Skip to content
Datasets/PDC000250

Prospective Ovarian JHU Intact Glycoproteome

OpenMachine-extracted
Clinical Proteomic Tumor Analysis ConsortiumAvailable from PDC

Can it answer your research question?

3 of 6 supported
  • Overall survival

    Not supported

    Vital status is recorded for every case and informative for none; the cohort does carry recurrence-free interval.API

  • Progression or recurrence

    Supported

    A time to event is derivable: recurrence-free interval; progression_or_recurrence is informative for 0% of cases.API

  • Treatment response

    Not supported

    treatment_outcome is populated for no case in the harmonized records.API

  • Which drug was given

    Not supported

    therapeutic_agents is recorded for no case in the harmonized records.API

  • Stage-adjusted modelling

    Supported

    tumor_stage is informative for 90% of cases.API

  • Analysis by race or ethnicity

    Supported

    Race is informative for 88% of cases.API

Judged from the repository’s own field completeness (thresholds). “Not measured” means we have not probed that field for this record, not that the data lack it.

At a glance

Every percentage is the repository’s own record of what is filled in
CasesAPI
97
Measurement types
1
Follow-upAPI
Present
for 94 of 97 cases; recurrence-free interval
Treatment responseAPI
Not recorded

SubjectCALC

Ovary and fallopian tube

As filed by the repository

Ovarian Serous CystadenocarcinomaOvary

Who is in the cohortAPI

A usable value“Not reported” or “unknown”No value recorded
  • Sex87 female · 10 not reported
  • Race74 white · 8 asian · 3 black or african american · 12 not reported
  • Ethnicity81 not hispanic or latino · 1 hispanic or latino · 15 not reported
  • Vital status97 Not Reported

What was measured, and on how many

1 measurement type, 1 covering the whole cohort.

  • Glycoproteome mass spectrometry (TMT10 / DDA)scarce97 of 97 · 100%
Platform, files and data levels
AssayPlatformFilesLevels
Glycoproteome mass spectrometry (TMT10 / DDA)APITMT10-raw, peptide/protein matrix
How complete all 27 clinical fields are - 11 informative for at least 80% of cases

A field counts as informative only when it holds a real value. “Not reported” blocks an analysis just as a missing field does. Fields marked 1:n can hold several records per case, so they show the share of cases with any record.

Informative - a usable valuePresent but uninformative - “not reported” or “unknown”Absent - no value recorded

Outcome

  • Days to recurrenceAPI97%
  • Vital statusAPI0%
  • Cause of deathAPI0%
  • Progression or recurrenceAPI0%
  • Last known disease statusAPI0%
  • Days to deathAPI0%

Follow-up

  • Days to last follow-upAPI97%

Treatment

  • Prior treatmentAPI0%
  • Treatment typeAPI0%
  • Therapeutic agentsAPI0%
  • Treatment outcomeAPI0%
  • Regimen or line of therapyAPI0%
  • Treatment givenAPI0%

Staging

  • AJCC pathologic stage (tumor_stage)API90%
  • AJCC pathologic stageAPI0%
  • AJCC clinical stageAPI0%

Diagnosis

  • Tissue or organ of originAPI97%
  • Prior malignancyAPI97%
  • Primary diagnosisAPI92%
  • Synchronous malignancyAPI0%

Pathology

  • Morphology (ICD-O)API80%
  • Tumor gradeAPI0%
  • Classification of tumorAPI0%

Demographics

  • Age at diagnosisAPI97%
  • Sex at birth (gender)API90%
  • RaceAPI88%
  • EthnicityAPI85%

Access

OpenDownload without an account.API

Direct download from the PDC portal or its API; no account required

Open components
1 analytical fraction studies
License
Open access under the PDC data use terms
Citation requirement
Cite the PDC study identifier and the study's primary publication; PDC asks that the consortium be acknowledged.

What it is good for

Written and checked by a reviewer, not generated from metadata.

No reviewed research questions yet. The measurements and field completeness above are machine-extracted and still useful for judging fit.

What it cannot tell you

Written by a reviewer against the source, not inferred from what is missing.

No reviewed limitations yet. Check the field completeness chart above before committing to an analysis. Low coverage on an endpoint you need is the most common blocker.

Who has used it

Articles that analyzed these data, counted separately from articles that only cited the paper. Only the first counts as reuse.

Analyzed the dataCALC2
1
accession in the methods section
Declared using it
1
named in a data availability statement
Cited the paper
-
attention to the publication, not reuse of the data
Against expectation
As expected or above
about 0.1 articles expected; index 0.85

What articles did with it

Only the last row counts as reuse. Where the accession appears in an article tells us what the authors did with the data.

  • Mentioned the dataset0
  • Accession found in text0
  • Declared using it1
  • Analyzed the data1

Against comparable datasets

1 article analyzed these data. About 0.1 would be expected. The expectation comes from a model of size, age, breadth and access tier.

