MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2028369276 · doi:10.1002/prca.200800030

High‐resolution biomarker discovery: Moving from large‐scale proteome profiling to quantitative validation of lead candidates

2008· article· en· W2028369276 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePROTEOMICS - CLINICAL APPLICATIONS · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicAdvanced Proteomics Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProfiling (computer programming)Biomarker discoveryContext (archaeology)ProteomicsComputer scienceProteomeComputational biologyBiomarkerPrecision medicineData sciencePersonalized medicineBioinformaticsMedicineBiologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Diverse proteomic techniques based on protein MS have been introduced to systematically characterize protein perturbations associated with disease. Progress in clinical proteomics is essential for personalized medicine, wherein treatments will be tailored to individual needs based on patient stratification using noninvasive disease monitoring procedures to reveal the most appropriate therapeutic targets. However, breakthroughs await the successful development and application of a robust proteomic pipeline capable of identifying and rigorously assessing the relevance of multiple candidate proteins as informative diagnostic and prognostic indicators or suitable drug targets involved in a pathological process. While steady progress has been made toward more comprehensive proteome profiling, the emphasis must now shift from in depth screening of reference samples to stringent quantitative validation of selected lead candidates in a broader clinical context. Here, we present an overview of the emerging proteomic strategies for high-throughput protein detection focused primarily on targeted MS/MS as the basis for biomarker verification in large clinical cohorts. We discuss the conceptual promise and practical pitfalls of these methods in terms of achieving higher dynamic range, higher throughput, and more reliable quantification, highlighting research avenues that merit additional inquiry.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.310 · 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