Mapping drug mechanisms with ProteomicsDB: unified omics and cell sensitivity data at scale
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Proteomic and phenotypic cell sensitivity datasets are increasingly important for understanding chemoproteomics and the underlying drug mechanisms of action. Yet, integrating such heterogeneous datasets remains challenging due to inconsistent annotations, incompatible IDs, and variable data processing methods. Here, a major update to ProteomicsDB (https://www.proteomicsdb.org) is presented that combines over 1300 proteomic and 1000 transcriptomic profiles with phenotypic cell sensitivity data across >1500 human cancer cell lines and 1470 drugs. Harmonizing cell line and drug names and applying a standardized normalization and refitting pipeline for dose-response curves enables consistent, statistically robust analysis across studies. Three new graphical user interfaces support interactive exploration of cell sensitivity data, exploring the protein targets and dose-resolved changes in protein expression in the presence of a drug, and comparing the expression profiles of cell lines. With this update, ProteomicsDB is strengthening its future role as a central hub for proteomics and multi-omics, providing researchers with a unified framework to explore phenotypic cell sensitivity in combination with dose-resolved expression proteomics at the molecular level, supporting biomarker discovery, drug repurposing, and precision medicine applications.
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 | 0.009 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 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".