MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2606920884 · doi:10.4172/2155-9929.1000323

Clinical Validation of a Serum Protein Panel (FLNA, FLNB and KRT19) for Diagnosis of Prostate Cancer

2017· article· en· W2606920884 on OpenAlexaff
Shobha Ravipaty, Wenfang Wu, Aditee Dalvi, Nikunj Tanna, Joe Andreazi, Tracey Friss, Allison Klotz, Chenchen Liao, Jeonifer Garren, Sally Schofield, Eleftherios P. Diamandis, Eric A. Klein, Albert Dobi, Shiv Srivastava, Poornima K. Tekumalla, Michael A. Kiebish, Vivek K. Vishnudas, Ranga Prasad Sarangarajan, Niven R. Narain, Viatcheslav R. Akmaev

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Molecular Biomarkers & Diagnosis · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicProstate Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsMount Sinai Hospital
FundersNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney DiseasesNational Cancer Institute
KeywordsMedicineProstate cancerProstateFLNAHyperplasiaFilaminCancerOncologyProstate-specific antigenInternal medicinePathologyUrologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study reports on the development of a novel serum protein panel of three prostate cancer biomarkers, Filamin A, Filamin B and Keratin-19 (FLNA, FLNB and KRT19) using multivariate models for disease screening and prognosis. ELISA and IPMRM (LC-MS/MS) based assays were developed and analytically validated by quantitative measurements of the biomarkers in serum. Retrospectively collected and clinically annotated serum samples with PSA values and Gleason scores were analyzed from subjects who underwent prostate biopsy, and showed no evidence of cancer with or without indication of prostatic hyperplasia, or had a definitive pathology diagnosis of prostatic adenocarcinoma. Probit linear regression models were used to combine the analytes into score functions to address the following clinical questions: does the biomarker test augment PSA for population screening? Can aggressive disease be differentiated from lower risk disease, and can the panel discriminate between prostate cancer and benign prostate hyperplasia? Modelling of the data showed that the new prostate biomarkers and PSA in combination were better than PSA alone in identifying prostate cancer, improved the prediction of high and low risk disease, and improved prediction of cancer versus benign prostate hyperplasia.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.515
Threshold uncertainty score0.815

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.315 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations21
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Molecular Biomarkers & DiagnosisSame topicProstate Cancer Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207