Literature DB >> 23638883

Isobaric protein-level labeling strategy for serum glycoprotein quantification analysis by liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry.

Song Nie1, Andy Lo, Jianhui Zhu, Jing Wu, Mack T Ruffin, David M Lubman.   

Abstract

While peptide-level labeling using isobaric tag reagents has been widely applied for quantitative proteomics experiments, there are comparatively few reports of protein-level labeling. Intact protein labeling could be broadly applied to quantification experiments utilizing protein-level separations or enrichment schemes. Here, protein-level isobaric labeling was explored as an alternative strategy to peptide-level labeling for serum glycoprotein quantification. Labeling and digestion conditions were optimized by comparing different organic solvents and enzymes. Digestions with Asp-N and trypsin were found highly complementary; combining the results enabled quantification of 30% more proteins than either enzyme alone. Three commercial reagents were compared for protein-level labeling. Protein identification rates were highest with iTRAQ 4-plex when compared to TMT 6-plex and iTRAQ 8-plex using higher-energy collisional dissociation on an Orbitrap Elite mass spectrometer. The compatibility of isobaric protein-level labeling with lectin-based glycoprotein enrichment was also investigated. More than 74% of lectin-bound labeled proteins were known glycoproteins, which was similar to results from unlabeled and peptide-level labeled serum samples. Finally, protein-level and peptide-level labeling strategies were compared for serum glycoprotein quantification. Isobaric protein-level labeling gave comparable identification levels and quantitative precision to peptide-level labeling.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23638883      PMCID: PMC3690282          DOI: 10.1021/ac400838s

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Anal Chem        ISSN: 0003-2700            Impact factor:   6.986


  21 in total

Review 1.  On the frequency of protein glycosylation, as deduced from analysis of the SWISS-PROT database.

Authors:  R Apweiler; H Hermjakob; N Sharon
Journal:  Biochim Biophys Acta       Date:  1999-12-06

2.  Systematic comparison of label-free, metabolic labeling, and isobaric chemical labeling for quantitative proteomics on LTQ Orbitrap Velos.

Authors:  Zhou Li; Rachel M Adams; Karuna Chourey; Gregory B Hurst; Robert L Hettich; Chongle Pan
Journal:  J Proteome Res       Date:  2012-02-16       Impact factor: 4.466

3.  Protein labeling by iTRAQ: a new tool for quantitative mass spectrometry in proteome research.

Authors:  Sebastian Wiese; Kai A Reidegeld; Helmut E Meyer; Bettina Warscheid
Journal:  Proteomics       Date:  2007-02       Impact factor: 3.984

4.  Quantitative profiling of serum samples using TMT protein labelling, fractionation and LC-MS/MS.

Authors:  John Sinclair; John F Timms
Journal:  Methods       Date:  2011-03-21       Impact factor: 3.608

5.  iTRAQ labeling is superior to mTRAQ for quantitative global proteomics and phosphoproteomics.

Authors:  Philipp Mertins; Namrata D Udeshi; Karl R Clauser; D R Mani; Jinal Patel; Shao-en Ong; Jacob D Jaffe; Steven A Carr
Journal:  Mol Cell Proteomics       Date:  2011-12-30       Impact factor: 5.911

6.  Fucosylation and gastrointestinal cancer.

Authors:  Kenta Moriwaki; Eiji Miyoshi
Journal:  World J Hepatol       Date:  2010-04-27

7.  Direct comparison of stable isotope labeling by amino acids in cell culture and spectral counting for quantitative proteomics.

Authors:  Timothy S Collier; Prasenjit Sarkar; William L Franck; Balaji M Rao; Ralph A Dean; David C Muddiman
Journal:  Anal Chem       Date:  2010-10-15       Impact factor: 6.986

8.  Comparison of a protein-level and peptide-level labeling strategy for quantitative proteomics of synaptosomes using isobaric tags.

Authors:  Olivia Engmann; James Campbell; Malcolm Ward; K Peter Giese; Andrew J Thompson
Journal:  J Proteome Res       Date:  2010-05-07       Impact factor: 4.466

9.  Absolute SILAC for accurate quantitation of proteins in complex mixtures down to the attomole level.

Authors:  Stefan Hanke; Hüseyin Besir; Dieter Oesterhelt; Matthias Mann
Journal:  J Proteome Res       Date:  2008-02-14       Impact factor: 4.466

10.  Rapid and label-free detection of breast cancer biomarker CA15-3 in clinical human serum samples with optofluidic ring resonator sensors.

Authors:  Hongying Zhu; Paul S Dale; Charles W Caldwell; Xudong Fan
Journal:  Anal Chem       Date:  2009-12-15       Impact factor: 6.986

View more
  8 in total

1.  Large-scale identification of core-fucosylated glycopeptide sites in pancreatic cancer serum using mass spectrometry.

Authors:  Zhijing Tan; Haidi Yin; Song Nie; Zhenxin Lin; Jianhui Zhu; Mack T Ruffin; Michelle A Anderson; Diane M Simeone; David M Lubman
Journal:  J Proteome Res       Date:  2015-03-09       Impact factor: 4.466

2.  Optimization of protein-level tandem mass tag (TMT) labeling conditions in complex samples with top-down proteomics.

Authors:  Yanting Guo; Dahang Yu; Kellye A Cupp-Sutton; Xiaowen Liu; Si Wu
Journal:  Anal Chim Acta       Date:  2022-06-07       Impact factor: 6.911

Review 3.  Methods for quantification of glycopeptides by liquid separation and mass spectrometry.

Authors:  Haidi Yin; Jianhui Zhu
Journal:  Mass Spectrom Rev       Date:  2022-01-31       Impact factor: 9.011

4.  A quantitative proteomics analysis of MCF7 breast cancer stem and progenitor cell populations.

Authors:  Song Nie; Sean P McDermott; Yadwinder Deol; Zhijing Tan; Max S Wicha; David M Lubman
Journal:  Proteomics       Date:  2015-10-07       Impact factor: 3.984

5.  Quantitative analysis of single amino acid variant peptides associated with pancreatic cancer in serum by an isobaric labeling quantitative method.

Authors:  Song Nie; Haidi Yin; Zhijing Tan; Michelle A Anderson; Mack T Ruffin; Diane M Simeone; David M Lubman
Journal:  J Proteome Res       Date:  2014-11-24       Impact factor: 4.466

6.  Serum Glycoproteome Profiles for Distinguishing Intestinal Fibrosis from Inflammation in Crohn's Disease.

Authors:  Ryan W Stidham; Jing Wu; Jiaqi Shi; David M Lubman; Peter D R Higgins
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-01-23       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 7.  The crucial role of multiomic approach in cancer research and clinically relevant outcomes.

Authors:  Miaolong Lu; Xianquan Zhan
Journal:  EPMA J       Date:  2018-02-21       Impact factor: 6.543

8.  Glycoprotein biomarker panel for pancreatic cancer discovered by quantitative proteomics analysis.

Authors:  Song Nie; Andy Lo; Jing Wu; Jianhui Zhu; Zhijing Tan; Diane M Simeone; Michelle A Anderson; Kerby A Shedden; Mack T Ruffin; David M Lubman
Journal:  J Proteome Res       Date:  2014-03-10       Impact factor: 4.466

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.