ArticleInternational journal of endocrinology2015
The Difference Quantity of Urinary Peptides between Two Groups of Type 2 Diabetic Patients with or without Coronary Artery Disease.
Article in International journal of endocrinology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Application of Isobaric Tags for Relative and Absolute Quantification (iTRAQ) Coupled with Two-Dimensional Liquid Chromatography/Tandem Mass Spectrometry in Quantitative Proteomic Analysis for Discovery of Serum Biomarkers for Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives. We aim to explore urinary biomarkers that could monitor CAD in type 2 diabetic patients. Materials and Methods. Urine samples from two groups, twenty-eight type 2 diabetic patients with coexisting CAD and thirty type 2 diabetic patients without CAD, were purified by MB-WCX and then analyzed by MALDI-TOF-MS. Subsequently, we compared the urinary peptide signatures of the two groups by use of ClinProTools2.1 and evaluated the potential ability of the differently expressed peptides to distinguish type 2 diabetic patients with coexisting CAD from type 2 diabetic patients without CAD by ROC analysis. Finally, the differently expressed peptides were identified by nanoliquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. Results. There were six differently expressed peptides (m/z 1305.2, 1743.9, 2184.9, 2756.1, 3223.2, and 6196.1) between the two groups of subjects, and they were identified as fragments of isoform 1 of fibrinogen alpha chain precursor, prothrombin precursor, and interalpha-trypsin inhibitor heavy chain H4. The diagnostic efficacy of m/z 2756.1 and m/z 3223.2 was better than the other peptides. Area under ROC of the m/z 2756.1, and m/z 3223.2 was 0.98 and 0.93, respectively. Conclusions. These urinary peptides are potential urinary biomarkers for monitoring of type 2 diabetic patients with CAD.
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.