MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2029762242 · doi:10.1002/pmic.201400448

Emerging proteomic technologies for elucidating context‐dependent cellular signaling events: A big challenge of tiny proportions

2014· review· en· W2029762242 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Sarah J. Parker, Koen Raedschelders, Jennifer E. Van Eyk

Bibliographic record

VenuePROTEOMICS · 2014
Typereview
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicAdvanced Proteomics Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin DiseasesNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Marfan Foundation
KeywordsProteomicsContext (archaeology)Computational biologyWorkflowSystems biologyComputer scienceBiologyData science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aberrant cell signaling events either drive or compensate for nearly all pathologies. A thorough description and quantification of maladaptive signaling flux in disease is a critical step in drug development, and complex proteomic approaches can provide valuable mechanistic insights. Traditional proteomics-based signaling analyses rely heavily on in vitro cellular monoculture. The characterization of these simplified systems generates a rich understanding of the basic components and complex interactions of many signaling networks, but they cannot capture the full complexity of the microenvironments in which pathologies are ultimately made manifest. Unfortunately, techniques that can directly interrogate signaling in situ often yield mass-limited starting materials that are incompatible with traditional proteomics workflows. This review provides an overview of established and emerging techniques that are applicable to context-dependent proteomics. Analytical approaches are illustrated through recent proteomics-based studies in which selective sample acquisition strategies preserve context-dependent information, and where the challenge of minimal starting material is met by optimized sensitivity and coverage. This review is organized into three major technological themes: (i) LC methods in line with MS; (ii) antibody-based approaches; (iii) MS imaging with a discussion of data integration and systems modeling. Finally, we conclude with future perspectives and implications of context-dependent proteomics.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.947
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.288 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations13
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePROTEOMICSSame topicAdvanced Proteomics Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207