ArticleScientific reports2025
Development of a serum protein biomarker panel for the diagnosis of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma using a machine learning approach.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. 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.
- Discovery of a Secretory Granule Lumen-Enriched Serum Protein Signature in Resectable Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Early detection of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDA) remains a major clinical challenge due to the lack of reliable biomarkers. We developed and validated a machine learning (ML)-based serum protein biomarker panel to enhance PDA diagnosis. Serum concentrations of 47 protein biomarkers were measured in 355 individuals using a Luminex™ bead-based immunoassay. Multiple ML algorithms were employed to construct a diagnostic model, with SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) analysis used to determine the importance of each biomarker. The diagnostic performance of the panel was assessed by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC), F1 score, sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy, and further validated in an independent cohort of 130 individuals. Among the tested models, CatBoost demonstrated the highest diagnostic accuracy. SHAP analysis identified CA19-9, GDF15, and suPAR as key biomarkers, and the combined panel significantly outperformed CA19-9 alone in detecting PDA across all stages (AUROC 0.992 vs. 0.952) and in early-stage PDA (AUROC 0.976 vs. 0.868). Validation in another cohort confirmed the robustness of the model, with AUROC values of 0.977 for all stages and 0.987 for early-stage PDA. These findings suggest that ML-integrated biomarker panels may enable earlier and more accurate PDA detection in clinical practice.
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.