Trial reportPloS one2016
Exploration of Serum Proteomic Profiling and Diagnostic Model That Differentiate Crohn's Disease and Intestinal Tuberculosis.
Trial report in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed.
- Quantitative Proteomic Analysis Reveals the Deregulation of Nicotinamide Adenine Dinucleotide Metabolism and CD38 in Inflammatory Bowel Disease.BioMed research international · 2019Trial
- The Overlap Between Crohn's Disease and Intestinal Tuberculosis: A Never-Ending Story.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Review
- Article
- Differentiating gastrointestinal tuberculosis and Crohn's disease- a comprehensive review.BMC gastroenterology · 2023Review
- A Current State of Proteomics in Adult and Pediatric Inflammatory Bowel Diseases: A Systematic Search and Review.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Review
- New pattern of individualized management of chronic diseases: focusing on inflammatory bowel diseases and looking to the future.Frontiers in medicine · 2023Review
- A Matrix-Assisted Laser Desorption/Ionization Time-of-Flight Assay Identifies Nilotinib as an Inhibitor of Inflammation in Acute Myeloid Leukemia.Journal of medicinal chemistry · 2022Article
- A combination of circulating microRNA-375-3p and chemokines CCL11, CXCL12, and G-CSF differentiate Crohn's disease and intestinal tuberculosis.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- A Novel Clinical Radiomics Nomogram to Identify Crohn's Disease from Intestinal Tuberculosis.Journal of inflammation research · 2021Article
- Serum proteome profiles to differentiate Crohn disease from intestinal tuberculosis and primary intestinal lymphoma: A pilot study.Medicine · 2019Article
- Making a Positive Diagnosis of Intestinal Tuberculosis with the Aid of New Biologic and Histologic Features: How Far Have We Reached?Inflammatory intestinal diseases · 2019Review
- Positive acceleration adaptive training attenuates gastric ischemia-reperfusion injury through COX-2 and PGE2 expression.Experimental and therapeutic medicine · 2019Article
- High-Throughput Identification of the Plasma Proteomic Signature of Inflammatory Bowel Disease.Journal of Crohn's & colitis · 2019Article
- Plasma Peptidome Pattern of Breast Cancer Using Magnetic Beads-Based Plasma Fractionation and MALDI-TOF MS: A Case Control Study in EgyptAsian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2019Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo explore the diagnostic models of Crohn's disease (CD), Intestinal tuberculosis (ITB) and the differential diagnostic model between CD and ITB by analyzing serum proteome profiles.
methodsSerum proteome profiles from 30 CD patients, 21 ITB patients and 30 healthy controls (HCs) were analyzed by using weak cationic magnetic beads combined with MALDI-TOF-MS technique to detect the differentially expressed proteins of serum samples. Three groups were made and compared accordingly: group of CD patients and HCs, group of ITB patients and HCs, group of CD patients and ITB patients. Wilcoxon rank sum test was used to screen the ten most differentiated protein peaks (P < 0.05). Genetic algorithm combining with support vector machine (SVM) was utilized to establish the optimal diagnostic models for CD, ITB and the optimal differential diagnostic model between CD and ITB. The predictive effects of these models were evaluated by Leave one out (LOO) cross validation method.
resultsThere were 236 protein peaks differently expressed between group of CD patients and HCs, 305 protein peaks differently expressed between group of ITB patients and HCs, 332 protein peaks differently expressed between group of CD patients and ITB patients. Ten most differentially expressed peaks were screened out between three groups respectively (P < 0.05) to establish diagnostic models and differential diagnostic model. A diagnostic model comprising of four protein peaks (M/Z 4964, 3029, 2833, 2900) can well distinguish CD patients and HCs, with a specificity and sensitivity of 96.7% and 96.7% respectively. A diagnostic model comprising four protein peaks (M/Z 3030, 2105, 2545, 4210) can well distinguish ITB patients and HCs, with a specificity and sensitivity of 93.3% and 95.2% respectively. A differential diagnostic model comprising three potential biomarkers protein peaks (M/Z 4267, 4223, 1541) can well distinguish CD patients and ITB patients, with a specificity and sensitivity of 76.2% and 80.0% respectively. Among the eleven protein peaks from the diagnostic models and differential diagnostic model, two have been successfully purified and identified, Those two peaks were M/Z 2900 from the diagnostic model between CD and HCs and M/Z 1541 from the differential diagnostic model between CD and ITB. M/Z 2900 was identified as appetite peptide, M/Z 1541 was identified as Lysyl oxidase-like 2 (LOXL-2).
conclusionThe differently expressed protein peaks analyzed by serum proteome with weak cationic magnetic beads combined MALDI-TOF-MS technique can effectively distinguish CD patients and HCs, ITB patients and HCs, CD patients and ITB patients. The diagnostic model between CD patients and HCs consisting of four protein peaks (M/Z 4964, 3029, 2833, 2900), the diagnostic model between ITB patients and HCs comprising four protein peaks (M/Z 3030, 2105, 2545, 4210) and the differential diagnostic model between CD patients and ITB patients comprising three protein peaks (M/Z 4267, 4223, 1541) had high specificity and sensitivity and can contribute to diagnoses of CD, ITB and the differential diagnosis between CD and ITB. Two proteins from the diagnostic model of CD and the differential diagnostic model between CD and ITB were identified. Further experiments are required using a larger cohort of samples.
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.