MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4381800848 · doi:10.3390/biomedicines11071786

Integrating Proteomics and Lipidomics for Evaluating the Risk of Breast Cancer Progression: A Pilot Study

2023· article· en· W4381800848 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Natalia Starodubtseva, Alisa Tokareva, В. В. Родионов, Alexander Brzhozovskiy, Anna E. Bugrova, Vitaliy Chagovets, В. В. Кометова, Evgenii Kukaev, Nelson C. Soares, Kovalev Gi, А. С. Кононихин, Vladimir Frankevich, Е. Н. Николаев, Г. Т. Сухих

Bibliographic record

VenueBiomedicines · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicAdvanced Proteomics Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMinistry of Science and Higher Education of the Russian FederationSkolkovo Institute of Science and Technology
KeywordsProteomicsLipidomicsProteomeApolipoprotein A1Breast cancerBlood proteinsApolipoprotein BSelected reaction monitoringTandem mass spectrometryCancerChemistryMedicineMass spectrometryInternal medicineBiochemistryChromatographyCholesterol

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Metastasis is a serious and often life-threatening condition, representing the leading cause of death among women with breast cancer (BC). Although the current clinical classification of BC is well-established, the addition of minimally invasive laboratory tests based on peripheral blood biomarkers that reflect pathological changes in the body is of utmost importance. In the current study, the serum proteome and lipidome profiles for 50 BC patients with (25) and without (25) metastasis were studied. Targeted proteomic analysis for concertation measurements of 125 proteins in the serum was performed via liquid chromatography-multiple reaction monitoring mass spectrometry (LC-MRM MS) using the BAK 125 kit (MRM Proteomics Inc., Victoria, BC, Canada). Untargeted label-free lipidomic analysis was performed using liquid chromatography coupled to tandem mass-spectrometry (LC-MS/MS), in both positive and negative ion modes. Finally, 87 serum proteins and 295 lipids were quantified and showed a moderate correlation with tumor grade, histological and biological subtypes, and the number of lymph node metastases. Two highly accurate classifiers that enabled distinguishing between metastatic and non-metastatic BC were developed based on proteomic (accuracy 90%) and lipidomic (accuracy 80%) features. The best classifier (91% sensitivity, 89% specificity, AUC = 0.92) for BC metastasis diagnostics was based on logistic regression and the serum levels of 11 proteins: alpha-2-macroglobulin, coagulation factor XII, adiponectin, leucine-rich alpha-2-glycoprotein, alpha-2-HS-glycoprotein, Ig mu chain C region, apolipoprotein C-IV, carbonic anhydrase 1, apolipoprotein A-II, apolipoprotein C-II and alpha-1-acid glycoprotein 1.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.406
Teacher spread0.352 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations13
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiomedicinesSame topicAdvanced Proteomics Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207