MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2325985016 · doi:10.1158/1538-7445.am2011-5075

Abstract 5075: An integrated <i>in silico</i> and proteomic approach towards the identification of novel cancer biomarkers based on tissue specificity

2011· article· en· W2325985016 on OpenAlexaff
Ioannis Prassas, Shalini Makawita, Eleftherios P. Diamandis

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicAdvanced Proteomics Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProstate cancerCancerIn silicoCancer biomarkersComputational biologyBiologyBiomarker discoveryHuman proteome projectHuman Protein AtlasProteomicsProteomeUniGeneBioinformaticsCancer researchGeneTranscriptomeGene expressionGeneticsProtein expression

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Serological biomarkers represent a non-invasive and cost-effective means to aid in clinical management of cancer patients, particularly in areas of disease detection, prognosis, monitoring and therapeutic stratification. Several notable biomarkers currently in clinical use are proteins that demonstrate high tissue specificity to a single tissue, such as prostate specific antigen (PSA) for prostate cancer and human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) for testicular cancer, the former being highly expressed only in the prostate and the latter in the placenta. Recent advances in high-throughput technologies (e.g. high-content microarray chips, serial analysis of gene expression platforms, thorough expressed sequence tag annotation) has enabled creation of publicly available gene and/or protein databases which describe the expression of thousands of genes (and/or proteins) in multiple tissues. Furthermore, over the past five years, our laboratory has characterized the proteomes of over 35 cell lines from numerous cancer sites as well as relevant biological fluids using a 2D-LC-MS/MS approach, identifying between 1000-4000 proteins per cancer site. In this respect, the present study represents an integrative analysis of existing databases in combination with our in-house generated proteomic datasets, in pursuit of highly tissue specific proteins, which could be further explored as cancer biomarkers and/or therapeutic targets. Through stringent bioinformatic mining of the Human Protein Atlas, BioGPS, Unigene, TiGER, TiSGeD and other related databases, a list of proteins highly specific to normal lung, colon, prostate, testis and ovaries was generated. Interestingly, only a few proteins from each tissue were commonly reported as highly specific across all of these databases and these were selected for further analysis. Subsequent integration and comparison to our in-house generated proteomes: prostate cancer (PC3, LNCaP, 22Rv1 and seminal plasma from prostate cancer patients; 1958 proteins), lung cancer (H1688, H23, H460, and H520; 1856 proteins), ovarian cancer (HTB75, TOV-112D, TOV-21G and RMUG-S; 1123 proteins) and colon cancer (HCT116, LoVo, LS174T, LS180, SW1116, SW480 and SW620; 2124 proteins), helped to corroborate our candidate list. Three, 4, 5, 10 and 7 highly specific proteins based on the applied criteria were prioritized for colon, testis, ovaries, prostate and lung, respectively. The identification of known biomarkers within these lists (e.g. PSA, KLK2, MSMB) warrants the analysis of the remaining proteins in serum, as potential cancer biomarkers and/or therapeutic targets. Citation Format: {Authors}. {Abstract title} [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 102nd Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research; 2011 Apr 2-6; Orlando, FL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2011;71(8 Suppl):Abstract nr 5075. doi:10.1158/1538-7445.AM2011-5075

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)0.000
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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.843

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.138
GPT teacher head0.398
Teacher spread0.259 · 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

Citations31
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer ResearchSame topicAdvanced Proteomics Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207