High‐resolution biomarker discovery: Moving from large‐scale proteome profiling to quantitative validation of lead candidates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".