Elucidating the susceptibility to breast cancer: an in-depth proteomic and transcriptomic investigation into novel potential plasma protein biomarkers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: This study aimed to identify plasma proteins that are associated with and causative of breast cancer through Proteome and Transcriptome-wide association studies combining Mendelian Randomization. Methods: Utilizing high-throughput datasets, we designed a two-phase analytical framework aimed at identifying novel plasma proteins that are both associated with and causative of breast cancer. Initially, we conducted Proteome/Transcriptome-wide association studies (P/TWAS) to identify plasma proteins with significant associations. Subsequently, Mendelian Randomization was employed to ascertain the causation. The validity and robustness of our findings were further reinforced through external validation and various sensitivity analyses, including Bayesian colocalization, Steiger filtering, heterogeneity and pleiotropy. Additionally, we performed functional enrichment analysis of the identified proteins to better understand their roles in breast cancer and to assess their potential as druggable targets. Results: We identified 5 plasma proteins demonstrating strong associations and causative links with breast cancer. Specifically, PEX14 (OR = 1.201, p = 0.016) and CTSF (OR = 1.114, p < 0.001) both displayed positive and causal association with breast cancer. In contrast, SNUPN (OR = 0.905, p < 0.001), CSK (OR = 0.962, p = 0.038), and PARK7 (OR = 0.954, p < 0.001) were negatively associated with the disease. For the ER-positive subtype, 3 plasma proteins were identified, with CSK and CTSF exhibiting consistent trends, while GDI2 (OR = 0.920, p < 0.001) was distinct to this subtype. In ER-negative subtype, PEX14 (OR = 1.645, p < 0.001) stood out as the sole protein, even showing a stronger causal effect compared to breast cancer. These associations were robustly supported by colocalization and sensitivity analyses. Conclusion: Integrating multiple data dimensions, our study successfully pinpointed plasma proteins significantly associated with and causative of breast cancer, offering valuable insights for future research and potential new biomarkers and therapeutic targets.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".