Canal-U

Mon compte
Canal-U/Médecine

Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum – Paris 2012 : Best statistical methods for evaluating the merits of a novel marker


Copier le code pour partager la vidéo :
<div style="position:relative;padding-bottom:56.25%;padding-top:10px;height:0;overflow:hidden;"><iframe src="https://www.canal-u.tv/video/canal_u_medecine/embed.1/cardiovascular_clinical_trialists_cvct_forum_paris_2012_best_statistical_methods_for_evaluating_the_merits_of_a_novel_marker.10913?width=100%&amp;height=100%" style="position:absolute;top:0;left:0;width:100%;height: 100%;" width="550" height="306" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen scrolling="no"></iframe></div> Si vous souhaitez partager une séquence, indiquez le début de celle-ci , et copiez le code : h m s
Auteur(s) :
GELLER Nancy

Producteur Canal-U :
Canal-U/Médecine
Contacter le contributeur
J’aime
Imprimer
partager facebook twitter Google +

Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum – Paris 2012 : Best statistical methods for evaluating the merits of a novel marker

Title : Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum – Paris 2012 : Best statistical methods for evaluating the merits of a novel marker
Speaker: Stefan BLANKENBERG, Hamburg, GER
Discussant: Nancy GELLER, Bethesda, USA
Abstract : Best statistical methods for evaluating the merits of a novel marker
The measurement of biomarkers for diagnosis and prognosis in heart disease has changed the fundamental way that patients are evaluated, and has led to a literal explosion of studies exploring both novel applications of established biomarkers as well as the discovery of newer biological markers. With the rise in interest in novel biomarkers has come a clear heterogeneity in the approach with which these potentially important tests have been studied, partially due to a lack of guidance as to nominal expectations for the approach for their evaluation. To this point, there is no consensus yet articulated with respect to the minimum expectations for which a new diagnostic or prognostic biomarker should be held to in order to clarify or reject their potential value. We recently proposed several standards to which novel biomarkers in heart failure should be held during their evaluation (Table) (1); these “rules” do not specifically apply to heart failure per se, and could thus theoretically serve as a starting point for determining the basic framework upon which the evaluation of novel applications of prior markers or the description of a frankly new biomarker.
1. The method by which a novel biomarker is judged (including and especially when compared to or in combination with other biomarkers) should be thorough: novel tests should be evaluated across a wide range of patients typical of the diagnosis for which it will be applied, and the statistical methods used to evaluate the biomarker (relative to clinical variables as well as other biomarkers) should be contemporary, rigorous, standardized and fair.
2. Measurement of a novel HF biomarker (e.g. in blood, urine or any easy obtainable tissue) should be easily achieved within a short period of time, provide acceptable accuracy and assays for its measurement should have defined biological variation and low analytical imprecision.
3. The biomarker should primarily reflect important (patho) physiological process(es) involved in HF presence and progression; use of biomarkers reflective of disease but originating outside the myocardium is acceptable as long as such a biomarker provides independently useful information involved in the diagnosis, prognosis, progression or therapy of HF syndromes.
4. The biomarker must provide clinically useful information for caregivers (physician, nurses, patient and others) to more swiftly and reliably establish/reject a diagnosis, to more accurately estimate prognosis, or to inform more successful therapeutic strategies. The information from such a biomarker should not recapitulate clinical information already available at the bedside, and must be additional to other biomarkers.
L’auteur n’a pas transmis de conflit d’intérêt concernant les données diffusées dans cette vidéo ou publiées dans la référence citée.
9th Global Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists Forum • Paris 2012
WHAT IS THE OPTIMAL DESIGN FOR BIOMARKER STUDIES?
Chairpersons: Jim JANUZZI, Boston, USA - Faiez ZANNAD, Nancy, FRA
Réalisation, production : Canal U/3S et CERIMES
Keyword : Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists, Paris, 2012, Cardiovascular prevention, cardiovascular pharmacology, biomarker

 

commentaires


Ajouter un commentaire Lire les commentaires
*Les champs suivis d’un astérisque sont obligatoires.
Aucun commentaire sur cette vidéo pour le moment (les commentaires font l’objet d’une modération)
 

