A Proteome Resource of Ovarian Cancer Ascites: Integrated Proteomic and Bioinformatic Analyses To Identify Putative Biomarkers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Epithelial ovarian cancer is the most lethal gynecological malignancy, and disease-specific biomarkers are urgently needed to improve diagnosis, prognosis, and to predict and monitor treatment efficiency. We present an in-depth proteomic analysis of selected biochemical fractions of human ovarian cancer ascites, resulting in the stringent and confident identification of over 2500 proteins. Rigorous filter schemes were applied to objectively minimize the number of false-positive identifications, and we only report proteins with substantial peptide evidence. Integrated computational analysis of the ascites proteome combined with several recently published proteomic data sets of human plasma, urine, 59 ovarian cancer related microarray data sets, and protein-protein interactions from the Interologous Interaction Database I (2)D ( http://ophid.utoronto.ca/i2d) resulted in a short-list of 80 putative biomarkers. The presented proteomics analysis provides a significant resource for ovarian cancer research, and a framework for biomarker discovery.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".