Integration and analysis of CPTAC proteomics data in the context of cancer genomics in the cBioPortal
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary The Clinical Proteomic Tumor Analysis Consortium (CPTAC) has produced extensive mass spectrometry based proteomics data for selected breast, colon and ovarian tumors from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA). We have incorporated the CPTAC proteomics data into the cBioPotal to support easy exploration and integrative analysis of these proteomic datasets in the context of the clinical and genomics data from the same tumors. cBioPortal is an open source platform for exploring, visualizing, and analyzing multi-dimensional cancer genomics and clinical data. The public instance of the cBioPortal ( http://cbioportal.org/ ) hosts more than 100 cancer genomics studies including all of the data from TCGA. Its biologist-friendly interface provides many rich analysis features, including a graphical summary of gene-level data across multiple platforms, correlation analysis between genes or other data types, survival analysis, and network visualization. Here, we present the integration of the CPTAC mass spectrometry based proteomics data into the cBioPortal, consisting of 77 breast, 95 colorectal, and 174 ovarian tumors that already have been profiled by TCGA for mutations, copy number alterations, gene expression, and DNA methylation. As a result, the CPTAC data can now be easily explored and analyzed in the cBioPortal in the context of clinical and genomics data. By integrating CPTAC data into cBioPortal, limitations of TCGA proteomics array data can be overcome while also providing a user-friendly web interface, a web API and an R client to query the mass spectrometry data together with genomic, epigenomic, and clinical data.
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 | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.007 |
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".