Mass spectrometry‐based clinical proteomics: Head‐and‐neck cancer biomarkers and drug‐targets discovery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mass spectrometry (MS)-based proteomics is a rapidly developing technology for both qualitative and quantitative analyses of proteins, and investigations into protein posttranslational modifications, subcellular localization, and interactions. Recent advancements in MS have made tremendous impact on the throughput and comprehensiveness of cancer proteomics, paving the way to unraveling deregulated cellular pathway networks in human malignancies. In turn, this knowledge is rapidly being translated into the discovery of novel potential cancer markers (PCMs) and targets for molecular therapeutics. Head-and-neck cancer is one of the most morbid human malignancies with an overall poor prognosis and severely compromised quality of life. Early detection and novel therapeutic strategies are urgently needed for more effective disease management. The characterizations of protein profiles of head-and-neck cancers and non-malignant tissues, with unprecedented sensitivity and precision, are providing technology platforms for identification of novel PCMs and drug targets. Importantly, low-abundance proteins are being identified and characterized, not only from the tumor tissues, but also from bodily fluids (plasma, saliva, and urine) in a high-throughput and unbiased manner. This review is a critical appraisal of recent advances in MS-based proteomic technologies and platforms for facilitating the discovery of biomarkers and novel drug targets in head-and-neck cancer. A major challenge in the discovery and verification of these cancer biomarkers is the typically limited availability of well-characterized and adequately stored clinical samples in tumor and sera banks, collected using recommended procedures, and with detailed information on clinical, pathological parameters, and follow-up. Most biomarker discovery studies use limited number of clinical samples and verification of cancer markers in large number of samples is beyond the scope of a single laboratory. The validation of these potential markers in large sample cohorts in multicentric studies is needed for their translation from the bench to the bedside.
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
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".