L.W. performed the growth characteristic assays (proliferation assay, spheroid assay, migration assay), data analysis of the migration assay and immunohistochemistry as well as participated in the xenograft formation experiment.
As for the successful CONSORT initiative for randomised trials and for the STARD statement for diagnostic studies, we suggest guidelines to provide relevant information about the study design, pre-planned hypotheses, patient and specimen characteristics, assay methods, and statistical analysis methods.
Variability of study results can be partly attributed to patient spectrum/treatment, specimen characteristics, assay methods, study design and statistical analysis.
More than 90% of studies reported details of the objective or prespecified hypothesis, patient source, population characteristics, assay method, manufacturer, cutpoint and confounders.
Similar to the successful CONSORT initiative for randomised trials and the STARD statement for diagnostic studies, we suggest guidelines to provide relevant information about the study design, preplanned hypotheses, patient and specimen characteristics, assay methods, and statistical analysis methods.
The REMARK report stated the importance of transparent and complete reporting in the publication of research on tumour markers, highlighting the need for clear descriptions of patient and specimen characteristics, assay methods, study design and statistical analysis.
Items included were: the description of patients; specimen characteristics; assay methods; study design; statistical analysis methods; presentation of results and study objectives and pre-specified hypotheses [ 71].> After screening the 314 references identified by the search strategy, 71 were included in this review (Fig. 1).
Similar to the successful CONSORT initiative for randomised clinical trials (Moher et al, 2001), and the STARD statement for studies of diagnostic test accuracy (Bossuyt et al, 2003a), these guidelines suggest relevant information that should be provided about the study design, preplanned hypotheses, patient and specimen characteristics, assay methods, and statistical analysis methods.
Systematic reviews have been hindered by varying study designs, subject characteristics, assay methods, test cut-offs and drinking thresholds, but CDT appears to be consistently more specific than GGT, and there may be value in combining the two biomarkers [ 15, 18, 19].
First, marked heterogeneity existed across the included studies in terms of population characteristics, BNPs assays, optimal cut-off point, follow-up period and definitions of endpoints.
