Literature DB >> 23954498

Comparison of label-free and label-based strategies for proteome analysis of hepatoma cell lines.

Dominik A Megger1, Leona L Pott2, Maike Ahrens2, Juliet Padden2, Thilo Bracht2, Katja Kuhlmann2, Martin Eisenacher2, Helmut E Meyer2, Barbara Sitek3.   

Abstract

Within the past decade numerous methods for quantitative proteome analysis have been developed of which all exhibit particular advantages and disadvantages. Here, we present the results of a study aiming for a comprehensive comparison of ion-intensity based label-free proteomics and two label-based approaches using isobaric tags incorporated at the peptide and protein levels, respectively. As model system for our quantitative analysis we used the three hepatoma cell lines HepG2, Hep3B and SK-Hep-1. Four biological replicates of each cell line were quantitatively analyzed using an RPLC-MS/MS setup. Each quantification experiment was performed twice to determine technical variances of the different quantification techniques. We were able to show that the label-free approach by far outperforms both TMT methods regarding proteome coverage, as up to threefold more proteins were reproducibly identified in replicate measurements. Furthermore, we could demonstrate that all three methods show comparable reproducibility concerning protein quantification, but slightly differ in terms of accuracy. Here, label-free was found to be less accurate than both TMT approaches. It was also observed that the introduction of TMT labels at the protein level reduces the effect of underestimation of protein ratios, which is commonly monitored in case of TMT peptide labeling. Previously reported differences in protein expression between the particular cell lines were furthermore reproduced, which confirms the applicability of each investigated quantification method to study proteomic differences in such biological systems. This article is part of a Special Issue entitled: Biomarkers: A Proteomic Challenge.
© 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Hepatocellular carcinoma; Label-free quantification; Quantitative proteomics; Tandem mass tag

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23954498     DOI: 10.1016/j.bbapap.2013.07.017

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Biochim Biophys Acta        ISSN: 0006-3002


  43 in total

1.  The Clathrin-dependent Spindle Proteome.

Authors:  Sushma R Rao; Neftali Flores-Rodriguez; Scott L Page; Chin Wong; Phillip J Robinson; Megan Chircop
Journal:  Mol Cell Proteomics       Date:  2016-05-12       Impact factor: 5.911

2.  Quality Assessments of Long-Term Quantitative Proteomic Analysis of Breast Cancer Xenograft Tissues.

Authors:  Jian-Ying Zhou; Lijun Chen; Bai Zhang; Yuan Tian; Tao Liu; Stefani N Thomas; Li Chen; Michael Schnaubelt; Emily Boja; Tara Hiltke; Christopher R Kinsinger; Henry Rodriguez; Sherri R Davies; Shunqiang Li; Jacqueline E Snider; Petra Erdmann-Gilmore; David L Tabb; R Reid Townsend; Matthew J Ellis; Karin D Rodland; Richard D Smith; Steven A Carr; Zhen Zhang; Daniel W Chan; Hui Zhang
Journal:  J Proteome Res       Date:  2017-11-16       Impact factor: 4.466

3.  In Depth Quantification of Extracellular Matrix Proteins from Human Pancreas.

Authors:  Fengfei Ma; Daniel M Tremmel; Zihui Li; Christopher B Lietz; Sara Dutton Sackett; Jon S Odorico; Lingjun Li
Journal:  J Proteome Res       Date:  2019-07-01       Impact factor: 4.466

4.  Characterizing the O-glycosylation landscape of human plasma, platelets, and endothelial cells.

Authors:  Sarah L King; Hiren J Joshi; Katrine T Schjoldager; Adnan Halim; Thomas D Madsen; Morten H Dziegiel; Anders Woetmann; Sergey Y Vakhrushev; Hans H Wandall
Journal:  Blood Adv       Date:  2017-02-23

5.  Unbiased Profiling of the Human Proinsulin Biosynthetic Interaction Network Reveals a Role for Peroxiredoxin 4 in Proinsulin Folding.

Authors:  Duc T Tran; Anita Pottekat; Saiful A Mir; Salvatore Loguercio; Insook Jang; Alexandre Rosa Campos; Kathleen M Scully; Reyhaneh Lahmy; Ming Liu; Peter Arvan; William E Balch; Randal J Kaufman; Pamela Itkin-Ansari
Journal:  Diabetes       Date:  2020-05-26       Impact factor: 9.461

Review 6.  Sample Multiplexing Strategies in Quantitative Proteomics.

Authors:  Albert B Arul; Renã A S Robinson
Journal:  Anal Chem       Date:  2018-12-18       Impact factor: 6.986

Review 7.  Integrated omics approaches to characterize a nuclear receptor corepressor-associated histone deacetylase in mouse skeletal muscle.

Authors:  Yingyun Gong; Rui Cao; Guolian Ding; Sungguan Hong; Wenjun Zhou; Wenyun Lu; Manashree Damle; Bin Fang; Chuhan C Wang; Justin Qian; Natasha Lie; Cristina Lanzillotta; Joshua D Rabinowitz; Zheng Sun
Journal:  Mol Cell Endocrinol       Date:  2017-05-26       Impact factor: 4.102

8.  Comparative Analysis of Quantitative Mass Spectrometric Methods for Subcellular Proteomics.

Authors:  Abla Tannous; Marielle Boonen; Haiyan Zheng; Caifeng Zhao; Colin J Germain; Dirk F Moore; David E Sleat; Michel Jadot; Peter Lobel
Journal:  J Proteome Res       Date:  2020-03-05       Impact factor: 4.466

9.  Type 1 diabetes cadaveric human pancreata exhibit a unique exocrine tissue proteomic profile.

Authors:  Chih-Wei Liu; Mark A Atkinson; Qibin Zhang
Journal:  Proteomics       Date:  2016-04-13       Impact factor: 3.984

10.  Immunohistochemical Markers Distinguishing Cholangiocellular Carcinoma (CCC) from Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma (PDAC) Discovered by Proteomic Analysis of Microdissected Cells.

Authors:  Juliet Padden; Maike Ahrens; Julia Kälsch; Stefanie Bertram; Dominik A Megger; Thilo Bracht; Martin Eisenacher; Peri Kocabayoglu; Helmut E Meyer; Bence Sipos; Hideo A Baba; Barbara Sitek
Journal:  Mol Cell Proteomics       Date:  2015-12-07       Impact factor: 5.911

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.