ArticleInternational journal of molecular sciences2014
Quantitative proteomic analysis of serum proteins from oral cancer patients: comparison of two analytical methods.
Article in International journal of molecular sciences, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Challenges and Opportunities in Clinical Applications of Blood-Based Proteomics in Cancer.Cancers · 2020Review
- Comparative Proteomic Investigation of Plasma Reveals Novel Potential Biomarker Groups for Acute Aortic Dissection.Disease markers · 2020Article
- Biomarkers: paving stones on the road towards the personalized precision medicine for oral squamous cell carcinoma.BMC cancer · 2018Review
- Proteomic analysis of serum proteins from HIV/AIDS patients withClinical proteomics · 2018Article
- The clinical impact of recent advances in LC-MS for cancer biomarker discovery and verification.Expert review of proteomics · 2016Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Serum proteomic analysis can be a valuable approach for the discovery of protein biomarkers for early detection or monitoring of a disease. In this study, two analytical methods were compared for quantification of serum proteins in patients with oral cancer. In the first approach, we quantified serum proteins between oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) and healthy control subjects by performing in-solution digestion of serum proteins, isobaric tags for relative and absolute quantification (iTRAQ) labeling of the resulting peptides, strong cation exchange (SCX) fractionation of labeled peptides and finally capillary liquid chromatography with tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) analysis of the peptides. In the second approach, we first separated serum proteins with SDS-PAGE. The gel-separated proteins were then digested with trypsin and the resulting peptides were labeled with iTRAQ and analyzed with LC-MS/MS for protein quantification. A total of 319 serum proteins were quantified with the first proteomic approach whereas a total of 281 proteins were quantified by the second proteomic approach. Most of the proteins were identified and quantified by both approaches, suggesting that these methods are similarly effective for serum proteome analysis. This study provides compelling evidence that quantitative serum proteomic analysis of OSCC is a valuable approach for identifying differentially expressed proteins in cancer patients' circulation systems that may be used as potential biomarkers for disease detection. Further validation in large oral cancer patient populations may lead to a simple and low invasive clinical tool for OSCC diagnosis or monitoring.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.