A proteome-level time-series study of drug effects (i.e., pharmacodynamics) is critical for understanding mechanisms of action and systems pharmacology, but is challenging, because of the requirement of a proteomics method for reliable quantification of many biological samples. Here, we describe a highly reproducible strategy, enabling a global, large-scale investigation of the expression dynamics of corticosteroid-regulated proteins in livers from adrenalectomized rats over 11 time points after drug dosing (0.5-66 h, N = 5/point). The analytical advances include (i) exhaustive tissue extraction with a Polytron/sonication procedure in a detergent cocktail buffer, and a cleanup/digestion procedure providing very consistent protein yields (relative standard deviation (RSD%) of 2.7%-6.4%) and peptide recoveries (4.1-9.0%) across the 60 animals; (ii) an ultrahigh-pressure nano-LC setup with substantially improved temperature stabilization, pump-noise suppression, and programmed interface cleaning, enabling excellent reproducibility for continuous analyses of numerous samples; (iii) separation on a 100-cm-long column (2-μm particles) with high reproducibility for days to enable both in-depth profiling and accurate peptide ion-current match; and (iv) well-controlled ion-current-based quantification. To obtain high-quality quantitative data necessary to describe the 11 time-points protein expression temporal profiles, strict criteria were used to define "quantifiable proteins". A total of 323 drug-responsive proteins were revealed with confidence, and the time profiles of these proteins provided new insights into the diverse temporal changes of biological cascades associated with hepatic metabolism, response to hormone stimuli, gluconeogenesis, inflammatory responses, and protein translation processes. Most profile changes persisted well after the drug was eliminated. The developed strategy can also be broadly applied in preclinical and clinical research, where the analysis of numerous biological replicates is crucial.
A proteome-level time-series study of drug effects (i.e., pharmacodynamics) is critical for understanding mechanisms of action and systems pharmacology, but is challenging, because of the requirement of a proteomics method for reliable quantification of many biological samples. Here, we describe a highly reproducible strategy, enabling a global, large-scale investigation of the expression dynamics of corticosteroid-regulated proteins in livers from adrenalectomized rats over 11 time points after drug dosing (0.5-66 h, N = 5/point). The analytical advances include (i) exhaustive tissue extraction with a Polytron/sonication procedure in a detergent cocktail buffer, and a cleanup/digestion procedure providing very consistent protein yields (relative standard deviation (RSD%) of 2.7%-6.4%) and peptide recoveries (4.1-9.0%) across the 60 animals; (ii) an ultrahigh-pressure nano-LC setup with substantially improved temperature stabilization, pump-noise suppression, and programmed interface cleaning, enabling excellent reproducibility for continuous analyses of numerous samples; (iii) separation on a 100-cm-long column (2-μm particles) with high reproducibility for days to enable both in-depth profiling and accurate peptide ion-current match; and (iv) well-controlled ion-current-based quantification. To obtain high-quality quantitative data necessary to describe the 11 time-points protein expression temporal profiles, strict criteria were used to define "quantifiable proteins". A total of 323 drug-responsive proteins were revealed with confidence, and the time profiles of these proteins provided new insights into the diverse temporal changes of biological cascades associated with hepatic metabolism, response to hormone stimuli, gluconeogenesis, inflammatory responses, and protein translation processes. Most profile changes persisted well after the drug was eliminated. The developed strategy can also be broadly applied in preclinical and clinical research, where the analysis of numerous biological replicates is crucial.
A comprehensive
understanding
of the mechanisms underlying drug action is indispensable for predicting
and evaluating drug efficacy and safety, and for directing therapeutic
efforts.[1] Conventionally, studies of drug
mechanisms of action involve the examination of hypothesized or known
targets.[2] Despite considerable successes,
target-based approaches remain suboptimal in that they are often laborious,
time-consuming, and susceptible to bias arising from factors such
as unexpected off-target effects and collective effects by multiple
targets.[3] Genomic approaches offer a powerful
tool for nonbiased investigations of drug action,[4] but such strategies fall short in that message expression
changes may not accurately reflect drug effects on protein level.[5,6] In contrast, proteomic approaches are capable of identifying global
protein dynamics in response to diverse stimuli and, thus, can provide
directly relevant information on altered biological cascades.[7,8]A comprehensive and accurate investigation of drug actions
require
the study of responses over time because many drug-induced biological
processes often occur at different times after drug dosing.[9] Pharmacodynamics, which is the investigation
of the quantitative relationships between drug concentrations and
effects over time, provides valuable information on drug potency,
toxicity, side effects, and mechanisms of action.[10] Performing in vivo pharmacodynamic studies
on a proteome level will reveal the temporal features of drug-induced
molecular changes and provide rich biological information leading
to improved understanding of diverse drug effects.However,
realizing comprehensive pharmacodynamic proteomic studies
represents a daunting challenge for several reasons. First, an ideal
pharmacodynamic study requires the analysis of many time points after
dosing with multiple biological replicates at each time point.[10] Although targeted proteomics methods can be
applied to the quantification of many biological samples,[11,12] accurate and precise proteomic profiling with many biological replicates
remain challenging. Recently, developments in isotope-labeling strategies,
especially the super-SILAC method,[13,14] enabled accurate
and large-scale proteomic quantification in some types of human and
mouse tissues, but a practical strategy that is readily adaptable
to any animal model in a cost-effective manner remains largely elusive.
