Literature DB >> 21557261

Proteomic biomarker discovery: it's more than just mass spectrometry.

Josip Blonder1, Haleem J Issaq, Timothy D Veenstra.   

Abstract

The previous decade witnessed an enormous number of studies with the singular goal of identifying protein biomarkers for diseases such as cancer. A large majority of these studies have focused on comparative studies of serum or plasma obtained from disease-affected and control patients. In these studies, proteins identified in the samples using MS were compared with the hope that differences between samples would reveal useful biomarkers. Unfortunately, finding clinically relevant biomarkers has often been elusive and frustrating. As with most research efforts, both successes and failures, much has been learned about what strategies work and which do not. Part of the problem can be attributed to underestimating the effort required to discover novel biomarkers and depending too heavily on MS analysis of peripheral blood samples. Fortunately, the future for biomarker discovery still appears bright. MS technology continues to increase in sensitivity, throughput, and accuracy while novel types of samples and clever experimental designs coupled with innovative bioinformatics will make this vision of routine biomarker discovery a reality. To achieve ultimate success is going to require concomitant application of a number of different technologies, all providing the information necessary for discovering and validating clinically useful biomarkers.
Copyright © 2011 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21557261     DOI: 10.1002/elps.201000585

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Electrophoresis        ISSN: 0173-0835            Impact factor:   3.535


  10 in total

1.  Streamlining biomarker discovery.

Authors:  Martin Latterich; Jan E Schnitzer
Journal:  Nat Biotechnol       Date:  2011-07-11       Impact factor: 54.908

2.  Quantitative mass spectrometry of urinary biomarkers.

Authors:  Marina Jerebtsova; Sergei Nekhai
Journal:  J Integr OMICS       Date:  2014-12-01

Review 3.  Proteomic analyses of CSF aimed at biomarker development for pediatric brain tumors.

Authors:  Nardin Samuel; Marc Remke; James T Rutka; Brian Raught; David Malkin
Journal:  J Neurooncol       Date:  2014-04-26       Impact factor: 4.130

Review 4.  Analytical challenges translating mass spectrometry-based phosphoproteomics from discovery to clinical applications.

Authors:  Anton B Iliuk; Justine V Arrington; Weiguo Andy Tao
Journal:  Electrophoresis       Date:  2014-07-10       Impact factor: 3.535

5.  Progress and Trends in Complement Therapeutics.

Authors:  Daniel Ricklin; John D Lambris
Journal:  Adv Exp Med Biol       Date:  2013       Impact factor: 2.622

Review 6.  Detecting Antigen-Specific T Cell Responses: From Bulk Populations to Single Cells.

Authors:  Chansavath Phetsouphanh; John James Zaunders; Anthony Dominic Kelleher
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2015-08-12       Impact factor: 5.923

7.  Detection of biomarkers using recombinant antibodies coupled to nanostructured platforms.

Authors:  Michael R Kierny; Thomas D Cunningham; Brian K Kay
Journal:  Nano Rev       Date:  2012-07-23

Review 8.  Mass spectrometry-based proteomics in molecular diagnostics: discovery of cancer biomarkers using tissue culture.

Authors:  Debasish Paul; Avinash Kumar; Akshada Gajbhiye; Manas K Santra; Rapole Srikanth
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2013-03-17       Impact factor: 3.411

9.  Identification of HSP90 as potential biomarker of biliary atresia using two-dimensional electrophoresis and mass spectrometry.

Authors:  Rui Dong; Panmo Deng; Yanlei Huang; Chun Shen; Ping Xue; Shan Zheng
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-07-11       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Lower fetuin-A, retinol binding protein 4 and several metabolites after gastric bypass compared to sleeve gastrectomy in patients with type 2 diabetes.

Authors:  Mia Jüllig; Shelley Yip; Aimin Xu; Greg Smith; Martin Middleditch; Michael Booth; Richard Babor; Grant Beban; Rinki Murphy
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-05-06       Impact factor: 3.240

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.