Experimental Biology and Medicine

Biomarkers are critical to the rational development of medical therapeutics, but significant confusion persists regarding fundamental definitions and concepts involved in their use in research and clinical practice, particularly in the fields of chronic disease and nutrition. Clarification of the definitions of different biomarkers and a better understanding of their appropriate application could result in substantial benefits. This review examines biomarker definitions recently established by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the National Institutes of Health as part of their joint Biomarkers, EndpointS, and other Tools (BEST) resource. These definitions are placed in context of their respective uses in patient care, clinical research, or therapeutic development. We explore the distinctions between biomarkers and clinical outcome assessments and discuss the specific definitions and applications of diagnostic, monitoring, pharmacodynamic/response, predictive, prognostic, safety, and susceptibility/risk biomarkers. We also explore the implications of current biomarker development trends, including complex composite biomarkers and digital biomarkers derived from sensors and mobile technologies. Finally, we discuss the challenges and potential benefits of biomarker-driven predictive toxicology and systems pharmacology, the need to ensure quality and reproducibility of the science underlying biomarker development, and the importance of fostering collaboration across the entire ecosystem of medical product development.

Biomarkers are ubiquitously used within drug development programs in both nonclinical species and in humans to assess safety and efficacy of novel compounds. To routinely apply such novel biomarkers with certainty, a well-defined data package is necessary for review and endorsement by regulatory agencies including the US Food and Drug Administration, European Medicines Agency, and Japanese Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency. This type of endorsement is known as regulatory qualification. Novel approaches are being applied to speed the process, lower the resource intensity, and increase the accessibility of biomarker qualification data and it is likely that consortia will continue to play a fundamental role in the qualification process by bringing together like-minded stakeholders focused on specific tools to accelerate drug development. This article will focus on learnings from the previous three nonclinical biomarker qualification projects, as well as discuss the progression of preclinical biomarker projects into the clinical qualification space and the current strategy for the use of nonclinical biomarker data in the translational qualification of clinical biomarkers; much like nonclinical information is used in the approval of drug development candidates.

Neurotoxicity has been linked with exposure to a number of common drugs and chemicals, yet efficient, accurate, and minimally invasive methods to detect it are lacking. Fluid-based biomarkers such as those found in serum, plasma, urine, and cerebrospinal fluid have great potential due to the relative ease of sampling but at present, data on their expression and translation are lacking or inconsistent. In this pilot study using a trimethyl tin rat model of central nervous system toxicity, we have applied state-of-the-art assessment techniques to identify potential individual biomarkers and patterns of biomarkers in serum, plasma, urine or cerebral spinal fluid that may be indicative of nerve cell damage and degeneration. Overall changes in metabolites and microRNAs were observed in biological fluids that were associated with neurotoxic damage induced by trimethyl tin. Behavioral changes and magnetic resonance imaging T₂ relaxation and ventricle volume changes served to identify animals that responded to the adverse effects of trimethyl tin.

Discovery and qualification of novel biomarkers with improved specificity and sensitivity for detection of xenobiotic-induced injuries is an area of active research across multiple sectors. However, the majority of efforts in this arena have used genetically limited rodent stocks that lack variability in xenobiotic responses inherent to genetically heterogeneous human populations. In this study, genetically diverse Diversity Outbred (DO) mice were used as a surrogate for human clinical populations to investigate performance of urinary kidney biomarkers against classical preclinical kidney injury biomarkers (blood urea nitrogen [BUN] and serum creatinine). In this study, cisplatin was used as a paradigm kidney toxicant, with female adult DO mice exposed to a single injection (5 mg/kg) of cisplatin or vehicle and necropsied 72 h post-exposure and 18 h following overnight urine collection. Interindividual variability in kidney toxicity was observed, with DO mice experiencing either no tubule cell necrosis or minimal-mild necrosis. A panel of urinary protein biomarkers and profiled miRNAs were assessed by receiver-operating characteristic curves as to their ability to distinguish non-responder versus responder animals, as defined by histopathological evidence of renal tubule cell necrosis. A surprising outcome of these studies was that BUN was elevated alongside of urinary miRNA and protein biomarkers in animals with grade 2 proximal tubular cell necrosis; but not elevated with grade 1 necrosis. These studies demonstrate a novel approach for using a rodent population to better assess sensitivity of candidate biomarkers, especially for proposed clinical applications.

