The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Application of Machine Learning to Proteomics Data: Classification and Biomarker Identification in Postgenomics Biology
Open accessAbstract
Mass spectrometry is an analytical technique for the characterization of biological samples and is increasingly used in omics studies because of its targeted, nontargeted, and high throughput abilities. However, due to the large datasets generated, it requires informatics approaches such as machine learning techniques to analyze and interpret relevant data. Machine learning can be applied to MS-derived proteomics data in two ways. First, directly to mass spectral peaks and second, to proteins identified by sequence database searching, although relative protein quantification is required for the latter. Machine learning has been applied to mass spectrometry data from different biological disciplines, particularly for various cancers. The aims of such investigations have been to identify biomarkers and to aid in diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment of specific diseases. This review describes how machine learning has been applied to proteomics tandem mass spectrometry data. This includes how it can be used to identify proteins suitable for use as biomarkers of disease and for classification of samples into disease or treatment groups, which may be applicable for diagnostics. It also includes the challenges faced by such investigations, such as prediction of proteins present, protein quantification, planning for the use of machine learning, and small sample sizes.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
A Study of Cross-Validation and Bootstrap for Accuracy Estimation and Model Selection
Kohavi, R. (1995) · Zenodo · doi:10.5281/zenodo.19712698 · Cited by 10,909
Electrospray Ionization for Mass Spectrometry of Large Biomolecules
Fenn, J. B., Mann, M., Meng, C. K., Wong, S. F., & Whitehouse, C. M. (1989) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.2675315 · Cited by 7,634
Mass spectrometry-based proteomics
Aebersold, R., & Mann, M. (2003) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature01511 · Cited by 6,955
Ong, S.-E., Blagoev, B., Kratchmarova, I., Kristensen, D. B., Steen, H., Pandey, A., & Mann, M. (2002) · Molecular & Cellular Proteomics · doi:10.1074/mcp.m200025-mcp200 · Cited by 5,574
Bias in error estimation when using cross-validation for model selection
Varma, S., & Simon, R. (2006) · BMC Bioinformatics · doi:10.1186/1471-2105-7-91 · Cited by 2,485 · cited 2×
“Therefore larger datasets would be more suitable, because cross-validation would not be needed to generate training and test sets (Kohavi, 1995; Varma and Simon, 2006).”
BackgroundAbsolute quantification of proteins and phosphoproteins from cell lysates by tandem MS
Gerber, S. A., Rush, J., Stemman, O., Kirschner, M. W., & Gygi, S. P. (2003) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0832254100 · Cited by 1,733
Lu, P., Vogel, C., Wang, R., Yao, X., & Marcotte, E. M. (2007) · Nature Biotechnology · doi:10.1038/nbt1270 · Cited by 1,139
Quantitative mass spectrometry in proteomics: critical review update from 2007 to the present
Bantscheff, M., Lemeer, S., Savitski, M. M., & Kuster, B. (2012) · Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry · doi:10.1007/s00216-012-6203-4 · Cited by 801
Cited by
Deep learning for computational biology
Angermueller, C., Pärnamaa, T., Parts, L., & Stegle, O. (2016) · Molecular Systems Biology · doi:10.15252/msb.20156651 · Cited by 1,473
Low-grade inflammation, diet composition and health: current research evidence and its translation
Minihane, A. M., Vinoy, S., Russell, W. R., Baka, A., Roche, H. M., Tuohy, K. M., Teeling, J. L., Blaak, E. E., Fenech, M., Vauzour, D., et al. (2015) · British Journal of Nutrition · doi:10.1017/s0007114515002093 · Cited by 916
Glazyrin, Y. E., Veprintsev, D. V., Ler, I. A., Rossovskaya, M. L., Varygina, S. A., Glizer, S. L., Zamay, T. N., Petrova, M. M., Minic, Z., Berezovski, M. V., et al. (2020) · International Journal of Molecular Sciences · doi:10.3390/ijms21134802 · Cited by 35
Yu, M., Bazydlo, L. A. L., Bruns, D. E., & Harrison, J. H. (2019) · Archives of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine · doi:10.5858/arpa.2018-0238-oa · Cited by 16
Metadata
- Authors
- Swan, A. L., Mobasheri, A., Allaway, D., Liddell, S., & Bacardit, J.
- Venue
- OMICS: A Journal of Integrative Biology
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2013-12
- Volume
- 17
- Issue
- 12
- Pages
- 595-610
- ISSN
- 1536-2310 (ISSN-L)
- 1557-8100
- OpenAlex
- W2071659396
- Cited by
- 249
- References
- 8
- FWCI
- 3.57
- 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: Application of Machine Learning to Proteomics Data: Classification and Biomarker Identification in Postgenomics Biology. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1089/omi.2013.0017
- The paper
- Swan, A. L., Mobasheri, A., Allaway, D., Liddell, S., & Bacardit, J. (2013). Application of Machine Learning to Proteomics Data: Classification and Biomarker Identification in Postgenomics Biology. OMICS: A Journal of Integrative Biology. https://doi.org/10.1089/omi.2013.0017
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.
