ArticleAsian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP2019
Evaluation of Protein Profiling in a Cohort of Egyptian Population with Renal Cell Carcinoma and Benign Kidney Neoplasms.
Article in Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- MALDI-TOF/MS Analysis of Non-Invasive Human Urine and Saliva Samples for the Identification of New Cancer Biomarkers.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Serum Peptidomic Profile as a Novel Biomarker for Rheumatoid Arthritis.International journal of rheumatology · 2020Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Abdominal imaging leads to the detection of a large number of renal tumors without the ability to distinguish the type of tumor detected. It is necessary to find a precise way to know the type of tumor to determine the appropriate treatment. The use of urine samples for detecting new biomarkers especially proteins has a great potential. In this work we assessed the proteomic profiling difference in a cohort of Egyptian population with renal neoplasms. Methods: This cohort study was conducted on 85 subjects. They were classified as 40 RCC, 15 benign kidney patients, and 30 healthy controls. Morning urine samples were used for peptidome separation using magnetic beads. Matrix assisted laser desorption ionization time of flight mass spectrometry (MALDI-TOF MS) was applied Using FlexControlTM software. Results: Benign tumors were differentiated from controls by 5 integrated peaks, 12 significant and 2 integrated significant peaks, 17:3,418.8 and 25:4,173.41. While RCC were differentiated from benign by 5 integrated, 28 significant and one integrated significant peak. The RCC group was discriminated from the controls by 5 peaks which were integrated from which 1 was integrated and significant (with mass to charge ratio of 12:3,408.97). The three groups showed protein profiles ranging from 1 to 10 kDa. The external validation was performed for the RCC group versus the control reveled sensitivity of 88.7% and specificity of 73.2% by genetic algorithm. Conclusion: Proteomic approach can be used as a sensitive urinary marker differentiating renal masses in an early diagnostic approach.
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.