↓ Skip to main content

Validation of biomarkers to predict response to immunotherapy in cancer: Volume II — clinical validation and regulatory considerations

Overview of attention for article published in Journal for Immunotherapy of Cancer, November 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (83rd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (60th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
12 X users
patent
1 patent

Citations

dimensions_citation
91 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
203 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Validation of biomarkers to predict response to immunotherapy in cancer: Volume II — clinical validation and regulatory considerations
Published in
Journal for Immunotherapy of Cancer, November 2016
DOI 10.1186/s40425-016-0179-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kevin K. Dobbin, Alessandra Cesano, John Alvarez, Rachael Hawtin, Sylvia Janetzki, Ilan Kirsch, Giuseppe V. Masucci, Paul B. Robbins, Senthamil R. Selvan, Howard Z. Streicher, Jenny Zhang, Lisa H. Butterfield, Magdalena Thurin

Abstract

There is growing recognition that immunotherapy is likely to significantly improve health outcomes for cancer patients in the coming years. Currently, while a subset of patients experience substantial clinical benefit in response to different immunotherapeutic approaches, the majority of patients do not but are still exposed to the significant drug toxicities. Therefore, a growing need for the development and clinical use of predictive biomarkers exists in the field of cancer immunotherapy. Predictive cancer biomarkers can be used to identify the patients who are or who are not likely to derive benefit from specific therapeutic approaches. In order to be applicable in a clinical setting, predictive biomarkers must be carefully shepherded through a step-wise, highly regulated developmental process. Volume I of this two-volume document focused on the pre-analytical and analytical phases of the biomarker development process, by providing background, examples and "good practice" recommendations. In the current Volume II, the focus is on the clinical validation, validation of clinical utility and regulatory considerations for biomarker development. Together, this two volume series is meant to provide guidance on the entire biomarker development process, with a particular focus on the unique aspects of developing immune-based biomarkers. Specifically, knowledge about the challenges to clinical validation of predictive biomarkers, which has been gained from numerous successes and failures in other contexts, will be reviewed together with statistical methodological issues related to bias and overfitting. The different trial designs used for the clinical validation of biomarkers will also be discussed, as the selection of clinical metrics and endpoints becomes critical to establish the clinical utility of the biomarker during the clinical validation phase of the biomarker development. Finally, the regulatory aspects of submission of biomarker assays to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration as well as regulatory considerations in the European Union will be covered.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 203 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 203 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 49 24%
Other 29 14%
Student > Master 23 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 7%
Student > Bachelor 11 5%
Other 32 16%
Unknown 45 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 45 22%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 35 17%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 30 15%
Immunology and Microbiology 15 7%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 10 5%
Other 18 9%
Unknown 50 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 June 2020.
All research outputs
#3,317,346
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Journal for Immunotherapy of Cancer
#907
of 3,421 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#52,055
of 311,950 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal for Immunotherapy of Cancer
#13
of 33 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,421 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 311,950 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 33 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% of its contemporaries.