The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Tumor Marker Utility Grading System: a Framework to Evaluate Clinical Utility of Tumor Markers
Abstract
Introduction of tumor markers into routine clinical practice has been poorly controlled, with few criteria or guidelines as to how such markers should be used. We propose a Tumor Marker Utility Grading System (TMUGS) to evaluate the clinical utility of tumor markers and to establish an investigational agenda for evaluation of new tumor markers. A Tumor Marker Utility Grading Worksheet has been designed. The initial portion of this worksheet is used to clarify the precise characteristics of the marker in question. These characteristics include the marker designation, the molecule and/or substance and the relevant alteration from normalcy, the assay format and reagents, the specimen type, and the neoplastic disease for which the marker is being evaluated. To determine the clinical utility of each marker, one of several potential uses must be designated, including risk assessment, screening, differential diagnosis, prognosis, and monitoring clinical course. For each of these uses, associations between marker assay results and expected biologic process and end points must be determined. However, knowledge of tumor marker data should contribute to a decision in practice that results in a more favorable clinical outcome for the patient, including increased overall survival, increased disease-free survival, improvement in quality of life, or reduction in cost of care. Semiquantitative utility scales have been developed for each end point. The only markers recommended for use in routine clinical practice are those that are assigned utility scores of "++" or " " on a 6-point scale (ranging from 0 to ) in the categories relative to more favorable clinical outcomes. Each utility score assignment should be supported by documentation of the level of evidence used to evaluate the marker. TMUGS will establish a standardized analytic technique to evaluate clinical utility of known and future tumor markers. It should result in improved patient outcomes and more cost-efficient investigation and application of tumor markers.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Radiomics: Images Are More than Pictures, They Are Data
Gillies, R. J., Kinahan, P. E., & Hricak, H. (2016) · Radiology · doi:10.1148/radiol.2015151169 · Cited by 8,421
Breast cancer metastasis: markers and models
Weigelt, B., Peterse, J. L., & van't Veer, L. J. (2005) · Nature Reviews Cancer · doi:10.1038/nrc1670 · Cited by 2,232
Reporting Recommendations for Tumor Marker Prognostic Studies (REMARK)
McShane, L. M., Altman, D. G., Sauerbrei, W., Taube, S. E., Gion, M., & Clark, G. M. (2005) · JNCI: Journal of the National Cancer Institute · doi:10.1093/jnci/dji237 · Cited by 2,162
Self-citationArtificial intelligence in digital pathology — new tools for diagnosis and precision oncology
Bera, K., Schalper, K. A., Rimm, D. L., Velcheti, V., & Madabhushi, A. (2019) · Nature Reviews Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1038/s41571-019-0252-y · Cited by 1,698
REporting recommendations for tumour MARKer prognostic studies (REMARK).
for the Statistics Subcommittee of the NCI-EORTC Working Group on Cancer Diagnostics, McShane, L. M., Altman, D. G., Sauerbrei, W., Taube, S. E., Gion, M., & Clark, G. M. (2005) · British Journal of Cancer · doi:10.1038/sj.bjc.6602678 · Cited by 1,394
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Hayes, D. F., Bast, R. C., Desch, C. E., Fritsche, H., Kemeny, N. E., Jessup, J. M., Locker, G. Y., Macdonald, J. S., Mennel, R. G., Norton, L., Ravdin, P., Taube, S., & Winn, R. J.
- Venue
- JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 1996-10-16
- Volume
- 88
- Issue
- 20
- Pages
- 1456-1466
- ISSN
- 0027-8874 (ISSN-L)
- 1460-2105
- OpenAlex
- W2115581335
- Cited by
- 748
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 4.53
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Tumor Marker Utility Grading System: a Framework to Evaluate Clinical Utility of Tumor Markers. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/jnci/88.20.1456
- The paper
- Hayes, D. F., Bast, R. C., Desch, C. E., Fritsche, H., Kemeny, N. E., Jessup, J. M., Locker, G. Y., Macdonald, J. S., Mennel, R. G., Norton, L., Ravdin, P., Taube, S., & Winn, R. J. (1996). Tumor Marker Utility Grading System: a Framework to Evaluate Clinical Utility of Tumor Markers. JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute. https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/88.20.1456
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.