ArticleClinical proteomics2024
Quantitative proteomics reveals serum proteome alterations during metastatic disease progression in breast cancer patients.
Article in Clinical proteomics, 2024. 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.
- Serum Protein Signatures for Breast Cancer Detection in Treatment-Naïve African American Women Using Integrated Proteomics and Pattern Analysis.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Proteomics in Diagnostic Evaluation and Treatment of Breast Cancer: A Scoping Review.Journal of personalized medicine · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTumor recurrence and metastatic progression remains the leading cause for breast cancer related mortalities. However, the proteomes of patient- matched primary breast cancer (BC) and metastatic lesions have not yet been identified, due to the lack of clinically annotated longitudinal samples. In this study, we evaluated the global-proteomic landscape of BC patients with and without distant metastasis as well as compared the proteome of distant metastatic disease with its corresponding primary BC, within the same patient.
methodsWe performed mass spectrometry-based proteome profiling of 73 serum samples from 51 BC patients. Among the 51 patients with BC, 29 remained metastasis-free (henceforth called non-progressors), and 22 developed metastases (henceforth called progressors). For the 22 progressors, we obtained two samples: one collected within a year of diagnosis, and the other collected within a year before the diagnosis of metastatic disease. MS data were analyzed using intensity-based absolute quantification and normalized before differential expression analysis. Significantly differentially expressed proteins (DEPs; absolute fold-change ≥ 1.5, P-value < 0.05 and 30% abundance per clinical group) were subjected to pathway analyses.
resultsWe identified 967 proteins among 73 serum samples from patients with BC. Among these, 39 proteins were altered in serum samples at diagnosis, between progressors and non-progressors. Among these, 4 proteins were further altered when the progressors developed distant metastasis. In addition, within progressors, 20 proteins were altered in serum collected at diagnosis versus at the onset of metastasis. Pathway analysis showed that these proteins encoded pathways that describe metastasis, including epithelial-mesenchymal transition and focal adhesion that are hallmarks of metastatic cascade.
conclusionsOur results highlight the importance of examining matched samples from distant metastasis with primary BC samples collected at diagnosis to unravel subset of proteins that could be involved in BC progression in serum. This study sets the foundation for additional future investigations that could position these proteins as non-invasive markers for clinically monitoring breast cancer progression in patients.
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.