MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1997352005 · doi:10.1158/1538-7445.am10-4574

Abstract 4574: Mining the proteome of breast cancer cell lines and nipple aspirate fluid in the quest for novel breast cancer biomarkers

2010· article· en· W1997352005 on OpenAlexaff
Maria Pavlou, Edward R. Sauter, Beth Kliethermes, Eleftherios P. Diamandis

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicAdvanced Proteomics Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoMount Sinai Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBreast cancerCancerInternal medicineOncologyProteomeCancer biomarkersMedicineCancer researchChemistryPathologyBioinformaticsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Approximately 200,000 new cases of breast cancer are estimated in the United States for 2009, rendering breast cancer the most frequently diagnosed cancer in women. Patients diagnosed with early stage disease have significantly improved survival rates compared to late stage patients, underlining the need for identification of biomarkers for early detection. Breast cancer is highly heterogeneous and it can be categorized into five subtypes with distinct clinical outcome and different treatment modalities. In this study the secretome of breast cancer cell lines and nipple aspirate fluid (NAF) were analyzed by tandem mass spectrometry to identify novel breast cancer biomarkers. To reflect disease heterogeneity, three cell lines for each of three breast cancer types [estrogen (ER)/ progesterone (PR) receptor positive, triple negative, HER2/neu amplified] were selected (HCC-1428, BT483, MCF-7, MDA-MB-231, HCC-1143, HCC-38, SK-BR-3, HCC-202, UACC-812). NAF samples were obtained from 3 patients with ER positive breast cancer. Proteins of NAF samples and conditioned media of the cell lines were denatured, reduced and trypsin-digested. The peptides were separated by two-dimensional liquid chromatography and the fractions were analyzed in a linear ion-trap coupled to an orbitrap mass analyser. Spectra were searched with Mascot and X!Tandem engines using the IPI 3.46 human database. Scaffold software was used to cross-validate Mascot and X!Tandem results. Spectra were exported from Scaffold and uploaded into an in-house-program for further data analysis. Over 1,000 unique proteins were identified in the conditioned media of each cell line, resulting in more than 4,000 proteins from the 9 breast cancer cell lines. Additionally, 780 proteins were identified in the three NAF samples generating the most extensive NAF cancer proteome so far. Using an in-house program, we annotated the cellular localization and the biological function for each protein. Proteins identified in the three cell lines of each subtype were combined to generate non-redundant, subtype-specific proteomes. The proteomes of different subtypes were then compared, to distinguish proteins that may reveal subtype-specific signatures. The comparison between the ER-positive cancer cell line secretome and the NAF proteome revealed 400 common proteins which were selected for further investigation. A set of selection criteria were applied to generate a panel of the 30 most promising candidates for ER-positive breast cancer. Multiple reaction monitoring (MRM) assays for each of these proteins are being developed to verify their utility as potential biomarkers in serum. In conclusion, proteomic analysis of NAF and tissue culture supernatants of breast cancer cell lines holds promise for breast cancer-specific biomarker discovery. Citation Format: {Authors}. {Abstract title} [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 101st Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research; 2010 Apr 17-21; Washington, DC. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2010;70(8 Suppl):Abstract nr 4574.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.053
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.342 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer ResearchSame topicAdvanced Proteomics Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207