Paradigm shift in biomarker translation: a pipeline to generate clinical grade biomarker candidates from DIA-MS discovery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Clinical biomarker development has been stymied by inaccurate protein quantification from mass spectrometry (MS) discovery data and a prolonged validation process. To mitigate these issues, we created the Targeted Extraction Assessment of Quantification (TEAQ) software package. This innovative tool uses the discovery cohort analysis to select precursors, peptides, and proteins that adhere to established targeted assay criteria. TEAQ was applied to Data-Independent Acquisition MS data from plasma samples acquired on an Orbitrap™ Astral™ MS. Identified precursors were evaluated for linearity, specificity, repeatability, reproducibility, and intra-protein correlation from 11-point loading curves under three throughputs, to develop a resource for clinical-grade targeted assays. From a clinical cohort of individuals with inflammatory bowel disease (n=492), TEAQ successfully identified 1116 signature peptides for 327 quantifiable proteins from 1180 identified proteins. Embedding stringent selection criteria adaptable to targeted assay development into the analysis of discovery data will streamline the transition to validation and clinical studies.
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 | 0.025 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.008 |
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".