MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2091773180 · doi:10.1021/pr1011087

In-Depth Proteomics of Ovarian Cancer Ascites: Combining Shotgun Proteomics and Selected Reaction Monitoring Mass Spectrometry

2011· article· en· W2091773180 on OpenAlexafffund
Sarah Elschenbroich, Vladimir Ignatchenko, Blaise Clarke, Steve E. Kalloger, Paul C. Boutros, Anthony O. Gramolini, Patricia Shaw, Igor Jurišica, Thomas Kislinger

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Proteome Research · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicAdvanced Proteomics Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsVancouver General HospitalUniversity Health NetworkBC Cancer AgencyOntario Institute for Cancer Research
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsProteomicsOvarian cancerShotgun proteomicsProteomeCancerQuantitative proteomicsCancer biomarkersAscitesMesothelinComputational biologyBioinformaticsBiologyMedicineInternal medicineBiochemistryGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) is the most common gynecological cancer and the ninth most common cancer overall. Major problems associated with EOC include poorly characterized disease progression, disease heterogeneity, lack of early detection markers and the development of chemoresistance. Early detection and treatment of EOC would significantly benefit from routine screening tests on available biofluids. We built on our experience in analyzing ovarian cancer ascites and present an analysis pipeline that combines discovery-based proteomics, bioinformatics prioritization and targeted proteomics quantification using Selected Reaction Monitoring Mass Spectrometry (SRM-MS). Ascitic fluids from patients with serous-type epithelial ovarian cancer were analyzed using comprehensive shotgun proteomics and compared to noncancerous ascitic fluids from patients with benign ovarian tumors. Integration of our data with published mRNA transcriptomic and proteomic data sets led to a panel of 51 candidate proteins. Systematic SRM-MS assay development was performed for a subset of these proteins using both synthetic peptides (13 proteins) and stable isotope labeled standards (4 proteins). Subsequently, precise relative quantification by stable isotope dilution-SRM (SID-SRM) in independent ascites and serum samples was performed as a proof-of-concept validation. The analysis strategy outlined here lays the foundation for future experiments using both larger numbers of patient samples and additional candidate proteins, and provides a template for the proteomics-based discovery of cancer biomarkers.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.307
Threshold uncertainty score0.830

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.296 · 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.

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

Citations79
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Proteome ResearchSame topicAdvanced Proteomics Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207