Cancer treatment with doxorubicin (DOX) can induce cumulative dose-dependent cardiotoxicity. Currently, there are no specific biomarkers that can identify patients at risk during the initial doses of chemotherapy. The aim of this study was to examine plasma cytokines/chemokines and potential cardiovascular biomarkers for the prediction of DOX-induced cardiotoxicity. Plasma samples were collected before (T0), and after the first (T1) and the second (T2) cycles of DOX-based chemotherapy of 27 breast cancer patients, including five patients who presented with >10% decline of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), five patients with LVEF decline of 5–10%, and 17 patients who maintained normal LVEF at the end of chemotherapy (240 mg/m² cumulative dose of DOX from four cycles of treatment). Multiplex immunoassays were used to screen plasma samples for 40 distinct chemokines, nine matrix metalloproteinases, 33 potential markers of cardiovascular diseases, and the fourth-generation cardiac troponin T assay. The results showed that the patients with abnormal decline of LVEF (>10%) had lower levels of CXCL6 and sICAM-1 and higher levels of CCL23 and CCL27 at T0; higher levels of CCL23 and lower levels of CXCL5, CCL26, CXCL6, GM-CSF, CXCL1, IFN-γ, IL-2, IL-8, CXCL11, CXCL9, CCL17, and CCL25 at T1; and higher levels of MIF and CCL23 at T2 than the patients who maintained normal LVEF. Patients with LVEF decline of 5–10% had lower plasma levels of CXCL1, CCL3, GDF-15, and haptoglobin at T0; lower levels of IL-16, FABP3, and myoglobin at T1; and lower levels of myoglobin and CCL23 at T2 as compared to the patients who maintained normal LVEF. This pilot study identified potential biomarkers that may help predict which patients are vulnerable to DOX-induced cardiotoxicity although further validation is needed in a larger cohort of patients.

While the term ‘biomarker’ is relatively new, the concept is millennia old. However, with the introduction of new technologies to discover potential biomarkers comes the need to assess their utility and veracity for any given use. This is particularly true for the use of biomarkers to support regulatory decisions in medical product development. Hence the US Food and Drug Administration has developed processes for the qualification of biomarkers and other medical product development tools, processes that are underscored by recent legislation (i.e. the 21st Century Cures Act). In addition to these qualification processes, diagnostic tests that measure a biomarker may follow a process for regulatory decision through the processes that evaluate companion diagnostics. This mini-review provides an overview of these processes and their role in pharmaceutical development and clinical use.

Liquid biopsy methodologies, for the purpose of plasma genotyping of cell-free DNA (cfDNA) of solid tumors, are a new class of novel molecular assays. Such assays are rapidly entering the clinical sphere of research-based monitoring in translational oncology, especially for thoracic malignancies. Potential applications for these blood-based cfDNA assays include: (i) initial diagnosis, (ii) response to therapy and follow-up, (iii) tumor evolution, and (iv) minimal residual disease evaluation. Precision medicine will benefit from cutting-edge molecular diagnostics, especially regarding treatment decisions in the adjuvant setting, where avoiding over-treatment and unnecessary toxicity are paramount. The use of innovative genetic analysis techniques on individual patient tumor samples is being pursued in several advanced clinical trials. Rather than using a categorical treatment plan, the next critical step of therapeutic decision making is providing the “right” cancer therapy for an individual patient, including correct dose and timeframe based on the molecular analysis of the tumor in question. Per the 21st Century Cures Act, innovative clinical trials are integral for biomarker and drug development. This will include advanced clinical trials utilizing: (i) innovative assays, (ii) molecular profiling with cutting-edge bioinformatics, and (iii) clinically relevant animal or tissue models. In this paper, a mini-review addresses state-of-the-art liquid biopsy approaches. Additionally, an on-going advanced clinical trial for lung cancer with novelty through synergizing liquid biopsies, co-clinical trials, and advanced bioinformatics is also presented.

Despite recent progress in the development of novel approaches to treat cancer, traditional antineoplastic drugs, such as cisplatin, remain a mainstay of regimens targeting solid tumors. Use of cisplatin is limited by acute kidney injury, which occurs in approximately 30% of patients. Current clinical measures, such as serum creatinine and estimated glomerular filtration rate, are inadequate in their ability to detect acute kidney injury, particularly when there is only a moderate degree of injury. Thus, there is an urgent need for improved diagnostic biomarkers to predict nephrotoxicity. There is also interest by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to validate and implement new biomarkers to identify clinical and subclinical acute kidney injury in patients during the drug approval process. This minireview provides an overview of the current literature regarding the utility of urinary proteins (albumin, beta-2-microglobulin, N-acetyl-D-glucosaminidase, kidney injury molecule-1, neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin, and cystatin C) as biomarkers for cisplatin-induced AKI. Many of the well-studied urinary proteins (KIM-1, NGAL, B2M, albumin) as well as emerging biomarkers (calbindin, monocyte chemotactic protein-1, and trefoil factor 3) display distinct patterns of time-dependent excretion after cisplatin administration. Implementation of these biomarker proteins in the oncology clinic has been hampered by a lack of validation studies. To address these issues, large head-to-head studies are needed to fully characterize time-dependent responses and establish accurate cutoff values and ranges, particularly in cancer patients.

The development of better diagnostic and prognostic non-invasive biomarkers holds an enormous potential to improve the ability to diagnose and individualize treatment of a great number of human diseases and substantially reduce health care cost. The discovery of a fundamental role of microRNAs in the disease pathogenesis and their presence and stability in biological fluids has led to extensive investigation of the role of microRNAs as potential non-invasive biomarkers for disease diagnosis and prognosis. The result of this research has suggested that alterations of microRNAs may be sensitive indicators of various pathologies; however, despite the indisputable progress in this field, the diagnostic promise of microRNAs has remained a work in progress, and circulating microRNAs have not entered the field of clinical medicine yet. Commonly reported microRNAs as disease biomarkers are largely not disease-specific and the results are often contradicting in independent studies. This review summarizes the current knowledge on the role of microRNAs as disease indicators and emphasizes the current gaps, challenges, and questions that need to be addressed in future well-designed and well-controlled studies for a successful translation of microRNA profiling into clinically meaningful tests.

