EDITORIAL-Medical practitioners have always relied on surrogate markers of inaccessible biological processes to make their diagnosis, whether it was the pallor of shock, the flush of inflammation, or the jaundice of liver failure. Obviously, the current implementation of biomarkers for disease is far more sophisticated, relying on highly reproducible, quantitative measurements of molecules that are often mechanistically associated with the disease in question, as in glycated hemoglobin for the diagnosis of diabetes [1] or the presence of cardiac troponins in the blood for confirmation of myocardial infarcts [2]. In cancer, where the initial symptoms are often subtle and the consequences of delayed diagnosis often drastic for disease management, the impetus to discover readily accessible, reliable, and accurate biomarkers for early detection is compelling. Yet despite years of intense activity, the stable of clinically validated, cost-effective biomarkers for early detection of cancer is pathetically small and still dominated by a handful of markers (CA-125, CEA, PSA) first discovered decades ago...
Revised: November 28, 2011 |
Published: December 1, 2010