Current and Prospective Protein Biomarkers of Lung Cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Lung cancer is a malignant lung tumor with various histological variants that arise from different cell types, such as bronchial epithelium, bronchioles, alveoli, or bronchial mucous glands. The clinical course and treatment efficacy of lung cancer depends on the histological variant of the tumor. Therefore, accurate identification of the histological type of cancer and respective protein biomarkers is crucial for adequate therapy. Due to the great diversity in the molecular-biological features of lung cancer histological types, detection is impossible without knowledge of the nature and origin of malignant cells, which release certain protein biomarkers into the bloodstream. To date, different panels of biomarkers are used for screening. Unfortunately, a uniform serum biomarker composition capable of distinguishing lung cancer types is yet to be discovered. As such, histological analyses of tumor biopsies and immunohistochemistry are the most frequently used methods for establishing correct diagnoses. Here, we discuss the recent advances in conventional and prospective aptamer based strategies for biomarker discovery. Aptamers like artificial antibodies can serve as molecular recognition elements for isolation detection and search of novel tumor-associated markers. Here we will describe how these small synthetic single stranded oligonucleotides can be used for lung cancer biomarker discovery and utilized for accurate diagnosis and targeted therapy. Furthermore, we describe the most frequently used in-clinic and novel lung cancer biomarkers, which suggest to have the ability of differentiating between histological types of lung cancer and defining metastasis rate.
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
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".