Metabolomic Profiling of Pulmonary Neuroendocrine Neoplasms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Pulmonary neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs) account for 20% of malignant lung tumors. Their management is challenging due to their diverse clinical features and aggressive nature. Currently, metabolomics offers a range of potential cancer biomarkers for diagnosis, monitoring tumor progression, and assessing therapeutic response. However, a specific metabolomic profile for early diagnosis of lung NENs has yet to be identified. This study aims to identify specific metabolomic profiles that can serve as biomarkers for early diagnosis of lung NENs. METHODS: We measured 153 metabolites using liquid chromatography combined with mass spectrometry (LC-MS) in the plasma of 120 NEN patients and compared them with those of 71 healthy individuals. Additionally, we compared these profiles with those of 466 patients with non-small-cell lung cancers (NSCLCs) to ensure clinical relevance. RESULTS: We identified 21 metabolites with consistently altered plasma concentrations in NENs. Compared to healthy controls, 18 metabolites were specific to carcinoid tumors, 5 to small-cell lung carcinomas (SCLCs), and 10 to large-cell neuroendocrine carcinomas (LCNECs). These findings revealed alterations in various metabolic pathways, such as fatty acid biosynthesis and beta-oxidation, the Warburg effect, and the citric acid cycle. CONCLUSIONS: Our study identified biomarker metabolites in the plasma of patients with each subtype of lung NENs and demonstrated significant alterations in several metabolic pathways. These metabolomic profiles could potentially serve as biomarkers for early diagnosis and better management of lung NENs.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".