of Publication
2.  Translational Biomarkers: from Preclinical to Clinical a Report of 2009 AAPS/ACCP Biomarker Workshop 
The AAPS Journal  2011;13(2):274-283.
There have been some successes in qualifying biomarkers and applying them to drug development and clinical treatment of various diseases. A recent success is illustrated by a collaborative effort among the US Food and Drug Administration, the European Medicines Agency, and the pharmaceutical industry to provide a set of seven preclinical kidney toxicity biomarkers for drug development. Other successes include, but are not limited to, clinical biomarkers for cancer treatment and clinical management of heart transplant patients. The value of fully qualified surrogate endpoints in facilitating successful drug development is undisputed, especially for diseases in which the traditional clinical outcome can only be assessed in large, multi-year trials. Emerging biomarkers, including chemical genomic or imaging biomarkers, and measurement of circulating tumor cells hold great promise for early diagnosis of disease and as prognostic tests for managing treatment of chronic diseases such as osteoarthritis, Alzheimer disease, cardiovascular disease, and cancer. To advance the success of treating and managing these diseases, efforts are needed to establish the temporal relationship between changes in inflammatory or imaging biomarkers with the progression of the chronic disease, and in the case of cancer, between the extent of circulating cancer cells and tumor progression or remission.
doi:10.1208/s12248-011-9265-x
PMCID: PMC3085704  PMID: 21448748
biomarkers; diagnostic; diseases; gene expression; imaging
3.  Workshop Report and Follow-Up—AAPS Workshop on Current Topics in GLP Bioanalysis: Assay Reproducibility for Incurred Samples—Implications of Crystal City Recommendations 
The AAPS Journal  2009;11(2):238-241.
The Conference Report of the 3rd AAPS/FDA Bioanalytical Workshop (Crystal City III) endorsed the concept that assay methods supporting bioanalytical data in submissions must demonstrate assay reproducibility by using incurred samples. The present Workshop was convened to provide a forum for discussion and consensus building about incurred sample assay reproducibility for both nonclinical and clinical studies. Information about current regulatory perspectives on incurred sample reanalysis (ISR) was presented, implications of ISR for both large and small molecules were discussed, and the steering committee put forth recommendations for performing ISR. These recommendations from the Workshop, along with the subsequent evolution of approaches leading to a robust ISR program, may be used by scientists performing bioanalytical assays for regulated studies to provide additional confirmation of assay reproducibility for incurred samples.
doi:10.1208/s12248-009-9100-9
PMCID: PMC2691460  PMID: 19381839
bioanalytical; confirmatory analysis; incurred sample(s); reanalysis
4.  Workshop/conference report—Quantitative bioanalytical methods validation and implementation: Best practices for chromatographic and ligand binding assays 
The AAPS Journal  2007;9(1):E30-E42.
Conclusion
For quantitative bioanalytical method validation procedure and requirements, there was a relatively good agreement between chromatographic assays and ligand-binding assays. It was realized that the quantitative and qualitative aspects of bioanalytical method validation should be reviewed and applied appropriately.Some of the major concerns between the 2 methodologies related to the acceptable total error for precision and accuracy determination and acceptance criteria for an analytical run. The acceptable total error for precision and accuracy for both the methodologies is less than 30. The 4–6–15 rule for accepting an analytical run by a chromatographic method remained acceptable while a 4–6–20 rule was recommended for ligand-binding methodology.The 3rd AAPS/FDA Bioanalytical Workshop clarified the issues related to placement of QC samples, determination of matrix effect, stability considerations, use of internal standards, and system suitability tests.There was a major concern and issues raised with respect to stability and reproducibility of incurred samples. This should be addressed for all analytical methods employed. It was left to the investigators to use their scientific judgment to address the issue.In general, the 3rd AAPS/FDA Bioanalytical Workshop provided a forum to discuss and clarify regulatory concerns regarding bioanalytical method validation issues.
doi:10.1208/aapsj0901004
PMCID: PMC2751302

Results 1-4 (4)