Label-free approaches carry the potential of comparing multiple biological
replicates.[15] However, as these approaches
do not employ any internal standard, highly quantitative and reproducible
sample preparation and LC/MS analysis are required but are often difficult
to achieve in practice, particularly for large sample cohorts.[16] Second, an in-depth proteomic analysis of each
animal or clinical subject in the large cohort is desirable for extensive
investigation of drug-responsive proteins, but it is difficult to
accomplish. Multidimensional chromatography can greatly enhance proteome
coverage,[17] but it is not practical for
quantification of many biological samples (e.g., >20) with the
requisite
quantitative accuracy and precision.[18] Previously,
several excellent works showed that one-dimensional liquid chromatography/mass
spectroscopy (1-D LC/MS) analysis using a long reverse-phase column
and a shallow gradient can provide extensive separation of complex
proteomes and good reproducibility has been demonstrated with a handful
of runs,[19−23] but the reproducibility for many biological samples has not been
evaluated yet (e.g., >30). Because of these technical difficulties,
studies of drug-induced proteomic changes have been limited to three
time points,[24,25] which is often not sufficient
for pharmaceutical studies.Recently, we developed an extensive
ion-current-based strategy
that is capable of profiling 10–20 replicates in one experimental
set.[7,26,27] To enable
the proteomic comparison of a much larger number of biological samples,
in this study, we developed several technical advances that substantially
enhance the efficiency and reproducibility of sample preparation,
digestion and LC/MS analysis, extent of peptide separation, and reliability
of ion current-based quantification.This strategy was applied
to a large-scale study of the protein
dynamics induced by the immunosuppressive drug methylprednisolone
(MPL) in rat liver. MPL is a corticosteroid (CS) used for the treatment
of chronic inflammatory and autoimmune diseases.[28] The CS drugs have long-term adverse effects such as diabetes,
myopathy, and osteoporosis,[28] and the mechanisms
underlying therapeutic and adverse side effects are complex.[29] We performed diverse studies of CS-induced transcriptional
changes,[30,31] which revealed complex patterns of mRNA
regulation. A proteomic-scale investigation of the pharmacodynamics
of CS will greatly extend our knowledge of the biological cascades
responsible for their effects.
Experimental Section
Dosing of Animals
Details for animal dosing are described
in the Supporting Information.
Extraction
of Tissues and Precipitation/On-Pellet Digestion
Livers were
ground to fine powder under liquid nitrogen and 80
mg of the powder was suspended in 800 μL of detergent-cocktail
lysis buffer, which contained 150 mM sodium chloride, 1% sodium deoxycholate,
2% Nonidet P-40 (NP-40), and 2.5% sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS) and
protease inhibitors (Complete tablets, EDTA-free, Roche, Inc.). The
mixtures were immediately homogenized on ice using a Polytron homogenizer
(Kinematica, Switzerland) at 15 000 rpm for six cycles, each
with 10-s bursts and 5-s pause times. The samples were then sonicated
using a high-energy sonicator (Qsonica, Newtown, CT) at 30-s bursts
on ice for six cycles. The extract was centrifuged at 20 000
g for 60 min at 4 °C. Several aliquots were collected from the
supernatant. Total protein contents were measured by the Bicinchoninic
Acid Assay. Then, 100 μg of protein were diluted with the lysis
buffer to a final concentration of 2 mg/mL, which subjected to a precipitation/on-pellet-digestion
procedure. Details are presented in the Supporting
Information.Precipitation/on-pellet-digestion of the
60 samples was carried out in 3 cohorts (20 samples per cohort) to
minimize the effect of peptide degradation over the 20-day analysis.
Nanoflow, Reverse-Phase LC/MS
The Nano Flow Ultrahigh
Pressure LC system (nano-UPLC) consisted of a Spark Endurance autosampler
(Emmen, Holland) and an ultrahigh pressure Eksigent (Dublin, CA) Nano-2D
Ultra capillary/nano-LC system. To achieve an extensive and reproducible
separation of the complex peptide mixture, a nano-LC/nanospray setup
that was devised in house, illustrated in Figure
S1 in the Supporting Information, was employed. The following
features were utilized to enable excellent chromatographic resolution
and run-to-run reproducibility:(i) Separation on a long column
(100 cm long and 50-μm inner diameter (ID)) with small particles
(Pepmap 2-μm C18, 100 Å) under high pressure (∼9000–11 000
psi with heating).(ii) A unique packing procedure for excellent
durability. The sorbent
flurry was packed three cycles per direction; for each cycle, the
packing pressure was ∼12 000 psi at 24 °C for 1
h, followed by controlled gradient venting for 8 h under constant
temperature and humidity. High-pressure, 0.5 mm frits (High-Pressure-Frits,
patent pending) were placed at both ends to constrain the packed sorbent.
