MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407771499 · doi:10.1039/d4mo00222a

Revealing the dynamics of fungal disease with proteomics

2025· review· en· W4407771499 on OpenAlexafffund
Mariana Cavalcante e. Almeida Sá, Brianna Ball, Jennifer Geddes‐McAlister

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecular Omics · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAntifungal resistance and susceptibility
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersInstitute of Infection and ImmunityCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsDynamics (music)ProteomicsComputational biologyBiologyComputer sciencePsychologyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The occurrence and distribution of new and re-emerging fungal pathogens, along with rates of antifungal resistance, are rising across the globe, and correspondingly, so are our awareness and call for action to address this public health concern. To effectively detect, monitor, and treat fungal infections, biological insights into the mechanisms that regulate pathogenesis, influence survival, and promote resistance are urgently needed. Mass spectrometry-based proteomics is a high-resolution technique that enables the identification and quantification of proteins across diverse biological systems to better understand the biology driving phenotypes. In this review, we highlight dynamic and innovative applications of proteomics to characterize three critical fungal pathogens (i.e., Candida spp., Cryptococcus spp., and Aspergillus spp.) causing disease in humans. We present strategies to investigate the host–pathogen interface, virulence factor production, and protein-level drivers of antifungal resistance. Through these studies, new opportunities for biomarker development, drug target discovery, and immune system remodeling are discussed, supporting the use of proteomics to combat a plethora of fungal diseases threatening global health.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.668
Threshold uncertainty score0.875

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.294 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations12
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMolecular OmicsSame topicAntifungal resistance and susceptibilityFrench-language works237,207