a good biomarker is hard to find

[Guest guest]

Re: Biomarkers, Revisited. Unfortunately. http://bit.ly/lI7Ri3 " I can't

begin to estimate how much work has been going into biomarker research in

this business - a good biomarker can clarify your clinical trial design,

regulatory picture, and eventual marketing enormously - if you can find one.

Plenty of them have been reported in the literature. How much are those

worth, too?

" Only 15 of the 35 biomarkers were nominally statistically significant in

the largest studies of them. "

Thanks, . Further, unlike say diabetes, we have disease heterogeneity

within FL and DLBCL, etc, . which likely contributes mightily to the number

of dead ends in this important area.

So I continue to wonder if it would be more productive for researchers to

evaluate for minimal residual disease status through PCR (before tx, shortly

after, and perhaps a month after that?) - in order to evaluate response to

therapy and guide the need to consolidate when a durable remission is the

need and goal.

(PET imaging seems to have too many false positives and negatives)

And is it possible to give a biological agent to induce lymphoma cells to

disengage from bystander cells - so that residual disease could be detected

in the blood? . Similar to how agents are given to induce stem cells to

migrate into the peripheral blood?

This too would have to be proven with prospective study.

- Karl