Upon completion of packing, a laser tip puller (Sutter Instruments)
was used to produce a ∼2-μm noncoated tip with the fused
frit inside.(iii) The direct trap-column connection without
extra in-valve
volume improves peak shapes and reduces tailing.(iv) To achieve
a highly homogeneous heating, the column was folded
in a heating sheath fully filled with heat-conductive silicone.(v) A large trap-vs-column ID ratio (6:1) was employed for substantially
dampened pump delivery variation and improved gradient mixing on nanoflow
scale.(vi) Between each two runs, the noncoated tip of the
fused silica
column was subjected to a programmed washing for 10 min (350 μL/min),
using 50% methanol and 0.1% formic acid, with a syringe pump triggered
by a contact closure signal sent from the Spark autosampler, prior
to the start of the nano-LC gradient. Before analysis of the large
number of time-course samples, the newly packed column was “aged”
by triplicate runs of a pooled liver digest sample for ∼21
h.Details on the 7-h gradient and MS parameters (Orbitrap)
are given
in the Supporting Information.
Protein Identification
and Ion-Current-Based Quantification
Details on database
searching, protein identification, and ion-current-based
quantification are specified in the Supporting
Information.
Results and Discussion
To enable
an accurate and extensive assessment of the expression
dynamics of drug-induced proteomic changes, this study developed a
robust and reproducible ion-current-based quantitative approach that
enables the reliable profiling of a large number of animals in one
set. The schematic of the procedures and the experimental design are
illustrated in Figure 1.
Figure 1
Experimental procedure
for the large-scale, ion-current-based proteomic
profiling. The ADX rats were dosed with 50 mg/kg methylprednisolone
(MPL) (11 time-course groups) or saline (1 vehicle-control group).
A multiplex, reproducible and extensive ion-current-based strategy
was developed and evaluated for quantification in all animals. To
determine the proper cutoff thresholds for discovery, the false altered
protein discovery in each time-course group was estimated by comparison
with a sham sample set (5 controls vs 5 controls).
Experimental procedure
for the large-scale, ion-current-based proteomic
profiling. The ADX rats were dosed with 50 mg/kg methylprednisolone
(MPL) (11 time-course groups) or saline (1 vehicle-control group).
A multiplex, reproducible and extensive ion-current-based strategy
was developed and evaluated for quantification in all animals. To
determine the proper cutoff thresholds for discovery, the false altered
protein discovery in each time-course group was estimated by comparison
with a sham sample set (5 controls vs 5 controls).
Highly Reproducible Approaches for Preparation of a Large Number
of Tissue Samples
Complete and uniform extraction of the
proteins across the 60 liver samples is essential for this study but
challenging with existing protocols. The extraction, cleanup, and
digestion procedure developed here achieved near-complete extraction
of liver tissues with exceptional intersample reproducibility. Perfused
livers were ground to fine powder in liquid nitrogen, and then lysed
with a Polytron homogenizer in a detergent cocktail, followed by extensive
extraction with sonication (see the Experimental
Section), which afforded complete disruption of tissue structures
and components. The optimal buffer compositions were experimentally
identified based on the evaluation of extraction consistency and efficiency
from rat livers, with consideration that all buffer components can
be completely removed later in the precipitation step. An extraction
buffer containing 2% NP-40, 2.5% SDS, and 1% sodium deoxycholate was
determined to be optimal. The mixture of ionic and nonionic detergents
permits exhaustive extraction of the membrane proteins as well as
cytosolic proteins in tissue.[32] High and
consistent protein yields at an average of 161.25 mg per gram of liver
tissue, with 2.7%–6.4% intragroup variation and 5.0% intergroup
variation were achieved across the 12 groups of animals (Figure 2A). The completeness of extraction was confirmed
by measuring the protein content in the pellet remnants after extraction,
where only <0.3% of total protein was found. The combination of
Polytron homogenization and sonication greatly enhanced the protein
yields and reproducibility of extraction, compared to using the homogenization
alone for the same samples in the same buffer, which resulted in protein
yields at ∼118.7 mg/g with >21% intergroup variations. The
sonication not only improves extraction efficiency and reproducibility,
but also breaks large-molecule nucleic acids into small fragments
that can be removed by subsequent precipitation steps.