Dans la même collection

 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum – Paris 2012 - Workshop 1 : How to secure the optimal dose(s) for phase III? (Michael GIBSON)
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum – Paris 2012 - Workshop 1 : Different doses, different indications? (Freek VERHEUGT)
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum – Paris 2012 - Workshop 1 : New indications: Is heart failure a viable new potential indication for anti-thrombosis therapy (Efthymios DELIARGYRIS)
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum – Paris 2012 - Workshop 1 : New indications: Is heart failure a viable new potential indication for anti-thrombosis therapy (Faiez ZANNAD)
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum – Paris 2012 - Workshop 1 : New indications: Is heart failure a viable new potential indication for anti-thrombosis therapy (Krishna PRASAD)
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum – Paris 2012 - Workshop 1 : Industry viewpoint (Joerg KOGLIN)
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum – Paris 2012 - Lunch Session 1 : Non randomized and/or non-blinded trials (Stuart POCOCK)
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum – Paris 2012 - Lunch Session 1 : Industry perspective (Holger WOEHRLE)
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum – Paris 2012 - Workshop 1 : How to secure the optimal dose(s) for phase III? (Nancy GELLER)
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum – Paris 2012 - Lunch Session 1 : Options of and alternatives to the “control group” in device trials (William T. ABRAHAM)
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum – Paris 2012 - Workshop 2 : Well Established Methods for Imaging Approaches, IVUS and IMT (Wolfgang KOENIG)
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum – Paris 2012 - Workshop 5 : Will we be able to answer the question of HDL as a therapeutic target after the CETP inhibitor trials? (Eric STROES)
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum – Paris 2012 - Debate Session 5 : Insights from DOSE and gaps in evidence with diuretic therapy (Alice MASCETTE)
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum – Paris 2012 - Debate Session 5 : Ultrafiltration for acute cardiorenal syndrome in heart failure (Gian Paolo ROSSI)
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum – Paris 2012 - Debate Session 5 : The Vaptans story post-EVEREST (William T. ABRAHAM)
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum – Paris 2012 - Debate Session 5 : The Vaptans story post-EVEREST (Michael FELKER)
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum – Paris 2012 - Workshop 5 : Will we be able to answer the question of HDL as a therapeutic target after the CETP inhibitor trials? (Robert ROSENSON)
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum – Paris 2012 - Debate Session 4 : Treatment optimization (William T. ABRAHAM)
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum – Paris 2012 - Debate Session 4 : What endpoint for securing approval and reimbursement (Andrew FARB - Ileana PIÑA)
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum – Paris 2012 - Lunch Session 3 : The value of repeat events in post discharge hospitalized HF trials (Stuart POCOCK)
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum – Paris 2012 - Lunch Session 3 : Regulatory viewpoint (Yuki ANDO)
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum – Paris 2012 - Workshop 5 : Identifying new targets: Monoclonal Antibody Inhibitor of PCSK9 (Wolfgang KOENIG)
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum – Paris 2012 - Lunch Session 3 : Endpoint related issues (Alexandre MEBAZAA)
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum – Paris 2012 - Lunch Session 3 : PRONTO (Frank PEACOCK)
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum – Paris 2012 - Lunch Session 3 : Execution issues (Mihai GHEORGHIADE)
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum – Paris 2012 - Lunch Session 3 : ASTRONAUT (Aldo MAGGIONI)
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum – Paris 2012 - Lunch Session 3 : RELAX-HF (Michael FELKER)
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum – Paris 2012 - Workshop 1 :Regulatory viewpoint (Pieter DE GRAEF)
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum – Paris 2012 - Workshop 1 :How to secure the optimal dose(s) for phase III? How to secure the optimal dose(s) for phase III?
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum – Paris 2012 - Workshop 5 : Identifying new targets: The value of omics and mendelian randomization studies (Daniel SWERDLOW)
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum – Paris 2012 - Lunch Session 1 : Approvability issues: Pathway to a more global device approval process (Ileana PIÑA)
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum – Paris 2012 - Lunch Session 1 : Post approval and registry studies (Ileana PIÑA)
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum – Paris 2012 - Lunch Session 1 : Comparative effectiveness studies (Kenneth STEIN)
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum – Paris 2012 - Lunch Session 1 : Comparative effectiveness studies (Rita REDBERG)
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum – Paris 2012 - Lunch Session 1 : Industry perspective (Rob KIEVAL)
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum – Paris 2012 - Lunch Session 1 : Post approval and registry studies (Roxana MEHRAN)
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum – Paris 2012 - Lunch Session 1 : How much one could deviate from “randomized - controlled” trials? Questions
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum – Paris 2012 - Workshop 1 : Regulatory viewpoint (Angeles ALONSO)
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum – Paris 2012 - Workshop 1 : Industry viewpoint (Christophe GAUDIN)
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum – Paris 2012 - Workshop 1 : Regulatory viewpoint (Kaori SHINAGAWA)
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum – Paris 2012 - Workshop 1 : New indications: Is heart failure a viable new potential indication for anti-thrombosis therapy (Lloyd HASKEL)
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum – Paris 2012 - Workshop 1 : Different doses, different indications? (Maarten SIMOONS)
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum – Paris 2012 - Workshop 1 : Dosing Issues, Questions
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum – Paris 2012 - Workshop 1 : Industry viewpoint (Yasser KHDER)
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum – Paris 2012 - Workshop 2 : PET-CT imaging in clinical trials (James RUDD)
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum – Paris 2012 : National guideline implementation and national registries.
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum – Paris 2012 : National guideline implementation and national registries.
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum – Paris 2012 : Omics research and system biology. Keys for future personalized medicine How future trials may help optimizing benefit-to-risk ratio. The role of specialist scientific organizations.
