MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2077333201 · doi:10.1074/mcp.m600378-mcp200

Endometrial Carcinoma Biomarker Discovery and Verification Using Differentially Tagged Clinical Samples with Multidimensional Liquid Chromatography and Tandem Mass Spectrometry

2007· article· en· W2077333201 on OpenAlexaff
Leroi V. DeSouza, Jörg Grigull, Shaun Ghanny, Valérie Dubé, Alexander D. Romaschin, Terence J. Colgan, K. W. Michael Siu

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecular & Cellular Proteomics · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicAdvanced Proteomics Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsSt. Michael's HospitalMount Sinai HospitalUniversity of TorontoYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiomarker discoveryChromatographyTandem mass spectrometryMass spectrometryLiquid chromatography–mass spectrometryBiomarkerChemistryProteomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The utility of differentially expressed proteins discovered and identified in an earlier study (DeSouza, L., Diehl, G., Rodrigues, M. J., Guo, J., Romaschin, A. D., Colgan, T. J., and Siu, K. W. M. (2005) Search for cancer markers from endometrial tissues using differentially labeled tags iTRAQ and cleavable ICAT with multidimensional liquid chromatography and tandem mass spectrometry. J. Proteome Res. 4, 377-386) to discriminate malignant and benign endometrial tissue samples was verified in a 40-sample iTRAQ (isobaric tags for relative and absolute quantitation) labeling study involving normal proliferative and secretory samples and Types I and II endometrial cancer samples. None of these proteins had the sensitivity and specificity to be used individually to discriminate between normal and cancer samples. However, a panel of pyruvate kinase, chaperonin 10, and alpha1-antitrypsin achieved the best results with a sensitivity, specificity, predictive value, and positive predictive value of 0.95 each in a logistic regression analysis. In addition, three new potential markers were discovered, whereas two other proteins showed promising trends but were not detected in sufficient numbers of samples to permit statistical validation. Differential expressions of some of these candidate biomarkers were independently verified using immunohistochemistry.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.256 · 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

Citations104
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMolecular & Cellular ProteomicsSame topicAdvanced Proteomics Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207