Figure 2
Efficient and reproducible
extraction and sample preparation for
the 60 animals. (A) Protein extraction yields from liver samples using
a unique Polytron/sonication protocol with a cocktail of high-concentration
of detergents. (B) The peptide recovery of the precipitation/on-pellet-digestion
procedure. Peptide recovery was determined by a modified BCA method
described previously.[32]
Efficient and reproducible
extraction and sample preparation for
the 60 animals. (A) Protein extraction yields from liver samples using
a unique Polytron/sonication protocol with a cocktail of high-concentration
of detergents. (B) The peptide recovery of the precipitation/on-pellet-digestion
procedure. Peptide recovery was determined by a modified BCA method
described previously.[32]The composition of organic solvents used for precipitation
was
experimentally optimized. As confirmed by a triple-quadruple LC/MS
analysis, the optimized precipitation approach using acetone/chloroform/formic
acid mixture (see the Supporting Information) effectively removed all the detergents that would otherwise severely
compromise the subsequent digestion and LC/MS analysis (>99.98%,
data
not shown), while providing high protein recoveries. It was found
that dilution of the liver extract to the protein concentration range
of 0.5–3 mg/mL with the lysis buffer before precipitation was
critical to maintain high protein recoveries. The optimized stepwise
precipitation procedure resulted in high protein recovery (92%–97%
across the 60 animals). Moreover, the procedure also significantly
reduced nonprotein matrix components such as lipids and fragmented/small-molecule
nucleic acids, which may otherwise negatively affect the robustness
and consistency of nano-LC/MS analysis. After precipitation, we employed
an on-pellet-digestion approach[32] without
dissolving the protein pellet (which often requires denaturing reagents
that may negatively impact analytical reproducibility). Under active
agitation, a short phase-I digestion brings the pellets into solution
by cleaving the pelleted proteins into soluble albeit large tryptic
peptides; these incompletely cleaved peptides were then subjected
to an overnight phase-II digestion, which achieved complete cleavage.
This straightforward precipitation/on-pellet-digestion procedure resulted
in high and reproducible peptide recoveries in the range of 84%–89%
with a relative standard deviation (RSD%) of 4.1%–9% across
the 12 groups of rats (n = 5 per group, Figure 2B). The data in Figure 2 demonstrated
that the developed sample preparation strategy is sufficiently quantitative
and reproducible for the 60 samples, which laid a solid foundation
for ion-current-based quantification.
A Reproducible and Extensive
Nano-LC/MS Strategy Capable of
Reliable Quantification of Numerous Samples
To address the
challenging requirement for reliable and precise relative quantification
of the 60 samples, we developed several approaches enabling high reproducibility,
sensitivity, and chromatographic resolution of the ultrahigh-pressure
nano-LC/MS analysis, by substantially improving procedures that we
described previously.[7,26] The detailed flow path setup
is illustrated in Figure S1 in the Supporting
Information and specified in the Experimental
Section. Compared with a more “conventional”
nano-LC/MS setup with shorter gradient/column, this strategy has the
following salient advantages.
High-Resolution Chromatographic Separation
Extensive
and high-resolution separation of the liver digests was achieved on
a 100-cm-long column packed with 2-μm particles and having a
7-h gradient. The low-void-volume design significantly improved peak
shapes and reduced tailing. Because of the retrograde loading-analysis
directions and the peak compression effect achieved by using slightly
weaker stationary phase in the trap than in the column (Figure S1 in the Supporting Information), the
large-ID trap did not lead to perceivable band-broadening. An elevated
separation temperature was found to improve chromatographic resolution,
as expressed by the average of 38% reduced peak widths (fwhm) of relative
polar peptides in the rat liver digest (i.e., the peptides eluted
in the first ∼125 min). Figure 3A shows
a representative base peak chromatogram for the analysis of rat liver
digests under the optimized nano-LC/MS conditions. An extended peptide
elution window of ∼360 min and a peak capacity of >1390
(the
length of peptide elution window divided by the average peak width
at 4σ, 13.4% peak height) were achieved. The high extent of
separation (6-h peptide elution window with narrow peaks) on this
system resulted in 3.2-fold greater numbers of quantifiable proteins
than using a 25-cm column packed with the same material with a 1.5-h
gradient (data not shown). Moreover, our study showed that an extensive
chromatographic separation also substantially improved the match of
peptide ion currents among different samples, by providing sufficient
chromatographic resolution among peptides with close m/z. For example, a 146% increase of successfully
matched quantitative frames and a 58% decrease in missing data in
individual replicates were observed using the 100-cm-long column with
a 7-h gradient, over that using a 25-cm column with a 1.5-h gradient.
Figure 3
The extensive
and reproducible separation of rat liver digests.
(A) A representative base peak chromatogram for separation of liver
digest. (B) Variation (RSD%) of the retention times of base peak peptides
across 60 consecutive runs of a pooled liver digest, over a 18-day
period. The nano-LC/MS configuration was shown in Figure S1 in the Supporting Information, and the separation
was carried out on a 100-cm-long nano column (50-μm ID and packed
with 2-μm C18 particles) heated at 52 °C. The extensive
separation permits extensive analysis and accurate match of peptide
peaks, which is critical for the ion-current-based quantification.
The extensive
and reproducible separation of rat liver digests.
(A) A representative base peak chromatogram for separation of liver
digest. (B) Variation (RSD%) of the retention times of base peak peptides
across 60 consecutive runs of a pooled liver digest, over a 18-day
period. The nano-LC/MS configuration was shown in Figure S1 in the Supporting Information, and the separation
was carried out on a 100-cm-long nano column (50-μm ID and packed
with 2-μm C18 particles) heated at 52 °C. The extensive
separation permits extensive analysis and accurate match of peptide
peaks, which is critical for the ion-current-based quantification.
