Proteomic prediction of disease outcome in cancer : clinical framework and current status.

R Steinert, P von Hoegen, L M Fels, K Günther, H Lippert, M A Reymond
{"title":"Proteomic prediction of disease outcome in cancer : clinical framework and current status.","authors":"R Steinert,&nbsp;P von Hoegen,&nbsp;L M Fels,&nbsp;K Günther,&nbsp;H Lippert,&nbsp;M A Reymond","doi":"10.2165/00129785-200303020-00004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Better than gene sequencing or quantitative amplification, proteomics tools allow the study of tumor phenotype. Indeed, most current prognostic tests in cancer (carcinoembryonary antigen [CEA], prostate-specific antigen [PSA], CA 19-1, CA 125, alpha-fetoprotein [AFP], etc.) are based on the detection and quantification of single proteins in body fluids. However, a common characteristic of these tests is their relatively low predictive value, so that they are usually complemented with other procedures such as biopsy and/or endoscopy. Recently, improved analytical and bioinformatics tools have driven the attention on pattern recognition approaches rather then single-marker tests for prognostic forecasting. It is expected that predicting metastasization on the basis of tumoral protein patterns will soon be a reality. However, currently available technologies either limit the number of proteins that can be analyzed simultaneously or they are expensive, difficult, and time-consuming. Moreover, the tools adapted for expression proteomics might not be the same as those for prognostic studies that require investigation of protein function over time. We believe that clinical proteomics research designed within a precise clinical and pathology framework should be strongly supported, since many prognostic factors are determined not by the tumor itself, but by the patient, the treatment and the environment.</p>","PeriodicalId":72171,"journal":{"name":"American journal of pharmacogenomics : genomics-related research in drug development and clinical practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2003-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2165/00129785-200303020-00004","citationCount":"7","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American journal of pharmacogenomics : genomics-related research in drug development and clinical practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2165/00129785-200303020-00004","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

Abstract

Better than gene sequencing or quantitative amplification, proteomics tools allow the study of tumor phenotype. Indeed, most current prognostic tests in cancer (carcinoembryonary antigen [CEA], prostate-specific antigen [PSA], CA 19-1, CA 125, alpha-fetoprotein [AFP], etc.) are based on the detection and quantification of single proteins in body fluids. However, a common characteristic of these tests is their relatively low predictive value, so that they are usually complemented with other procedures such as biopsy and/or endoscopy. Recently, improved analytical and bioinformatics tools have driven the attention on pattern recognition approaches rather then single-marker tests for prognostic forecasting. It is expected that predicting metastasization on the basis of tumoral protein patterns will soon be a reality. However, currently available technologies either limit the number of proteins that can be analyzed simultaneously or they are expensive, difficult, and time-consuming. Moreover, the tools adapted for expression proteomics might not be the same as those for prognostic studies that require investigation of protein function over time. We believe that clinical proteomics research designed within a precise clinical and pathology framework should be strongly supported, since many prognostic factors are determined not by the tumor itself, but by the patient, the treatment and the environment.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
癌症预后的蛋白质组学预测:临床框架和现状。
与基因测序或定量扩增相比,蛋白质组学工具可以更好地研究肿瘤表型。事实上,目前大多数癌症预后检测(癌胚抗原(CEA)、前列腺特异性抗原(PSA)、ca19 -1、ca125、甲胎蛋白(AFP)等)都是基于体液中单一蛋白的检测和定量。然而,这些检查的一个共同特点是它们的预测价值相对较低,因此它们通常与其他程序如活检和/或内窥镜检查相辅相成。最近,改进的分析和生物信息学工具推动了对模式识别方法的关注,而不是用于预后预测的单标记测试。预计基于肿瘤蛋白模式预测转移将很快成为现实。然而,目前可用的技术要么限制了可以同时分析的蛋白质数量,要么价格昂贵、难度大、耗时长。此外,适用于表达蛋白质组学的工具可能与那些需要随时间调查蛋白质功能的预后研究不同。我们认为,应该大力支持在精确的临床和病理框架内设计的临床蛋白质组学研究,因为许多预后因素不是由肿瘤本身决定的,而是由患者、治疗和环境决定的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Towards molecular medicine: a case for a biological periodic table. Genetic testing in Crohn disease: utility in individualizing patient management. Identifying DNA methylation biomarkers of cancer drug response. The Autism Genome Project: goals and strategies. Oncogenes as novel targets for cancer therapy (part II): Intermediate signaling molecules.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1