ArticleBMC medicine2014
Towards identification of true cancer biomarkers.
Article in BMC medicine, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Solvent Interaction Analysis: A New Lens for Protein Structure and Diagnostics.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Mass spectrometry-based proteomics as an emerging tool in clinical laboratories.Clinical proteomics · 2023Review
- Review
- Effects of Cancer Presence and Therapy on the Platelet Proteome.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021Article
- Pathway Based Analysis of Mutation Data Is Efficient for Scoring Target Cancer Drugs.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2019Article
- Targeted proteomic assays for quantitation of proteins identified by proteogenomic analysis of ovarian cancer.Scientific data · 2017Article
- A clinical trial protocol to treat massive Africanized honeybee (The journal of venomous animals and toxins including tropical diseases · 2017Article
- Recent advances in mass spectrometry-based proteomics of gastric cancer.World journal of gastroenterology · 2016Review
- Review
- The clinical impact of recent advances in LC-MS for cancer biomarker discovery and verification.Expert review of proteomics · 2016Review
- Comparative Proteomics of ccRCC Cell Lines to Identify Kidney Cancer Progression Factors.Cancer genomics & proteomicsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMost of newly discovered cancer biomarkers fail in the clinic because they lack sensitivity and/or specificity. The current explosion in knowledge of the mutational spectrum of many cancer types, as a result of whole exome and whole genome sequencing, has revealed a wide spectrum of mutations that appear to be highly specific for various cancer types. DISCUSSION: Mass spectrometry (MS) has the ability to monitor tryptic peptides in complex biological mixtures with high sensitivity and specificity. It may be possible in the near future to combine the known spectrum of gene mutations revealed by genomics with the power of MS, in order to quantify mutant peptides that are highly specific for cancer, in a multiplex fashion. Such mutant peptides, quantified in the circulation and other fluids, may represent tumor markers that are suitable for detection and monitoring of cancer. SUMMARY: The power of genomic and proteomic technologies can be combined to identify highly specific analytes for biomarker applications.
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.