Liquid Biopsy Proteomics in Ophthalmology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Minimally invasive liquid biopsies from the eye capture locally enriched fluids that contain thousands of proteins from highly specialized ocular cell types, presenting a promising alternative to solid tissue biopsies. The advantages of liquid biopsies include sampling the eye without causing irreversible functional damage, potentially better reflecting tissue heterogeneity, collecting samples in an outpatient setting, monitoring therapeutic response with sequential sampling, and even allowing examination of disease mechanisms at the cell level in living humans, an approach that we refer to as TEMPO (Tracing Expression of Multiple Protein Origins). Liquid biopsy proteomics has the potential to transform molecular diagnostics and prognostics and to assess disease mechanisms and personalized therapeutic strategies in individual patients. This review addresses opportunities, challenges, and future directions of high-resolution liquid biopsy proteomics in ophthalmology, with particular emphasis on the large-scale collection of high-quality samples, cutting edge proteomics technology, and artificial intelligence-supported data analysis.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| 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".