  • Analyzed it1
  • Expected~0.1
Reuse assessment
  • Reuse is within the expected range for comparable datasets (index +0.85).

Compared against 132 datasets in this corpus with a citable accession and sufficient metadata. See Methods for the model.

Possible original publication, unverified

No repository or reviewer names this dataset’s marker paper, so this is the pipeline’s own guess: the earliest heavily cited article that analysed the accession and names it in full text. Nothing is counted from it - not the citation figure above, not the funding attribution - and it is queued for review rather than presented as fact.

Articles that analyzed the data

None found. We searched Europe PMC for this dataset's accessions in article methods, results, tables, figures and data availability statements on 20 Sept 2026. That means our search found nothing, not that nobody has used these data.

Community examples

Share your example

Analyses someone ran on these data end to end, each with a receipt recording when it ran, against which packages and for how long.

Nobody has shared an analysis of this dataset yet. The examples on other datasets cover the common patterns and can be adapted - and if you adapt one, it belongs here.

Start here

Starter code generated from this record’s own identifiers, then the access steps.

Get the data in code

PDC: file manifest through the GraphQL APIpython
import requests

PDC_STUDY = "PDC000250"
API = "https://proteomic.datacommons.cancer.gov/graphql"

def gql(query, **variables):
    r = requests.post(API, json={"query": query, "variables": variables}, timeout=180)
    r.raise_for_status()
    body = r.json()
    if body.get("errors"):
        raise RuntimeError(body["errors"][0]["message"])
    return body["data"]

# filesPerStudy only fills its fields when given the study UUID: called with the
# pdc_study_id it returns the right number of rows with every column null.
study = gql("""query ($id: String!) {
  study(pdc_study_id: $id acceptDUA: true) { study_id study_name }
}""", id=PDC_STUDY)["study"][0]

files = gql("""query ($sid: String!) {
  filesPerStudy(study_id: $sid acceptDUA: true) {
    file_id file_name file_type data_category md5sum file_size signedUrl { url }
  }
}""", sid=study["study_id"])["filesPerStudy"]

print(study["study_name"], "-", len(files), "files")
for f in files[:3]:
    print(f["file_name"], f["data_category"], f["file_size"])
# Each signedUrl.url is a time-limited download link; stream it to disk with requests.get(url, stream=True).
This page as data: limitations firstbash
curl -s https://cd2s.vercel.app/data/datasets/pdc-prospective-ovarian-jhu-intact-glycoproteome.json | python3 -c '
import json, sys
r = json.load(sys.stdin)
for l in r["limitations"]:
    print(l["severity"].upper(), "-", l["statement"][:120])
print("survival endpoint:", r["longitudinal"]["has_survival_endpoint"], "| treatment response:", r["longitudinal"]["has_treatment_response"])'

Access steps

  1. 1
    Open the study in the PDC portalFor people5 minutes

    Proteomic data are released open; the portal's use guidelines still apply.

    https://pdc.cancer.gov/pdc/study/PDC000250

    Generated from repository policy. Check the linked policy before downloading.

  2. 2
    Accept the data use guidelines and downloadFor peopleminutes to hours, by study size

    The portal asks for acknowledgement and citation, not a data access request.

    https://pdc.cancer.gov/pdc/data-use-guidelines

    Generated from repository policy. Check the linked policy before downloading.

  3. 3
    Resolve the study UUID, then fetch the file manifestFor agents

    filesPerStudy keys on the study UUID, not on PDC000250: called with the pdc_study_id it returns the right number of rows with every column null. Resolve the UUID first and pass the terms acknowledgement.

    python - <<'PY'
    import requests
    API = "https://proteomic.datacommons.cancer.gov/graphql"
    
    def gql(query, **variables):
        r = requests.post(API, json={"query": query, "variables": variables}, timeout=180)
        r.raise_for_status()
        body = r.json()
        if body.get("errors"):
            raise RuntimeError(body["errors"][0]["message"])
        return body["data"]
    
    study = gql('query($id:String!){ study(pdc_study_id:$id acceptDUA:true){ study_id } }',
                id="PDC000250")["study"][0]
    files = gql('query($sid:String!){ filesPerStudy(study_id:$sid acceptDUA:true)'
                '{ file_id file_name file_size } }', sid=study["study_id"])["filesPerStudy"]
    print(len(files), "files")
    PY
    https://pdc.cancer.gov/data-dictionary/publicapi-documentation/

    Generated from repository policy. Check the linked policy before downloading.

Provenance

All of it, and more, is in this record’s JSON.

Identifiers

Versions and verification

Released
1 Jan 2025
Metadata retrieved
18 Sept 2026
Review status
Machine-extracted
Data generation funding
Funded data generation

For softwarerecord JSON