ArticleBioinformatics (Oxford, England)2024
Peptide set test: a peptide-centric strategy to infer differentially expressed proteins.
Article in Bioinformatics (Oxford, England), 2024. 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.
- ComBat-met: adjusting batch effects in DNA methylation data.NAR genomics and bioinformatics · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
motivationThe clinical translation of mass spectrometry-based proteomics has been challenging due to limited statistical power caused by large technical variability and inter-patient heterogeneity. Bottom-up proteomics provides an indirect measurement of proteins through digested peptides. This raises the question whether peptide measurements can be used directly to better distinguish differentially expressed proteins.
resultsWe present a novel method called the peptide set test, which detects coordinated changes in the expression of peptides originating from the same protein and compares them to the rest of the peptidome. Applying our method to data from a published spike-in experiment and simulations demonstrates improved sensitivity without compromising precision, compared to aggregation-based approaches. Additionally, applying the peptide set test to compare the tumor proteomes of tamoxifen-sensitive and tamoxifen-resistant breast cancer patients reveals significant alterations in peptide levels of collagen XII, suggesting an association between collagen XII-mediated matrix reassembly and tamoxifen resistance. Our study establishes the peptide set test as a powerful peptide-centric strategy to infer differential expression in proteomics studies. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: Peptide set test (PepSetTest) is publicly available at https://github.com/JmWangBio/PepSetTest.
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.