Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26047516›Full record

ArticlePloS one2015

Classification of Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Gene Mutation Status Using Serum Proteomic Profiling Predicts Tumor Response in Patients with Stage IIIB or IV Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.

Lin Yang, Chuanhao Tang, Bin Xu, Weixia Wang, Jianjie Li, Xiaoyan Li, Haifeng Qin, Hongjun Gao, Kun He, Santai Song and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 15% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Lin YangDepartment of Pulmonary Oncology, 307 Hospital, PLA, Beijing, China.
Chuanhao TangDepartment of Pulmonary Oncology, 307 Hospital, PLA, Beijing, China.
Bin XuNational Center of Biomedical Analysis, Beijing, China.
Weixia WangDepartment of Pulmonary Oncology, 307 Hospital, PLA, Beijing, China.
Jianjie LiDepartment of Pulmonary Oncology, 307 Hospital, PLA, Beijing, China.
Xiaoyan LiDepartment of Pulmonary Oncology, 307 Hospital, PLA, Beijing, China.
Haifeng QinDepartment of Pulmonary Oncology, 307 Hospital, PLA, Beijing, China.
Hongjun GaoDepartment of Pulmonary Oncology, 307 Hospital, PLA, Beijing, China.
Kun HeNational Center of Biomedical Analysis, Beijing, China.
Santai SongCancer Center, 307 Hospital, PLA, Beijing, China.
Xiaoqing LiuDepartment of Pulmonary Oncology, 307 Hospital, PLA, Beijing, China.
PLA 306 Hospital · CNNational Center of Biomedical Analysis · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesEpidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) gene mutations in tumors predict tumor response to EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (EGFR-TKIs) in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, obtaining tumor tissue for mutation analysis is challenging. Here, we aimed to detect serum peptides/proteins associated with EGFR gene mutation status, and test whether a classification algorithm based on serum proteomic profiling could be developed to analyze EGFR gene mutation status to aid therapeutic decision-making. PATIENTS AND

methodsSerum collected from 223 stage IIIB or IV NSCLC patients with known EGFR gene mutation status in their tumors prior to therapy was analyzed by matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometry (MALDI-TOF-MS) and ClinProTools software. Differences in serum peptides/proteins between patients with EGFR gene TKI-sensitive mutations and wild-type EGFR genes were detected in a training group of 100 patients; based on this analysis, a serum proteomic classification algorithm was developed to classify EGFR gene mutation status and tested in an independent validation group of 123 patients. The correlation between EGFR gene mutation status, as identified with the serum proteomic classifier and response to EGFR-TKIs was analyzed.

resultsNine peptide/protein peaks were significantly different between NSCLC patients with EGFR gene TKI-sensitive mutations and wild-type EGFR genes in the training group. A genetic algorithm model consisting of five peptides/proteins (m/z 4092.4, 4585.05, 1365.1, 4643.49 and 4438.43) was developed from the training group to separate patients with EGFR gene TKI-sensitive mutations and wild-type EGFR genes. The classifier exhibited a sensitivity of 84.6% and a specificity of 77.5% in the validation group. In the 81 patients from the validation group treated with EGFR-TKIs, 28 (59.6%) of 47 patients whose matched samples were labeled as "mutant" by the classifier and 3 (8.8%) of 34 patients whose matched samples were labeled as "wild" achieved an objective response (p<0.0001). Patients whose matched samples were labeled as "mutant" by the classifier had a significantly longer progression-free survival (PFS) than patients whose matched samples were labeled as "wild" (p=0.001).

conclusionPeptides/proteins related to EGFR gene mutation status were found in the serum. Classification of EGFR gene mutation status using the serum proteomic classifier established in the present study in patients with stage IIIB or IV NSCLC is feasible and may predict tumor response to EGFR-TKIs.

Indexed as

SoftwareAgedAlgorithmsAntineoplastic AgentsBiomarkers, PharmacologicalBiomarkers, TumorCarcinoma, Non-Small-Cell LungErbB ReceptorsFemaleGene ExpressionHumansLung NeoplasmsMaleMiddle AgedMutationNeoplasm StagingAntineoplastic AgentsBiomarkers, PharmacologicalBiomarkers, TumorEGFR protein, humanErbB ReceptorsPeptidesProtein Kinase Inhibitors

Identifiers

PMID26047516
PMCPMC4457791
OpenAlexW2339611991

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.