ArticleEndocrinology and metabolism (Seoul, Korea)2025
Comprehensive Proteomics and Machine Learning Analysis to Distinguish Follicular Adenoma and Follicular Thyroid Carcinoma from Indeterminate Thyroid Nodules.
Article in Endocrinology and metabolism (Seoul, Korea), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgruoundThe preoperative diagnosis of follicular thyroid carcinoma (FTC) is challenging because it cannot be readily distinguished from follicular adenoma (FA) or benign follicular nodular disease (FND) using the sonographic and cytological features typically employed in clinical practice.
methodsWe employed comprehensive proteomics and machine learning (ML) models to identify novel diagnostic biomarkers capable of classifying three subtypes: FTC, FA, and FND. Bottom-up proteomics techniques were applied to quantify proteins in formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded (FFPE) thyroid tissues. In total, 202 FFPE tissue samples, comprising 62 FNDs, 72 FAs, and 68 FTCs, were analyzed.
resultsClose spectrum-spectrum matching quantified 6,332 proteins, with approximately 9% (780 proteins) differentially expressed among the groups. When applying an ML model to the proteomics data from samples with preoperative indeterminate cytopathology (n=183), we identified distinct protein panels: five proteins (CNDP2, DNAAF5, DYNC1H1, FARSB, and PDCD4) for the FND prediction model, six proteins (DNAAF5, FAM149B1, RPS9, TAGLN2, UPF1, and UQCRC1) for the FA model, and seven proteins (ACTN4, DSTN, MACROH2A1, NUCB1, SPTAN1, TAGLN, and XRCC5) for the FTC model. The classifiers' performance, evaluated by the median area under the curve values of the random forest models, was 0.832 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.824 to 0.839) for FND, 0.826 (95% CI, 0.817 to 0.835) for FA, and 0.870 (95% CI, 0.863 to 0.877) for FTC.
conclusionQuantitative proteome analysis combined with an ML model yielded an optimized multi-protein panel that can distinguish FTC from benign subtypes. Our findings indicate that a proteomic approach holds promise for the differential diagnosis of FTC.
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.