Reporting recommendations for tumor marker prognostic studies.

By Lisa M. McShane, Douglas G. Altman, Willi Sauerbrei, S. Taube, M. Gion, G. Clark. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 2005

808 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Molecular Biology, Statistics and Probability

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/5400704c817c6afd4b3b08daa961174c3e8cff9a

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Molecular Biology

In Statistics and Probability

Citations in the corpus

Cutoff Finder: A Comprehensive and Straightforward Web Application Enabling Rapid Biomarker Cutoff Optimization (2012, background): “Conflicting the need of a higher degree of objectivity [13], cutoff point determination is often done in a non-systematic manner and therefore among the causes for a poor reproducibility of biomarker studies.”
A 17-gene assay to predict prostate cancer aggressiveness in the context of Gleason grade heterogeneity, tumor multifocality, and biopsy undersampling. (2014, methodology): “The validation study conformed to the REMARK (Reporting Recommendations for Tumor Marker Prognostic Studies) guidelines for biomarker validation [25].”
Reporting Recommendations for Tumor Marker Prognostic Studies (REMARK): Explanation and Elaboration (2012, methodology): “The initial REMARK paper [1-7] recommended items that should be reported in all published tumor marker prognostic studies (Table 1).”
Prognostic value of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes in triple-negative breast cancers from two phase III randomized adjuvant breast cancer trials: ECOG 2197 and ECOG 1199. (2014, methodology): “We herein describe a prospective-retrospective validation study performed in accordance with guidelines recommended by Simon et al(6) and the Reporting Recommendations for Tumor Marker Prognostic Studies (REMARK) criteria.(7) The purpose of our study was to provide confirmatory evidence of clinical ”
Ki-67 as prognostic marker in early breast cancer: a meta-analysis of published studies involving 12 155 patients (2007, methodology): “Prognostic markers may also be used to aid the decision-making process for adjuvant therapy, for example, they may be used as decision aids in determining whether a patient should receive adjuvant chemotherapy or how aggressive that therapy should be (McShane et al, 2005).”
American Society of Clinical Oncology 2007 update of recommendations for the use of tumor markers in breast cancer. (2007, background): “The Update Committee hopes that adherence to a recently published set of suggested guidelines for reporting of tumor marker results (designated the Reporting Recommendations for Tumor Marker Prognostic Studies [REMARK] criteria) will provide more informative data sets in the future.(1,2) The Update ”