ArticleJournal of proteomics2021
Proteomic profiling of soft tissue sarcomas with SWATH mass spectrometry.
Article in Journal of proteomics, 2021. 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, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Review of Proteomic Studies in Uterine Leiomyosarcoma: Biomarkers, Pathways, and Clinical Potential.Current issues in molecular biology · 2026Review
- Molecular and epigenetic oncogenesis in synovial sarcoma: implications for cancer biology, diagnosis and treatment.Oncogene · 2025Review
- Proteomic features of soft tissue tumours in adolescents and young adults.Communications medicine · 2024Article
- The proteomic landscape of soft tissue sarcomas.Nature communications · 2023Article
- Proteomic profiling of canine fibrosarcoma and adjacent peritumoral tissue.Neoplasia (New York, N.Y.) · 2023Article
- Quantitative proteomic studies addressing unmet clinical needs in sarcoma.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Review
- Article
- Article
- Proteomic and Metabolomic Profiling in Soft Tissue Sarcomas.Current treatment options in oncology · 2022Review
- Mass spectrometry analysis of human tear fluid biomarkers specific for ocular and systemic diseases in the context of 3P medicine.The EPMA journal · 2021Review
- The Extracellular Matrix in Soft Tissue Sarcomas: Pathobiology and Cellular Signalling.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Soft tissue sarcomas (STS) are a group of rare and heterogeneous cancers. While large-scale genomic and epigenomic profiling of STS have been undertaken, proteomic analysis has thus far been limited. Here we utilise sequential window acquisition of all theoretical fragment ion spectra mass spectrometry (SWATH-MS) for proteomic profiling of formalin fixed paraffin embedded (FFPE) specimens from a cohort of STS patients (n = 36) across four histological subtypes (leiomyosarcoma, synovial sarcoma, undifferentiated pleomorphic sarcoma and dedifferentiated liposarcoma). We quantified 2951 proteins across all cases and show that there is a significant enrichment of gene sets associated with smooth muscle contraction in leiomyosarcoma, RNA splicing regulation in synovial sarcoma and leukocyte activation in undifferentiated pleomorphic sarcoma. We further identified a subgroup of STS cases that have a distinct expression profile in a panel of proteins, with worse survival outcomes when compared to the rest of the cohort. Our study highlights the value of comprehensive proteomic characterisation as a means to identify histotype-specific STS profiles that describe key biological pathways of clinical and therapeutic relevance; as well as for discovering new prognostic biomarkers in this group of rare and difficult-to-treat diseases.
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.