The proteomic analysis of breast cell line exosomes reveals disease patterns and potential biomarkers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cancer cells release small extracellular vesicles, exosomes, that have been shown to contribute to various aspects of cancer development and progression. Differential analysis of exosomal proteomes from cancerous and non-tumorigenic breast cell lines can provide valuable information related to breast cancer progression and metastasis. Moreover, such a comparison can be explored to find potentially new protein biomarkers for early disease detection. In this study, exosomal proteomes of MDA-MB-231, a metastatic breast cancer cell line, and MCF-10A, a non-cancerous epithelial breast cell line, were identified by nano-liquid chromatography coupled to tandem mass spectrometry. We also tested three exosomes isolation methods (ExoQuick, Ultracentrifugation (UC), and Ultrafiltration-Ultracentrifugation) and detergents (n-dodecyl β-D-maltoside, Triton X-100, and Digitonin) for solubilization of exosomal proteins and enhanced detection by mass spectrometry. A total of 1,107 exosomal proteins were identified in both cell lines, 726 of which were unique to the MDA-MB-231 breast cancer cell line. Among them, 87 proteins were predicted to be relevant to breast cancer and 16 proteins to cancer metastasis. Three exosomal membrane/surface proteins, glucose transporter 1 (GLUT-1), glypican 1 (GPC-1), and disintegrin and metalloproteinase domain-containing protein 10 (ADAM10), were identified as potential breast cancer biomarkers and validated with Western blotting and high-resolution flow cytometry. We demonstrated that exosomes are a rich source of breast cancer-related proteins and surface biomarkers that may be used for disease diagnosis and prognosis.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".