Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41319168›Full record

ArticleCancer medicine2025

Molecular Resonance Quantification and Label-Free Interactome Characterization of Total Proteome of Tumor Specimens Decipher Responder and Success Predictors in Colorectal Cancer Patients Treated With Panitumumab.

Angelique Quartier, Ahmed Y Sanin, Julia Nagelschmitz, Justine Schneider, Wenjie Shi, Thomas Wartmann, Maximilian Dölling, Frederike Stelter, Mihailo Andric, Roland S Croner and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors.

Angelique QuartierInoviem Scientific, Illkirch Graffenstaden, France.
Ahmed Y SaninMolecular and Experimental Surgery, University Clinic for General, Visceral, Vascular and Transplantation Surgery, Medical Faculty University Hospital Magdeburg, Otto-von Guericke University, Magdeburg, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0009-7786-2200
Julia NagelschmitzMolecular and Experimental Surgery, University Clinic for General, Visceral, Vascular and Transplantation Surgery, Medical Faculty University Hospital Magdeburg, Otto-von Guericke University, Magdeburg, Germany.
Justine SchneiderInoviem Scientific, Illkirch Graffenstaden, France.
Wenjie ShiMolecular and Experimental Surgery, University Clinic for General, Visceral, Vascular and Transplantation Surgery, Medical Faculty University Hospital Magdeburg, Otto-von Guericke University, Magdeburg, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0001-7345-579X
Thomas WartmannMolecular and Experimental Surgery, University Clinic for General, Visceral, Vascular and Transplantation Surgery, Medical Faculty University Hospital Magdeburg, Otto-von Guericke University, Magdeburg, Germany.
Maximilian DöllingMolecular and Experimental Surgery, University Clinic for General, Visceral, Vascular and Transplantation Surgery, Medical Faculty University Hospital Magdeburg, Otto-von Guericke University, Magdeburg, Germany.
Frederike StelterMolecular and Experimental Surgery, University Clinic for General, Visceral, Vascular and Transplantation Surgery, Medical Faculty University Hospital Magdeburg, Otto-von Guericke University, Magdeburg, Germany.
Mihailo AndricMolecular and Experimental Surgery, University Clinic for General, Visceral, Vascular and Transplantation Surgery, Medical Faculty University Hospital Magdeburg, Otto-von Guericke University, Magdeburg, Germany.
Roland S CronerMolecular and Experimental Surgery, University Clinic for General, Visceral, Vascular and Transplantation Surgery, Medical Faculty University Hospital Magdeburg, Otto-von Guericke University, Magdeburg, Germany.
Pierre EftekhariInoviem Scientific, Illkirch Graffenstaden, France.
Ulf D KahlertMolecular and Experimental Surgery, University Clinic for General, Visceral, Vascular and Transplantation Surgery, Medical Faculty University Hospital Magdeburg, Otto-von Guericke University, Magdeburg, Germany.

Funding

Europäischer Fonds für regionale Entwicklung (EFRE)
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPanitumumab shows limited clinical benefit in colorectal cancer (CRC), and reliable predictive biomarkers to guide patient selection remain lacking. To address this gap, we investigated molecular determinants of therapeutic response using tumor samples from patients with primary and metastatic CRC. By integrating PIMS-based metastatic classification, NPOT interaction profiling and quantitative proteomics, this study aimed to identify response-associated pathways and potential prognostic biomarkers that could support improved stratification for panitumumab therapy.

methodTwenty-one tumor resection samples from twenty CRC patients from primary site (n = 12) and from intrahepatic metastasis (n = 9), female (n = 6) and male (n = 14) were analyzed. Clinical metadata of donors was associated with molecular properties of each sample. Patients' cryostored tumor material was blinded before subjecting to PIMS analysis. PIMS analysis was at first performed to separate metastatic and non-metastatic patients. After uncovering the blind, tumors were all challenged by 1 μg of panitumumab in PIMS to identify responder and non-responder with or without metastasis. Tumors from metastatic (n = 3) and non-metastatic (n = 2) patients were thereafter analyzed by NPOT to identify EGFR-related signaling pathway. All group tumors were analyzed using label-free quantitative proteomics.

resultsPIMS identified with 82% accuracy metastatic (n = 9) from non-metastatic (n = 7) tumor. The metastatic tumor had higher resonance volumes (2948-5094) compared to non-metastatic (1076-2759) tumor. NPOT identified EGFR only in metastatic tumor. The metastatic interactome was composed of 34 proteins (EGFR, PTPN1, CTNNB1, CTNND1, YWHAZ, CD44, FN1, ITGB1, GADPH, ENO1, HSPA4, HSPA8, HSP90AA1, HSP90AB1, ANXA2, A1BG, DNTM1, TSR1, RPS27, PPM1G, SMC2, LIG1, NCAPD2, POLD1, PRKDC, YBX1, ANK1, FTL, NCL, ITGB2, SERPINA7, HP, and A2M). The first 10 proteins (underlined) were shared also with non-metastatic tumors. Label-free quantitative proteomics identified 145 differentiated protein, 15 of which were enriched and 130 impoverished specifically in metastatic tumors. Evidence suggests that HSPA4, HSP90AB1, DNTM1, RPS27, FTL, NCL, A2M are implicated in the pathogenesis and progression of colorectal cancer, positioning them as potential prognostic biomarkers for the onset of metastasis.

conclusionCombination of PIMS and NPOT coupled to label-free quantitative proteomics point towards the distinct panitumumab mode of action in CRC patients and highlights specific proteins as prognostic biomarkers which need further validation in a bigger cohort and multicentric investigation, ideally involving patient registry follow up data. NOVELTY AND IMPACT: This study presents an integrative molecular profiling strategy that combines PIMS, NPOT, and proteomics to uncover mechanistically relevant biomarkers of therapeutic response in colorectal cancer. By identifying an EGFR-centered interactome and responder-specific protein signatures, the research offers a novel approach to stratify panitumumab response and supports advancement of precision oncology in clinical settings.

Indexed as

Antineoplastic Agents, ImmunologicalBiomarkers, TumorColorectal NeoplasmsPanitumumabProteomeProteomicsAgedErbB ReceptorsFemaleHumansLiver NeoplasmsMaleMiddle AgedPrognosisProtein Interaction MapsTreatment OutcomeAntineoplastic Agents, ImmunologicalBiomarkers, TumorErbB ReceptorsPanitumumabProteomebiomarkerscolorectal cancer (CRC)EGFR signaling pathwayproteomics

Identifiers

PMID41319168
PMCPMC12665168

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.