Abstract
The principal conclusions and opportunities that can be drawn from this conference are as follows. The meeting demonstrated the large communication gap that still exists between most epidemiologists and laboratory scientists. This problem could be overcome if epidemiologists worked closely with laboratory scientists at the outset of any project so that a better understanding could be built between them. Epidemiologists need simple, well-characterized, reproducible assays that can be applied to hundreds or thousands of people. Most laboratory scientists have little interest in running large numbers of assays, but wish to continually refine their methods so that they stay on the "cutting edge" of basic research. This problem could be overcome if the new laboratory technology could be transferred to contract laboratories or small companies. Problems of technology transfer therefore need to be addressed. Current and new biomarkers need to be better validated in the field and by studying animal models. More information on the background expression of biomarkers in the general population is needed (i.e. what is the normal range?). Ethical issues, such as the possibility that biomarkers of susceptibility could be used to exclude people from the workplace, need to be addressed.