Cargando…
An Updated Overview of Existing Cancer Databases and Identified Needs
SIMPLE SUMMARY: This review examines the current state of cancer databases and identifies key needs in the field. The analysis of 71 databases reveals a lack of dedicated lipidomic and glycomic databases for cancer research, as well as limited proteomic databases. By comparing non-cancer databases,...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10452211/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37627037 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/biology12081152 |
Sumario: | SIMPLE SUMMARY: This review examines the current state of cancer databases and identifies key needs in the field. The analysis of 71 databases reveals a lack of dedicated lipidomic and glycomic databases for cancer research, as well as limited proteomic databases. By comparing non-cancer databases, advancements in genomics, proteomics, lipidomics, and glycomics over the past eight years are highlighted. The evaluation of user-friendliness using the FAIRness principle emphasizes the importance of accessibility and usability. Overall, this review emphasizes the growth of cancer databases while identifying areas for improvement, offering valuable insights for researchers, clinicians, and database developers. Addressing these needs will advance cancer research and benefit the wider cancer community. ABSTRACT: Our search of existing cancer databases aimed to assess the current landscape and identify key needs. We analyzed 71 databases, focusing on genomics, proteomics, lipidomics, and glycomics. We found a lack of cancer-related lipidomic and glycomic databases, indicating a need for further development in these areas. Proteomic databases dedicated to cancer research were also limited. To assess overall progress, we included human non-cancer databases in proteomics, lipidomics, and glycomics for comparison. This provided insights into advancements in these fields over the past eight years. We also analyzed other types of cancer databases, such as clinical trial databases and web servers. Evaluating user-friendliness, we used the FAIRness principle to assess findability, accessibility, interoperability, and reusability. This ensured databases were easily accessible and usable. Our search summary highlights significant growth in cancer databases while identifying gaps and needs. These insights are valuable for researchers, clinicians, and database developers, guiding efforts to enhance accessibility, integration, and usability. Addressing these needs will support advancements in cancer research and benefit the wider cancer community. |
---|