Adverse drug reactions can be caused by a wide range of therapeutics. Adverse drug reactions affect many bodily organ systems and vary widely in severity. Milder adverse drug reactions often resolve quickly following withdrawal of the casual drug or sometimes after dose reduction. Some adverse drug reactions are severe and lead to significant organ/tissue injury which can be fatal. Adverse drug reactions also represent a financial burden to both healthcare providers and the pharmaceutical industry. Thus, a number of stakeholders would benefit from development of new, robust biomarkers for the prediction, diagnosis, and prognostication of adverse drug reactions. There has been significant recent progress in identifying predictive genomic biomarkers with the potential to be used in clinical settings to reduce the burden of adverse drug reactions. These have included biomarkers that can be used to alter drug dose (for example, Thiopurine methyltransferase (TPMT) and azathioprine dose) and drug choice. The latter have in particular included human leukocyte antigen (HLA) biomarkers which identify susceptibility to immune-mediated injuries to major organs such as skin, liver, and bone marrow from a variety of drugs. This review covers both the current state of the art with regard to genomic adverse drug reaction biomarkers. We also review circulating biomarkers that have the potential to be used for both diagnosis and prognosis, and have the added advantage of providing mechanistic information. In the future, we will not be relying on single biomarkers (genomic/non-genomic), but on multiple biomarker panels, integrated through the application of different omics technologies, which will provide information on predisposition, early diagnosis, prognosis, and mechanisms.

Current strategies to delineate the risk of serious drug-induced liver injury associated with drugs rely on assessment of serum biomarkers that have been utilized for many decades. In particular, serum alanine aminotransferase and total bilirubin levels are typically used to assess hepatic integrity and function, respectively. Parallel measurement of these biomarkers is utilized to identify patients with drug-induced hepatocellular jaundice (“Hy’s Law” cases) which carries at least a 10% risk of death or liver transplant. However, current guidelines regarding use of these biomarkers in clinical trials can put study subjects at risk for life-threatening drug-induced liver injury, or result in over estimation of risk that may halt development of safe drugs. In addition, pharmaceutical companies are increasingly being required to conduct large and expensive clinical trials to “defend” the safety of their new drug when results from smaller trials are inconclusive. Innovative approaches and some novel biomarkers are now being employed to maximize the value of traditional biochemical tests. DILIsym®, a product of the DILIsim Initiative, utilizes serial serum alanine aminotransferase values, along with serum biomarkers of apoptosis vs necrosis, to estimate percent hepatocyte loss and total bilirubin elevations resulting from loss of global liver function. The results from analyses conducted with DILIsym have been reported to the FDA to support the safety of entolimod and cimaglermin alfa after elevations in serum alanine aminotransferase and/or bilirubin halted clinical development. DILIsym can also be utilized to determine whether rises in serum conjugated and unconjugated bilirubin are consistent with mechanisms unrelated to toxicity (i.e. inhibition of bilirubin transport or metabolism). In silico modeling of traditional and novel drug-induced liver injury biomarker data obtained in clinical trials may be the most efficient and accurate way to define the liver safety profile of new drug candidates.

In January 2017, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) formally established the Oncology Center of Excellence (OCE) to streamline the development of cancer therapies by uniting experts from FDA product centers to conduct expedited review of drugs, biologics, and devices. In May 2017, the FDA approved a cancer treatment based on a biomarker, without regard to the tumor’s site, by granting accelerated approval to pembrolizumab for patients with solid tumors that have the microsatellite instability-high or mismatch repair deficient biomarker. We describe here the OCE’s role in this first site-agnostic approval and OCE programs for further advancement of oncology-related regulatory science and policy. In addition, the FDA’s four expedited review programs that enable transformative therapies to reach patients with life-threatening malignancies earlier in the development process are key to the continued rapid development of safe and effective therapies for patients with few or no other treatment options. These changes at FDA are taking place in the context of recent progress in the understanding of the genetic and immunologic foundations of cancer, resulting in the development of targeted therapies and immunotherapies. The traditional system of phased clinical trials has evolved as early trials of breakthrough therapies use expansion cohorts in a process known as seamless drug development. Increasingly, FDA approvals of targeted therapies are likely to have contemporaneous approvals of companion diagnostics to identify patients whose cancers harbor actionable abnormalities.

Biomarkers are the pillars of precision medicine and are delivering on expectations of molecular, quantitative health. These features have made clinical decisions more precise and personalized, but require a high bar for validation. Biomarkers have improved health outcomes in a few areas such as cancer, pharmacogenetics, and safety. Burgeoning big data research infrastructure, the internet of things, and increased patient participation will accelerate discovery in the many areas that have not yet realized the full potential of biomarkers for precision health. Here we review themes of biomarker discovery, current implementations of biomarkers for precision health, and future opportunities and challenges for biomarker discovery.