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum – Paris 2012 : Omics research and system biology. Keys for future personalized medicine How future trials may help optimizing benefit-to-risk ratio. The role of specialist scientific organizations.
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum – Paris 2012 : debate Omics research and system biology. Keys for future personalized medicine How future trials may help optimizing benefit-to-risk ratio. The role of specialist scientific organizations.
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum – Paris 2012 : The role of biomarkers
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum – Paris 2012 : Journal editor’s viewpoints
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum – Paris 2012 : Journal editor’s viewpoints
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum – Paris 2012 : How should diagnostic/prognostic markers be studied?
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum – Paris 2012 : How should diagnostic/prognostic markers be studied?
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum – Paris 2012 : Best statistical methods for evaluating the merits of a novel marker
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum – Paris 2012 : debate : Best statistical methods for evaluating the merits of a novel marker (debates).
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum – Paris 2012 : Biomarker guided-therapy: Are there other endpoints besides mortality that matter? Selecting the best outcome measures
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum – Paris 2012 : Debate led by Journal Editors: There are too many studies and the quality is variable. Should there be a position statement establishing rules for biomarker studies?
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum – Paris 2012 : Debate led by Journal Editors: There are too many studies and the quality is variable. Should there be a position statement establishing rules for biomarker studies?
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum – Paris 2012 : Resistant hypertension trials: Can renal denervation therapy lower blood pressure?
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum – Paris 2012 : Resistant hypertension trials: Can renal denervation therapy lower blood pressure?
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum – Paris 2012 : Barostim: Experience so far and future developments
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum – Paris 2012 : Autonomic modulation therapy for heart failure: Preclinical data and ongoing trials
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum – Paris 2012 : Debate : What relevant endpoints in autonomic nerve modulation therapy trials? What kind/level of evidence? Targets to meet for approval (FDA, and in EU, beyond CE mark) and reimbursement
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum – Paris 2012 : Debate : What relevant endpoints in autonomic nerve modulation therapy trials? What kind/level of evidence? Targets to meet for approval (FDA, and in EU, beyond CE mark) and reimbursement
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum – Paris 2012 : Debate : What relevant endpoints in autonomic nerve modulation therapy trials? What kind/level of evidence? Targets to meet for approval (FDA, and in EU, beyond CE mark) and reimbursement
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum – Paris 2012 : conclusion
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum - Paris 2012 : SHIfTing evidence in heart failure management.
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum - Paris 2012 : Save life and save cost with ivabradine.
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum – Lipid lowering agents. Now, we have an option! (SHARP, 4D, AURORA)
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum – EVOLVE: A major cardiovascular outcomes trial in hemodialysis patients.
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum – EVOLVE: A major cardiovascular outcomes trial in hemodialysis patients
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum – EVOLVE: A major cardiovascular outcomes trial in hemodialysis patients
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum – EVOLVE: A major cardiovascular outcomes trial in hemodialysis patients (debates).
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum – RAAS inhibitors and Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (FOSIDIAL, ALCHEMIST)
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum – Interpretation and approvability issues.
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum – Paris 2012 : Impact of major clinical trials on ESC Chronic Heart Failure 2012 guidelines. Game changer trials: EMPHASIS-HF, SHIFT, Devices…
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum – Paris 2012 : Expected implications on heart failure epidemiology.
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum - Paris 2012 : Compound vs. class effect. Drug class recommendations in guidelinesCanadian, Australian CHF guideline and 2010 NICE guideline.
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum – Paris 2012 : Is it always safe to believe in class effect: Spironolactone vs. eplerenone differences and clinical relevance?
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum - Paris 2012 : Globalization of Diabetes trials: Epidemiology of diabetes in the Middle East and Asian countries
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum - Paris 2012 : Globalization of Diabetes trials: Epidemiology of diabetes in the Middle East and Asian countries
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum - Paris 2012 : Globalization of Diabetes trials: Epidemiology of diabetes in the Middle East and Asian countries (debates).
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum - Paris 2012 : Target populations: How do we risk-stratify? Are additional biomarkers helpful?
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum - Paris 2012 : Target populations: How do we risk-stratify? Are additional biomarkers helpful?
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum - Paris 2012 : Target populations: How do we risk-stratify? Are additional biomarkers helpful? (debates)
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum - Paris 2012 : Study drug and background therapy : Insulin in type 2 diabetes: bad guy or good guy?
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum - Paris 2012 : What else than glucose control? Lipids, BP, Weight, Kidney
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum - Paris 2012 : Study drug and background therapy (debates).
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum - Paris 2012 : Non-inferiority, superiority, or both? Operationalizing the FDA guidance
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum - Paris 2012 : Non-inferiority, superiority, or both? Operationalizing the FDA guidance
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum - Paris 2012 : Non-inferiority, superiority, or both? Operationalizing the FDA guidance (debates).
 Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Forum - Paris 2012 : Study drug and background therapy : on top of or vs. Metformin? The issue of background therapy and comparator
FMSH
 
Facebook Twitter Google+
Mon Compte