Proteomic-based stemness score measures oncogenic dedifferentiation and enables the identification of druggable targets
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cancer progression and therapeutic resistance are closely linked to a stemness phenotype. Here, we introduce a protein-expression-based stemness index (PROTsi) to evaluate oncogenic dedifferentiation in relation to histopathology, molecular features, and clinical outcomes. Utilizing datasets from the Clinical Proteomic Tumor Analysis Consortium across 11 tumor types, we validate PROTsi's effectiveness in accurately quantifying stem-like features. Through integration of PROTsi with multi-omics, including protein post-translational modifications, we identify molecular features associated with stemness and proteins that act as active nodes within transcriptional networks, driving tumor aggressiveness. Proteins highly correlated with stemness were identified as potential drug targets, both shared and tumor specific. These stemness-associated proteins demonstrate predictive value for clinical outcomes, as confirmed by immunohistochemistry in multiple samples. The findings emphasize PROTsi's efficacy as a valuable tool for selecting predictive protein targets, a crucial step in customizing anti-cancer therapy and advancing the clinical development of cures for cancer patients.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".