Towards Preanalytical Best Practices for Liquid Biopsy Studies: A BLOODPAC Landscape Analysis.


Journal

Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics
ISSN: 1532-6535
Titre abrégé: Clin Pharmacol Ther
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0372741

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
20 Aug 2024
Historique:
received: 04 03 2024
accepted: 19 07 2024
medline: 21 8 2024
pubmed: 21 8 2024
entrez: 21 8 2024
Statut: aheadofprint

Résumé

BLOODPAC is a public-private consortium that develops best practices, coordinates clinical and translational research, and manages the BLOODPAC Data Commons to broadly support the liquid biopsy community and accelerate regulatory review to aid patient accessibility. BLOODPAC previously recommended 11 preanalytical minimal technical data elements (MTDEs) for BLOODPAC-sponsored studies and data submitted to BLOODPAC Data Commons. The current landscape analysis evaluates the overlap of the BLOODPAC MTDEs with current best practices, guidelines, and standards documents related to clinical and research liquid biopsy applications. Our findings indicate an existing high degree of concordance among these documents. Where differences exist, the BLOODPAC preanalytical MTDEs can be considered a minimal practicable set for organizations to utilize. These MTDEs were developed following extensive examination of best practices and iterative conversations with the U.S. FDA. BLOODPAC recommends the use of these MTDEs in submissions to data commons and to support liquid biopsy clinical trials and research globally.

Identifiants

pubmed: 39164947
doi: 10.1002/cpt.3416
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Review

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Informations de copyright

© 2024 The Author(s). Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics.

Références

Pascual, J. et al. ESMO recommendations on the use of circulating tumour DNA assays for patients with cancer: a report from the ESMO Precision Medicine Working Group. Ann. Oncol. 33, 750–768 (2022).
Grossman, R.L. et al. BloodPAC data commons for liquid biopsy data. JCO Clin. Cancer Inform. 5, 479–486 (2021).
Wilkinson, M.D. et al. The FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship. Sci. Data 3, 160018 (2016).
Febbo, P.G. et al. Minimum technical data elements for liquid biopsy data submitted to public databases. Clin. Pharmacol. Ther. 107, 730–734 (2020).
Graham, R., Mancher, M., Wolman, D.M., Greenfield, S. & Steinberg, E. Clinical Practice Guidelines We Can Trust (National Academies Press (US), Washington, DC, 2011). https://doi.org/10.17226/13058.
Guyatt, G.H. et al. Rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations: GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ 336, 924–926 (2008).
Brouwers, M.C. et al. AGREE II: advancing guideline development, reporting and evaluation in health care. CMAJ 182, E839 (2010).
Merker, J.D. et al. Circulating tumor DNA analysis in patients with cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology and College of American Pathologists joint review. J. Clin. Oncol. 36, 1631–1641 (2018).
International Standards Organization (ISO). Part 3: Isolated circulating cell free DNA from plasma. In Molecular In Vitro Diagnostic Examinations — Specifications for Pre‐Examination Processes for Venous Whole Blood (International Organization for Standardization (ISO), Switzerland, 2019).
Greytak, S.R. et al. Harmonizing cell‐free DNA collection and processing practices through evidence‐based guidance. Clin. Cancer Res. 26, 3104–3109 (2020).
Lockwood, C.M. et al. Recommendations for cell‐free DNA assay validations: a joint consensus recommendation of the Association for Molecular Pathology and College of American Pathologists. J. Mol. Diagn. 25, 876–897 (2023).
Snapes, E. et al. Updating International Society for Biological and Environmental Repositories Best Practices, fifth edition: a new process for relevance in an evolving landscape. Biopreserv. Biobank. 21, 537–546 (2023).

Auteurs

Christina M Lockwood (CM)

Association for Molecular Pathology, Rockville, Maryland, USA.
Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA.

Jason D Merker (JD)

American Society of Clinical Oncology, Alexandria, Virginia, USA.
Department of Pathology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.

Elizabeth Bain (E)

American Cancer Society, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.

Caroline Compton (C)

School of Life Sciences, Arizona State University, Phoenix, Arizona, USA.

Robert L Grossman (RL)

Open Commons Consortium, Chicago, Illinois, USA.

Donald Johann (D)

College of Medicine, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock, Arkansas, USA.

Frederick Jones (F)

Sysmex Inostics Inc, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.

Gregory Jones (G)

Neogenomics, Fort Myers, Florida, USA.

Matthew Kreifels (M)

Streck, Omaha, Nebraska, USA.

Suzanne LeBlang (S)

Focused Ultrasound Foundation, Charlottesville, Virginia, USA.

Jerry S H Lee (JSH)

Ellison Institute of Technology, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California, USA.

John Lyle (J)

Personalis, Fremont, California, USA.

Jean-Francois Martini (JF)

Pfizer, San Diego, California, USA.

Lauren Saunders (L)

Ceres Nanosciences, Manassas, Virginia, USA.

Howard Scher (H)

Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA.

Stella Somiari (S)

Windber Research Institute, Windber, Pennsylvania, USA.

Mark Stewart (M)

Friends of Cancer Research, Washington, District of Columbia, USA.

Jacob Vinson (J)

Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Consortium, New York, New York, USA.

Lauren C Leiman (LC)

BLOODPAC, Chicago, Illinois, USA.

Classifications MeSH