Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 482

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Biomarker Discovery from Pancreatic Cancer Secretome Using a Differential Proteomic Approach

Open access
Grønborg, Mads, Kristiansen, Troels Zakarias, Iwahori, Akiko, Chang, Rubens, Reddy, Raghunath, Sato, Norihiro, Molina, Henrik, Jensen, Ole Nørregaard, Hruban, Ralph H., Goggins, Michael G., Maitra, Anirban, Pandey, Akhilesh·2006·Molecular & Cellular Proteomics

Abstract

Quantitative proteomics can be used as a screening tool for identification of differentially expressed proteins as potential biomarkers for cancers. Candidate biomarkers from such studies can subsequently be tested using other techniques for use in early detection of cancers. Here we demonstrate the use of stable isotope labeling with amino acids in cell culture (SILAC) method to compare the secreted proteins (secretome) from pancreatic cancer-derived cells with that from non-neoplastic pancreatic ductal cells. We identified 145 differentially secreted proteins (>1.5-fold change), several of which were previously reported as either up-regulated (e.g. cathepsin D, macrophage colony stimulation factor, and fibronectin receptor) or down-regulated (e.g. profilin 1 and IGFBP-7) proteins in pancreatic cancer, confirming the validity of our approach. In addition, we identified several proteins that have not been correlated previously with pancreatic cancer including perlecan (HSPG2), CD9 antigen, fibronectin receptor (integrin beta1), and a novel cytokine designated as predicted osteoblast protein (FAM3C). The differential expression of a subset of these novel proteins was validated by Western blot analysis. In addition, overexpression of several proteins not described previously to be elevated in human pancreatic cancer (CD9, perlecan, SDF4, apoE, and fibronectin receptor) was confirmed by immunohistochemical labeling using pancreatic cancer tissue microarrays suggesting that these could be further pursued as potential biomarkers. Lastly the protein expression data from SILAC were compared with mRNA expression data obtained using gene expression microarrays for the two cell lines (Panc1 and human pancreatic duct epithelial), and a correlation coefficient (r) of 0.28 was obtained, confirming previously reported poor associations between RNA and protein expression studies.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1074/mcp.m500178-mcp200

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 5 references

Cited by

See all 482

Metadata

Authors
Grønborg, M., Kristiansen, T. Z., Iwahori, A., Chang, R., Reddy, R., Sato, N., Molina, H., Jensen, O. N., Hruban, R. H., Goggins, M. G., Maitra, A., & Pandey, A.
Venue
Molecular & Cellular Proteomics
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2006-01
Volume
5
Issue
1
Pages
157-171
ISSN
1535-9476 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2116201301
Cited by
482
References
5
FWCI
12.72
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Biomarker Discovery from Pancreatic Cancer Secretome Using a Differential Proteomic Approach. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1074/mcp.m500178-mcp200
The paper
Grønborg, M., Kristiansen, T. Z., Iwahori, A., Chang, R., Reddy, R., Sato, N., Molina, H., Jensen, O. N., Hruban, R. H., Goggins, M. G., Maitra, A., & Pandey, A. (2006). Biomarker Discovery from Pancreatic Cancer Secretome Using a Differential Proteomic Approach. Molecular & Cellular Proteomics. https://doi.org/10.1074/mcp.m500178-mcp200

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.