High Analytical Reproducibility
among Many Runs
It
has been previously demonstrated that the use of a long column/gradient
enables extensive 1-D LC/MS analysis of complex proteomes.[19−22,33] Our pilot study found it very
challenging to achieve the high run-to-run reproducibility using a
trapless, conventional long column/gradient approach for the analysis
of many tissue samples, e.g., the coefficient of variation (CV%) of
retention time and area-under-the-curve (AUC) increased to >7%
and
>26%, respectively, after nine consecutive runs (data not shown)
.
This problem can be attributed to the buildup of residual matrix components
in the LC/MS system and the difficulties in stabilizing the long-column-LC/MS
system for an extended period of time (e.g., >10 days). Here, we
developed
technical advances providing exceptional run-to-run reproducibility,
in terms of both retention times and AUC of peptide precursor ions.
These advances include the following:(i) An improved column
packing procedure and high-pressure frits at both ends, which helps
to achieve consistent column performance over a 20-day period, after
one-day “aging” runs with tissue samples (see the Experimental Section);(ii) The large-capacity
trap prevents hydrophobic and hydrophilic
matrix components from entering the nano-LC/MS system, eliminating
the need of offline sample cleaning, one major source of compromised
reproducibility for label-free quantification; the trap also provided
pump noise dampening and optimal gradient mixing;[32](iii) The separation was carried out with a homogeneous
heating
of the long silica column by immersing it in a heat-conductive-silicone
filled, well-insulated heating sheath, which markedly improved run-to-run
repeatability, compared to using a standard column oven; and(iv) A programmed, effective washing of the spray tip between two
runs using a software-controlled syringe pump (see the Experimental Section) was found to result in a
highly constant ionization efficiency and MS signal responses across
>60 consecutive runs.We evaluated the reproducibility of
LC/MS analysis of liver digests
by 60 repetitive runs of a pooled sample. The RSD% values of the retention
times of peptide base peaks ranged from 0.6% to 2.8% (Figure 3B). Furthermore, to estimate the run-to-run reproducibility
of peptide ion current AUC, 15 representative peptides that were randomly
selected within each 20 min segment of the elution window were evaluated.
Over the 60 replicate runs, low variations of AUC of proteins, in
the range of 3.9%–16.8% (RSD%) with a mean of 9.4%, were observed.
Finally, using the ion-current-based quantitative method, >98%
of
the proteins (1594 out of 1622 quantified) exhibited no missing data
at the protein level in any of the replicates.
High Analytical
Sensitivity
The developed nano-LC/MS
approach provides improved analytical sensitivity, which is important
for ion-current-based quantification of low-abundance peptides. With
a long, shallow gradient elution, the loading capacity of the system
is mainly determined by the trap capacity, rather than the nanocolumn.[26] Our pilot studies indicated that up to 8 μg
of liver digest can be loaded onto the system without compromising
the chromatographic resolutions and quantitative linearity, even for
the most hydrophilic peptides (e.g., those eluted in the first 10
min of the elution window). Based on this result, the optimal loading
capacity was 6 μg of liver digest, which is 5–10-fold
higher than using a trap-less configuration. The 6 μg loading
resulted in a >25% increase in quantifiable proteins over the standard
loading of 1 μg without a trap, as shown in Figure S2 in the Supporting Information. Furthermore, we overfilled
the Orbitrap analyzer to further improve the signal-to-noise ratio
(S/N) of the peptide precursors. Because of the unique feature of
its electric fields, the Orbitrap analyzer is much less prone to space-charge
effects than most other types of MS analyzers.[34] Therefore, it is feasible to overfill the Orbitrap with
large numbers of charges, which will produce more-intensive image
currents and thus improve the S/N of peptides. Previously, we demonstrated
that overfilling an Orbitrap achieved markedly improved analytical
sensitivity without compromising mass accuracy and resolution, when
the analyzer was properly calibrated under the target high Automatic
Gain Control (AGC) values.[32,35,36] Here, we optimized the Orbitrap overfilling conditions using rat
liver digests. Under the optimal conditions (see the Experimental Section), an average 6-fold improvement in S/N
was achieved over the manufacturer-suggested values, with an average
mass error of constantly <5 ppm over a 10-day evaluation.
