ArticleClinical proteomics2023
Development of a predictive model to distinguish prostate cancer from benign prostatic hyperplasia by integrating serum glycoproteomics and clinical variables.
Article in Clinical proteomics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- High-Throughput Proteomic and Glycoproteomic Analyses in Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia.Journal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry · 2026Article
- Screening and identification of key genes related to the immune microenvironment of rectal cancer influenced by radiotherapy based on bioinformatics methods.Discover oncology · 2026Article
- Fecal metaproteomics reveals alterations in gut microbiota and intestinal proteins in adolescents with bipolar depression.Translational psychiatry · 2026Article
- Proteoglycans in Prostate Cancer Progression and Therapy Resistance.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Review
- The evolution of analytical techniques for multiplex analysis of protein biomarkers.Expert review of proteomics · 2025Review
- Elevated serum levels of GPX4, NDUFS4, PRDX5, and TXNRD2 as predictive biomarkers for castration resistance in prostate cancer patients: an exploratory study.British journal of cancer · 2025Article
- A Scaled Proteomic Discovery Study for Prostate Cancer Diagnostic Markers Using ProteographInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2024Article
- Machine learning pipeline to analyze clinical and proteomics data: experiences on a prostate cancer case.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2024Article
- Advances in Prostate Cancer Biomarkers and Probes.Cyborg and bionic systems (Washington, D.C.) · 2024Review
- Outsmarting Metastatic Prostate Cancer: Integration of Imaging, Liquid Biopsies and Biomarkers With Artificial Intelligence.Technology in cancer research & treatmentReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundProstate Cancer (PCa) represents the second leading cause of cancer-related death in men. Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) serum testing, currently used for PCa screening, lacks the necessary sensitivity and specificity. New non-invasive diagnostic tools able to discriminate tumoral from benign conditions and aggressive (AG-PCa) from indolent forms of PCa (NAG-PCa) are required to avoid unnecessary biopsies.
methodsIn this work, 32 formerly N-glycosylated peptides were quantified by PRM (parallel reaction monitoring) in 163 serum samples (79 from PCa patients and 84 from individuals affected by benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH)) in two technical replicates. These potential biomarker candidates were prioritized through a multi-stage biomarker discovery pipeline articulated in: discovery, LC-PRM assay development and verification phases. Because of the well-established involvement of glycoproteins in cancer development and progression, the proteomic analysis was focused on glycoproteins enriched by TiO
resultsMachine learning algorithms have been applied to the combined matrix comprising proteomic and clinical variables, resulting in a predictive model based on six proteomic variables (RNASE1, LAMP2, LUM, MASP1, NCAM1, GPLD1) and five clinical variables (prostate dimension, proPSA, free-PSA, total-PSA, free/total-PSA) able to distinguish PCa from BPH with an area under the Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve of 0.93. This model outperformed PSA alone which, on the same sample set, was able to discriminate PCa from BPH with an AUC of 0.79. To improve the clinical managing of PCa patients, an explorative small-scale analysis (79 samples) aimed at distinguishing AG-PCa from NAG-PCa was conducted. A predictor of PCa aggressiveness based on the combination of 7 proteomic variables (FCN3, LGALS3BP, AZU1, C6, LAMB1, CHL1, POSTN) and proPSA was developed (AUC of 0.69).
conclusionsTo address the impelling need of more sensitive and specific serum diagnostic tests, a predictive model combining proteomic and clinical variables was developed. A preliminary evaluation to build a new tool able to discriminate aggressive presentations of PCa from tumors with benign behavior was exploited. This predictor displayed moderate performances, but no conclusions can be drawn due to the limited number of the sample cohort. Data are available via ProteomeXchange with identifier PXD035935.
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.