Yearly Archive

Yearly Archives: 2014

July 8, 2014 comments

Twenty six of the best candidate protein biomarkers have no ability to predict Alzheimer’s Disease

DrugBaron woke up this morning to the latest chapter in the “blood test for Alzheimer’s Disease” soap opera, with this article from the BBC trumpeting the latest study to be published as a “major step forward”.

The study behind the headlines was published (unusually for a “major breakthrough”) in the journal Alzheimer’s & Dementia, and described a study based on the measurement of 26 candidate protein biomarkers in blood samples from 1,148 individuals, 476 with Alzheimer’s Disease, 220 with mild cognitive impairment (MCI), and 452 controls of similar age but no dementia.

The authors of the study, and their industrial collaborators at Proteome Sciences plc, were not backward at promoting this work as a significant: Dr Ian Pike, Chief Operating Officer at Proteome Science declared “Having a protein test is really a major step forwards.  [It] will take several years and need many more patients before we can be certain these tests are suitable for routine clinical use, that process can start fairly quickly now.”

Even independent voices were quick to praise the new research: Eric Karran, Director of Research at Alzheimer’s Research UK, described the study as a “technical tour de force”.  Really?

This is, after all, not the first 2014 paper to make such a claim: in March a paper in Nature Medicine made almost identical claims, and BBC article reporting that study even used many of the same stock images!  Even the headline claims of the two studies were similar (90% accuracy for the Nature Medicine paper verus 87% accuracy for the new study).  And both used similar methodology: multivariate signatures, although the earlier study was focused on metabolic biomarkers and the new study on proteins.

So did the new study justify the hype any more than the previous attempts to solve this important problem? DrugBaron reviewed the primary publication with interest.

More

More
January 2, 2012 no comments

The interleukin lottery: playing the odds on numbers 9 and 16

The interleukins are an odd family.  One name …

More
November 1, 2011 no comments

The End of a Dream for Population Screening as Diagnostic’s “Blockbuster” Product

For a decade investors in the development of …

More
November 1, 2011 no comments

Smoke Screen: The intensifying debate about population screening generates more heat than light

If a test with prognostic value exists, should …

More
September 11, 2011 no comments

Personalized Medicine Demands Investment in Innovative Diagnostics: Will the Returns be High Enough?

Several very senior pharma executives were recently overheard …

More
August 22, 2011 no comments

Ultra-sensitive NMR-based diagnosis for infectious diseases: the tortoise races the hare again

Obtaining rapid and reliable diagnosis of infectious diseases …

More
July 14, 2011 no comments

Chemokines as biomarkers for cancer: Time to revisit an old friend?

A wide-ranging study pre-published on-line in Nature last …

More
March 31, 2011 no comments

Biomarkers: lessons from history

The increase in the use of the term …

More
November 22, 2010 no comments

FDA guidance on the use of biomarkers as drug development tools

Back in September the US Food and Drug …

More
September 20, 2010 no comments

Biomarkers: standing the test of time means good initial study design

It feels like every other day that another …

More

Yearly Archive