Kinase Inhibitor Pulldown Assay (KiP) for Clinical Proteomics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Protein kinases are frequently dysregulated and/or mutated in cancer and represent essential targets for therapy. Accurate quantification is essential, but current approaches are inadequate. For breast cancer treatment for example, the identification and quantification of the protein kinase ERBB2 is critical for therapeutic decisions. While immunohistochemistry (IHC) is the current clinical diagnostic approach, it is only semiquantitative. Mass spectrometry-based proteomics offers more quantitative assays that, unlike IHC, can be used to accurately evaluate hundreds of kinases simultaneously. The enrichment of less abundant kinase targets for quantification, along with depletion of interfering proteins, improves sensitivity and thus promotes more effective downstream analyses. Multiple kinase inhibitors were therefore deployed as a capture matrix for kinase inhibitor pulldown (KiP) assays designed to profile the human protein kinome as broadly as possible. Optimized assays were initially evaluated in 16 patient derived xenograft models (PDX) where KiP identified multiple differentially expressed and biologically relevant kinases. From these analyses, an optimized single-shot parallel reaction monitoring (PRM) method was developed to improve quantitative fidelity. The PRM KiP approach was then reapplied to low quantities of proteins typical of protein yields from core needle biopsies of human cancers. The initial prototype targeting 100 kinases recapitulated intrinsic subtyping of PDX models obtained from comprehensive proteomic and transcriptomic profiling. Luminal and HER2 enriched OCT-frozen patient biopsies subsequently analyzed through KiP-PRM also clustered by subtype. Finally, stable isotope labeled peptide standards were developed to define a prototype clinical method.
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 | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.004 |
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".