From guideline to clinic: biomarker-guided therapy in endocrinology

Abstract

Across multiple cohorts, patient selection criteria deserve closer scrutiny, particularly in resource-constrained settings. Recent studies suggest that training and accreditation are decisive for reproducibility, with meaningful differences between subgroups. Longitudinal data show that variability between operators remains a key limitation, with meaningful differences between subgroups.

When protocols are compared, digital tooling shortens time-to-decision considerably, particularly in resource-constrained settings. Longitudinal data show that threshold harmonization is still an open question, and this trend is expected to continue.

Recent studies suggest that cross-disciplinary review changes the initial assessment in a sizeable minority of cases, particularly in resource-constrained settings. In routine practice, cross-disciplinary review changes the initial assessment in a sizeable minority of cases, as discussed in the accompanying commentary.

From a workflow perspective, standardized reporting improves comparability between centers, although confirmatory data are still limited. From a workflow perspective, standardized reporting improves comparability between centers, pending validation in prospective studies. When protocols are compared, threshold harmonization is still an open question, pending validation in prospective studies. Recent studies suggest that variability between operators remains a key limitation, pending validation in prospective studies.