Well-Controlled Ion-Current-Based Quantification
A
well-controlled ion-current-based quantification was conducted. Technical
details on ion-current-based quantification can be found in a previous
publication.[37] The parameters for peak
alignment, peptide ion match, and frame generation were identified
by analyzing a benchmark dataset containing the repetitive runs of
a pooled tissue sample. To ensure high quantitative accuracy and precision,
strict criteria were applied for peak detection and frame generation,
e.g., S/N > 10 for peptide precursor peaks and the elimination
of
peptides with ambiguous assignment, so that only qualified frames
were used for quantification. Because of the reproducible and efficient
sample preparation and LC/MS analysis, high intersample reproducibility
was achieved, as expressed by excellent SIEVE alignment scores (0.82–0.88,
with 1.0 being the maximum) across the 60 time-course samples. Approximately
120 000 quantitative frames were generated. The AUC data was
interfaced to a PHP script, which transformed the quantitative data,
followed by normalization for each individual sample. The protein
ratios of time-course groups versus vehicle controls were computed
by aggregating the AUC data on peptide levels to protein levels using
a weighting model based on relative variances, as detailed in the Supporting Information.Pharmacodynamic
studies require accurate and precise quantitative data across all
time points. To achieve this, a set of highly stringent cutoff criteria
were employed to define the “quantifiable proteins”,
so that only proteins with high-quality AUC data and confident identification
were considered. These include (i) high cutoff criteria for peptide
identification that resulted in a peptide FDR of 0.4%; (ii) strict
criteria for peak detection and frame generation (e.g., S/N > 10);
and (iii) the fact that each quantifiable protein was required to
have at least two independent sets of qualified AUC data, each from
a unique peptide that met both criteria (i) and (ii). Under these
criteria, 1753 unique protein groups (out of ∼3000 identified)
were quantified with high confidence across the time points. The detailed
quantitative data on both protein and peptide levels are shown in Table S1 in the Supporting Information. Considering
the very stringent criteria, the fact that the quantitative assessments
were carried out in each of the 60 biological replicates and that
the reviewed rat protein database is currently incomplete, this study
achieved relatively extensive proteomic quantification.To determine
the proper cutoff thresholds for the discovery of
significantly altered proteins, the false-positive discovery of significantly
altered proteins was evaluated and controlled using an experimental
strategy. Briefly, 10 vehicle-control animal tissue samples were used
to constitute the “sham sample set”; among these, 5
were randomly designated as the “sham-experimental samples”
with the other 5 as “sham-control samples”. The sham
samples were prepared and analyzed by LC/MS in a sequence randomly
interspaced with the time-course samples, using exactly the same experimental
procedures (Figure 1). Obviously, the “significantly
altered proteins” discovered in the sham set, which is actually
an “experimentally null” sample set, reflect false-positives
arising from technical and biological variability. The false altered-protein
discovery rate (FADR) in one time-course group was calculated as the
ratio of the number of significantly altered proteins discovered in
the sham sample set over that in the time-course sample set, under
the same cutoff thresholds (i.e., p-values and fold changes). We evaluated
the FADR in all time-course groups under various cutoff thresholds.
Finally, a global cutoff criteria of ∼50% change and p < 0.05 (time-course versus control groups) were determined
to be optimal. Under these criteria, a total of 323 proteins were
significantly altered for at least one time point, with the FADR ranging
1.1–8.2% across the 11 time sample sets. Representative volcano
plots are shown in Figure S3 in the Supporting
Information.The heat map for the time course of the
323 altered proteins is
shown in Figure 4. A detailed heat map with
the names of all altered proteins is shown in Figure S4 in the Supporting Information. The changes at the
peptide level agreed well with those at the protein level. For significantly
elevated proteins, >95% of peptides are elevated; a similar trend
was also observed for decreased proteins (Figure
S5 in the Supporting Information). The most prominent drug-induced
change is the up-regulation of metallothionein (∼100-fold;
see Figure S6 in the Supporting Information), which is a key protein in metal ion homeostasis. This observation
is in excellent agreement with previous observations at the transcriptional
level.[38]
Figure 4
Heat map of the 323 proteins significantly
altered at one or more
time points. Red and green rectangles represent significant up- or
down- regulations, respectively, while the black color denotes that
no significant change was found.
Heat map of the 323 proteins significantly
altered at one or more
time points. Red and green rectangles represent significant up- or
down- regulations, respectively, while the black color denotes that
no significant change was found.
Gene Ontology Annotations and Temporal Changes in Biological
Processes
Among quantifiable proteins, 26% are associated
with membrane components, indicating excellent recovery of membrane
proteins by the sample preparation method (Figure
S7 in the Supporting Information). The distributions of cellular
locations and biological processes of drug-altered proteins are shown
in Figures 5A and 5B.
The percentages of the significantly altered proteins vary noticeably
among different cellular components, reflecting the known fact that
corticosteroids (CSs) regulate numerous signaling and metabolism pathways
in specific cellular locations (see the“Results
and Discussion” section in the Supporting Information). For all time courses, little or no response was observed at very
early time points (e.g., 0.5 and 1 h), followed by increases and then
decays in the protein concentrations over the 66-h period post-dosing.
MPL elicited sustained changes of proteins in “response to
hormone stimulus” (Figure 5C); the observed
altered proteins in “gluconeogenesis” were all up-regulated,
peaking at 8 h (Figure 5D); most of the altered
proteins in the “inflammatory/anti-inflammatory response”
category were up-regulated and peaked at 12 h, as shown in Figure 5E. These are among the acute response proteins up-regulated
by CS as part of their anti-inflammatory response.[39] The majority of proteins related to translation were up-regulated,
sharply increased, and peaked at 5.5 h, followed by a decline (Figure 5F), in agreement with the anabolic actions of CS
in liver.[40] Interestingly, the temporal
characteristics, such as the peak times and the rates of decline,
are quite distinct among various biological processes, reflecting
diverse regulatory mechanisms and dynamics. Detailed discussions are
in the“Results and Discussion” section
in the Supporting Information.
