Multiplex assays for biomarker research and clinical application: translational science coming of age

Over the last decade, translational science has come into the focus of academic medicine, and significant intellectual and financial efforts have been made to initiate a multitude of bench-to-bedside projects. The quest for suitable biomarkers that will significantly change clinical practice has become one of the biggest challenges in translational medicine. Quantitative measurement of proteins is a critical step in biomarker discovery. Assessing a large number of potential protein biomarkers in a statistically significant number of samples and controls still constitutes a major technical hurdle. Multiplexed analysis offers significant advantages regarding time, reagent cost, sample requirements and the amount of data that can be generated. The two contemporary approaches in multiplexed and quantitative biomarker validation, antibody-based immunoassays and MS-based multiple (or selected) reaction monitoring, are based on different assay principles and instrument requirements. Both approaches have their own advantages and disadvantages and therefore have complementary roles in the multi-staged biomarker verification and validation process. In this review, we discuss quantitative immunoassay and multiple reaction monitoring/selected reaction monitoring assay principles and development. We also discuss choosing an appropriate platform, judging the performance of assays, obtaining reliable, quantitative results for translational research and clinical applications in the biomarker field.

Reverse-translational biomarker validation of Abnormal Repetitive Behaviors in mice: an illustration of the 4P's modeling approach

The NIMH's new strategic plan, with its emphasis on the "4P's" (Prediction, Pre-emption, Personalization, and Populations) and biomarker-based medicine requires a radical shift in animal modeling methodology. In particular 4P's models will be non-determinant (i.e. disease severity will depend on secondary environmental and genetic factors); and validated by reverse-translation of animal homologues to human biomarkers. A powerful consequence of the biomarker approach is that different closely related disorders have a unique fingerprint of biomarkers. Animals can be validated as a highly specific model of a single disorder by matching this 'fingerprint'; or as a model of a symptom seen in multiple disorders by matching common biomarkers. Here we illustrate this approach with two Abnormal Repetitive Behaviors (ARBs) in mice: stereotypies and barbering (hair pulling). We developed animal versions of the neuropsychological biomarkers that distinguish human ARBs, and tested the fingerprint of the different mouse ARBs. As predicted, the two mouse ARBs were associated with different biomarkers. Both barbering and stereotypy could be discounted as models of OCD (even though they are widely used as such), due to the absence of limbic biomarkers which are characteristic of OCD and hence are necessary for a valid model. Conversely barbering matched the fingerprint of trichotillomania (i.e. selective deficits in set-shifting), suggesting it may be a highly specific model of this disorder. In contrast stereotypies were correlated only with a biomarker (deficits in response shifting) correlated with stereotypies in multiple disorders, suggesting that animal stereotypies model stereotypies in multiple disorders.

Improving outcome after stroke: overcoming the translational roadblock

Stroke poses a massive burden of disease, yet we have few effective therapies. The paucity of therapeutic options stands contrary to intensive research efforts. The failure of these past investments demands a thorough re-examination of the pathophysiology of ischaemic brain injury. Several critical areas hold the key to overcoming the translational roadblock: (1) vascular occlusion: current recanalization strategies have limited effectiveness and may have serious side effects; (2) complexity of stroke pathobiology: therapy must acknowledge the 'Janus-faced' nature of many stroke targets and must identify endogenous neuroprotective and repair mechanisms; (3) inflammation and brain-immune-system interaction: inflammation contributes to lesion expansion, but is also instrumental in lesion containment and repair; stroke outcome is modulated by the interaction of the injured brain with the immune system; (4) regeneration: the potential of the brain for reorganization, plasticity and repair after injury is much greater than previously thought; (5) confounding factors, long-term outcome and predictive modelling. These 5 areas are linked on all levels and therefore need to be tackled by an integrative approach and innovative therapeutic strategies.