首页> 外文期刊>Proteomics >Assessment of reproducibility in depletion and enrichment workflows for plasma proteomics using label-free quantitative data-independent LC-MS
【24h】

Assessment of reproducibility in depletion and enrichment workflows for plasma proteomics using label-free quantitative data-independent LC-MS

机译:使用无标记定量数据独立LC-MS评估血浆蛋白质组学在消耗和富集工作流程中的可重复性

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Quantitation in plasma-based proteomics necessitates the reproducible removal of highly abundant proteins to enable the less abundant proteins to be visible to the mass spectrometer. We have evaluated immunodepletion (proteoprep20) and enrichment (Bio-Rad beads), as the current predominant approaches. Label-free analysis offers an opportunity to estimate the effectiveness of this approach without incorporating chemical labels. Human plasma samples were used to quantitatively assess the reproducibility of these two methods using nano-LC-data-independent acquisition MS. We have selected 18 candidate proteins and a comparison of both methodologies showed that both of the methods were reproducible and fell below 20% residual SD. With the same candidate proteins, individual inter-day variability for the samples was also processed, allowing us to monitor instrument reproducibility. Overall, a total of 131 proteins were identified by both methods with 272 proteins identified by enrichment and 200 identified by immunodepletion. Reproducibility of measurements of the amount of protein in the processed sample for individual proteins is within analytically acceptable standards for both methodologies. This enables both methods to be used for biomarker studies. However, when sample is limited, enrichment is not suitable as larger volumes (>1.0 mL) are required. In experiments where sample is not limited then a greater number of proteins can be reliably identified using enrichment.
机译:在基于血浆的蛋白质组学中进行定量分析,需要可重复去除高丰度的蛋白质,以使质谱仪可以看到较少丰度的蛋白质。我们已经评估了免疫耗竭(proteoprep20)和免疫富集(Bio-Rad磁珠),作为当前的主要方法。无标记分析提供了一个机会,无需结合化学标记即可评估此方法的有效性。使用人类血浆样品,使用与纳米液相色谱数据无关的采集质谱仪,定量评估这两种方法的重现性。我们选择了18种候选蛋白,两种方法学的比较表明,这两种方法都是可重现的,并且低于20%的残留SD。使用相同的候选蛋白质,还可以处理样品的个体间日间变异性,从而使我们能够监测仪器的再现性。总体而言,两种方法共鉴定出131种蛋白质,其中富集鉴定出272种蛋白质,免疫耗竭鉴定出200种蛋白质。两种蛋白质的处理样品中蛋白质含量的蛋白质测量值的重现性均在分析可接受的标准之内。这使得两种方法都可以用于生物标志物研究。但是,当样品有限时,由于需要更大的体积(> 1.0 mL),因此不适合进行浓缩。在不受样品限制的实验中,可以通过富集可靠地鉴定出更多的蛋白质。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号