Figure 5
Gene ontology annotation of significantly
altered proteins. The
distributions of the altered proteins by (A) cellular components and
(B) biological processes. Representative time courses of the number
of changed proteins are shown in panels (C)–(F). The up- and
down- regulated proteins are denoted in red and green, respectively.
Gene ontology annotation of significantly
altered proteins. The
distributions of the altered proteins by (A) cellular components and
(B) biological processes. Representative time courses of the number
of changed proteins are shown in panels (C)–(F). The up- and
down- regulated proteins are denoted in red and green, respectively.
Drug-Responsive Proteins
in Hepatic Amino Acid Metabolism, Gluconeogenesis,
and Acute Phase Response
Previously, systematic investigations
of drug responses were mostly on enzyme activity and transcriptional
levels but rarely on multiple protein levels, because of the technical
limitations. The method developed here enables comprehensive time
series studies of protein-level changes underlying drug effects. Although
the plasma level of the drug decreased to <1% of peak concentration
at 5.5 h,[41] temporal proteomics data showed
that many biological cascades remained active well after the drug
was cleared from the system. Investigation of the biological functions
of the discovered drug-responsive proteins is our future plan; however,
some key drug-responsive proteins involved in hepatic amino acid metabolism
and gluconeogenesis are exemplified here.The CS-induced protein
degradation, as illustrated in Figure 6A, provides
the substrate for amino acid metabolism and gluconeogenesis.[42] The time courses of three CS-responsive aminotransferases
found in this study (alanine aminotranferase, cytosolic aspartate
aminotransferase, and tyrosine aminotransferase) are shown in Figures 6B and 6C. Although all three
enzymes can be up-regulated by CS-induced GR binding,[43] they exhibited distinct time profiles, reflecting the complex
biochemical and dynamic features of the regulation of these proteins
in liver. One potential explanation could be found in the differential
turnover rates of these proteins, e.g., cASAT has a much longer half-life
(5–11 days) than TAT (∼4 h),[44] which may account for the much wider response window of cASAT. Furthermore,
in contrast to cASAT, the proteomic data showed no significant increase
of mASAT, which is consistent with previous reports that cASAT is
responsive to CS while mASAT is not.[44] Hepatic
gluconeogenesis is downstream of amino acid metabolism (Figure 6A); we found that phosphoenolpyruvatecarboxykinase,
which is the rate-limiting enzyme in gluconeogenesis, was induced
but not pyruvate carboxylase or fructose2,6-bisphosphate (Figure 6D), which agree with previous observations on observations
on mRNA[45] and enzyme activity levels. Detailed
discussions are given in the“Results and
Discussion” section in the Supporting Information.
Figure 6
Time series
changes of hepatic metabolism. Panel (A) shows a simplified
scheme for the hepatic metabolism pathways altered by MPL involving
protein degradation, amino acid metabolism, and gluconeogenesis. The
temporal profiles for the key proteins involved in amino acid metabolism,
including cytosolic aspartate aminotransferase (cASAT), tyrosine aminotransferase
(TAT), and alanine aminotransferase (AAT), are shown in panels (B)
and (C). The profiles for key proteins involved in gluconeogenesis,
pyruvate carboxylase (PC), phosphoenol pyruvate carboxykinase (PEPCK),
and fructose 1,6-biphosphataseisozyme (FBPase) are shown in panel
(D).
Time series
changes of hepatic metabolism. Panel (A) shows a simplified
scheme for the hepatic metabolism pathways altered by MPL involving
protein degradation, amino acid metabolism, and gluconeogenesis. The
temporal profiles for the key proteins involved in amino acid metabolism,
including cytosolic aspartate aminotransferase (cASAT), tyrosine aminotransferase
(TAT), and alanine aminotransferase (AAT), are shown in panels (B)
and (C). The profiles for key proteins involved in gluconeogenesis,
pyruvate carboxylase (PC), phosphoenol pyruvate carboxykinase (PEPCK),
and fructose 1,6-biphosphataseisozyme (FBPase) are shown in panel
(D).Among the significantly up-regulated
proteins in inflammatory responses,
seven acute phase response proteins were induced by the drug. The
increase of these proteins may play a significant role in tissue and
organ protection, in response to diverse stimuli, and it is supported
by evidence on mRNA level and the reduction of white blood cells after
MPL dosing.[46] Discussions are in the “Results and Discussion” section in the
Supporting Information.
