Find trials using a specified biomarker

Why use this

1. A researcher searching for studies using a blood biomarker may find records that mention it only in background text or an exclusion criterion. Study status and protocol versions can also differ across available records.

2. A protocol-grounded shortlist could distinguish direct matches from superficial mentions and preserve identifying study details. It would support further research review without suggesting that a trial is suitable for a particular patient or currently available to them.

Why an agent / simpler alternative

Useful judgment

Interpret the biomarker’s role in a protocol and identify ambiguous synonyms or measurement context.

Simpler alternative

Use a registry’s structured filters when they precisely cover the required biomarker role.

Unsuitable when

The task requires clinical eligibility, treatment advice or handling patient-specific data.

Proposed inputs

1. Name

   Research inclusion brief

   Owner

   Researcher

   Minimum scope

   Specified biomarker, permitted synonyms and required study role

   Quality check

   Clarify whether measurement, enrollment selection or another use qualifies.

2. Name

   Protocol/registry excerpts

   Owner

   Researcher

   Minimum scope

   Relevant public records with study IDs, version dates and status fields

   Quality check

   Keep protocol wording separate from brief registry summaries.

Access and setup — proposed or unknown

Proposed minimum

1. Read-only public or supplied protocol evidence and a private screening table.

Compatibility unknowns

1. Unknown: exact runtime, registry access, protocol availability and current recruitment status.

External actions requiring approval

1. Contacting study teams, sharing patient information or submitting enrollment inquiries.

Expected deliverable and review checks

Proposed artifact

Study shortlist with biomarker-role evidence, sponsor, phase, status date and uncertainties.

Critical checks

1. Each inclusion cites the relevant protocol role.

2. Recruitment labels are timestamped and do not imply individual eligibility.

Missing output evidence

No new workflow run or output inspection was performed for this overlay.

Failure signals and proposed responses

1. Signal

   A biomarker appears only in the background section.

   Why it matters

   The study may not actually use it as requested.

   Proposed response

   Exclude or mark it uncertain until protocol methods support the match.

2. Signal

   A newer registry status conflicts with an older protocol cover page.

   Why it matters

   The shortlist could misstate recruitment.

   Proposed response

   Record the conflict and require current authoritative verification.

Effort and cost — unknown

Setup work

1. Define biomarker role and inclusion rules.

Ongoing review

1. Have researchers verify protocol matches and refresh status before use.

Unknowns

1. Unknown: record completeness, terminology variation and screening effort.

First check — proposed, unexecuted

Status

proposed_unexecuted

Synthetic fixture

Invented protocols mention a biomarker as background, an exclusion criterion and an actual measured endpoint.

Acceptance checks

1. Matches follow the stated research inclusion rule.

2. No patient recommendation is produced.

Stop conditions

1. Clinical judgment or patient-specific disclosure is required.

Limits

1. Editorial research screening; no clinical, scientific or live recruitment validation is established.