Salivary metabolomic identification of biomarker candidates for oral melanoma and oral squamous cell carcinoma in dogs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Oral melanoma (OM) and oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) are frequently diagnosed in dogs, presenting a challenge in distinguishing them from benign oral tumors (BN). Salivary metabolomic biomarkers offer a practical solution because of saliva's direct contact with tumors and the noninvasive nature of collection. OBJECTIVE: Assess the diversity and abundance of the salivary metabolome in dogs with BN, OM, and OSCC using amine/phenol submetabolome analysis and high-performance chemical isotope labeling liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry (CIL LC-MS). ANIMALS: Study included 11 BN, 24 OM, 10 OSCC, and 20 healthy control dogs. METHODS: C-dansyl chloride and analyzed using CIL LC-MS targeted to amine- and phenol-containing metabolites for amine/phenol submetabolome analysis. RESULTS: Distinct clusters and significant differences in metabolite concentrations were observed among the oral cancer, BN, and control groups. A total of 154 and 66 metabolites showed significantly altered concentrations, particularly in OM and OSCC, respectively, when compared with BN (Padj < .05). Potential metabolic biomarkers were identified for each cancer, including decreased concentrations of seryl-arginine and sarcosine in OSCC. Moreover, high-confidence putative metabolites were identified, including an increase in tryptophyl-threonine and a decrease in 1,2-dihydroxynapthalene-6-sulfonic acid and hydroxyprolyl-hydroxyproline for OM. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPORTANCE: We identified high coverage of the amine/phenol submetabolome, including seryl-arginine, and sarcosine, in OSCC. Our findings emphasize the potential of these biomarkers for distinguishing between oral OSCC and BN in dogs.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".