Peptide Library

Human study PLS-00190

Thymosin β4 is a novel potential prognostic marker in gastrointestinal stromal tumors.

Cross-sectional study · 60 participants enrolled · not included in the assessments (other)

Version 1 · published November 8, 2026 · evidence through November 8, 2026 · research snapshot 2026.1.1 · methodology ev-1 · Automated assessment by AI (claude-opus-5-5 and claude-sonnet-5-5), not reviewed by a person.

Only the abstract was available. Essential methods may be missing, which limits what can be judged.

Reports of this study

Every publication, registration and abstract describing this one study. Participants are counted once.

  • Thymosin β4 is a novel potential prognostic marker in gastrointestinal stromal tumors.primary · APMIS : acta pathologica, microbiologica, et immunologica Scandinavica · 2012-03-24 · PMID 22882257 · DOI

Design and participants

Design
Cross-sectional study
Population
Patients with gastrointestinal stromal tumors whose tumor specimens were retrospectively re-examined (60 GISTs)
Conditions
Gastrointestinal stromal tumor
Setting
Retrospective pathology review of tumor specimens
Planned enrollment (registry)
Not reported
Enrolled
60
Randomized
Not reported
Completed follow-up
Not reported
Funding
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't (per publication type); no funder named

Intervention and comparator

What each group received. Related peptides, analogs and combinations are never treated as the compound itself.

    What the authors reported

    As stated in the sources. This is the authors’ account, not Peptide Library’s assessment.

    Adverse events

    None reported. That is not evidence of safety, and how safety was monitored isn’t described.

    The authors concluded (paraphrased): The authors report the first demonstration of Tβ4 protein in GISTs. They conclude that increased Tβ4 expression may indicate aggressive tumor behavior and could serve as a prognostic marker.

    Peptide Library’s assessment

    An automated assessment, made by AI separately from the authors’ conclusions and not reviewed by a person. How risk of bias is assessed.

    Limitations

    • abstract only: Only the PubMed abstract is available, so methods and full results cannot be checked.
    • other: Tβ4 was measured as an endogenous tumor biomarker and never administered, so the study gives no information on the compound's effects or safety.
    • small or imprecise: Only 60 tumor specimens were examined retrospectively, limiting the precision of the associations.
    • inappropriate population: Tβ4 was measured as an endogenous tumor biomarker in cancer specimens, not administered, so the study gives no information on treatment effects or safety.
    • confounding: Associations between expression and clinicopathologic features are reported as correlations, with no stated adjustment for other prognostic factors.

    No risk-of-bias assessment has been published for this study’s results.

    Claims this study informs

    Where each value comes from

    • author_conclusion: PMID 22882257, abstract (final two sentences) · extracted by AI (automated, not verified by a person) · abstract only
    • design: PMID 22882257, abstract (sentence 4) · extracted by AI (automated, not verified by a person) · abstract only
    • funding: PMID 22882257, title (publication types metadata) · extracted by AI (automated, not verified by a person) · abstract only
    • participants: PMID 22882257, abstract (sentence 4) · extracted by AI (automated, not verified by a person) · abstract only
    • population: PMID 22882257, abstract (sentences 3-4) · extracted by AI (automated, not verified by a person) · abstract only

    • Version 1 · published November 8, 2026 · evidence through November 8, 2026 · research snapshot 2026.1.1 · methodology ev-1 · Automated assessment by AI (claude-opus-5-5 and claude-sonnet-5-5), not reviewed by a person.

    These assessments describe published research. Records marked automated were produced by AI under the published methodology and have not been reviewed by a person; they can contain errors. None of this is medical advice, not a statement about any product’s safety for human use, and not a regulatory approval. Peptide Library’s vendor and partner relationships play no part in them (editorial independence).