Conclusions
A
multiplexed, reproducible, and well-controlled strategy capable
of large-scale proteomic investigation was developed. Several technical
advances enabled highly reproducible extraction, preparation, and
LC/MS analysis, and thus permitting reliable quantification of liver
samples from 60 rats. The particular advances include the following:(i) An efficient and consistent tissue extraction with a Polytron/sonication
in a cocktail of high-concentration detergents, followed by a cleanup/digestion
procedure that is fully compatible with the extraction method and
provides highly reproducible protein and peptide recovery among many
tissue samples;(ii) Substantial improvements of temperature
stabilization, pump-noise
suppression, and programmed interface cleaning, which permitted high
LC/MS reproducibility across continuous analysis of tissue samples
for >20 days; this is the key enabling factor that allowed reliable
relative quantification in the 60 liver samples;(iii) The extensive
chromatographic separation enabled in-depth
profiling of the liver proteome and enhanced the analysis of drug-responsive
proteins; and(iv) Well-controlled ion current-based quantification.In addition, false-positive discovery of drug-responsive proteins
arising from both technical and biological variability was evaluated
and controlled by estimating the null distribution using an experimental
method. This approach permitted the reliable discovery and quantification
of drug-responsive proteins in 5 replicates from 11 different time
point groups. The ion-current-based strategy developed herein is straightforward,
low cost, and has a low level of missing data.[37]This strategy was applied in the investigation of
the protein expression
dynamics induced by MPL, using 60 animals and 11 time points. To our
knowledge, this study represents the most comprehensive investigation
of drug-induced protein dynamics on a proteomics level. Under a highly
stringent set of cutoff criteria, the time courses of a cohort of
drug-responsive proteins were obtained. These molecular changes are
implicated in multiple biological and physiological functions, such
as hepatic metabolism, inflammatory responses, and translation. Interesting
temporal features of proteins involved in amino acid metabolism, gluconeogenesis,
and acute phase response were demonstrated. The majority of profiles
were found to remain active well after the drug was eliminated, and
most of the observed CS-induced changes had not been observed at protein
levels before this study.Moreover and beyond this, the proteomic
strategy can be applied
broadly in preclinical and clinical studies of disease progression
and pharmacology where the analysis of a large number of biological
replicates is necessary, and the highly reproducible sample extraction,
cleanup and digestion methods are also valuable for most isotope-tagging
methods.
Authors: Yufeng Shen; Nikola Tolić; Christophe Masselon; Ljiljana Pasa-Tolić; David G Camp; Kim K Hixson; Rui Zhao; Gordon A Anderson; Richard D Smith Journal: Anal Chem Date: 2004-01-01 Impact factor: 6.986
Authors: Yufeng Shen; Rui Zhao; Scott J Berger; Gordon A Anderson; Nestor Rodriguez; Richard D Smith Journal: Anal Chem Date: 2002-08-15 Impact factor: 6.986
Authors: Uma T Shankavaram; William C Reinhold; Satoshi Nishizuka; Sylvia Major; Daisaku Morita; Krishna K Chary; Mark A Reimers; Uwe Scherf; Ari Kahn; Douglas Dolginow; Jeffrey Cossman; Eric P Kaldjian; Dominic A Scudiero; Emanuel Petricoin; Lance Liotta; Jae K Lee; John N Weinstein Journal: Mol Cancer Ther Date: 2007-03-05 Impact factor: 6.261
Authors: Tujin Shi; Thomas L Fillmore; Xuefei Sun; Rui Zhao; Athena A Schepmoes; Mahmud Hossain; Fang Xie; Si Wu; Jong-Seo Kim; Nathan Jones; Ronald J Moore; Ljiljana Pasa-Tolić; Jacob Kagan; Karin D Rodland; Tao Liu; Keqi Tang; David G Camp; Richard D Smith; Wei-Jun Qian Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2012-09-04 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Satoshi Nishizuka; Sing-Tsung Chen; Fuad G Gwadry; Jes Alexander; Sylvia M Major; Uwe Scherf; William C Reinhold; Mark Waltham; Lu Charboneau; Lynn Young; Kimberly J Bussey; Sohyoung Kim; Samir Lababidi; Jae K Lee; Stefania Pittaluga; Dominic A Scudiero; Edward A Sausville; Peter J Munson; Emmanuel F Petricoin; Lance A Liotta; Stephen M Hewitt; Mark Raffeld; John N Weinstein Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2003-09-01 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Vivaswath S Ayyar; Siddharth Sukumaran; Debra C DuBois; Richard R Almon; Jun Qu; William J Jusko Journal: J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn Date: 2018-04-27 Impact factor: 2.745
Authors: Vivaswath S Ayyar; Richard R Almon; Debra C DuBois; Siddharth Sukumaran; Jun Qu; William J Jusko Journal: J Proteomics Date: 2017-03-14 Impact factor: 4.044
Authors: Shichen Shen; Xiaosheng Jiang; Jun Li; Robert M Straubinger; Mauricio Suarez; Chengjian Tu; Xiaotao Duan; Alexis C Thompson; Jun Qu Journal: J Proteome Res Date: 2016-04-11 Impact factor: 4.466
Authors: Chengjian Tu; Kay D Beharry; Xiaomeng Shen; Jun Li; Lianshui Wang; Jacob V Aranda; Jun Qu Journal: J Proteome Res Date: 2015-04-06 Impact factor: 4.466
Authors: Xue Wang; Jin Niu; Jun Li; Xiaomeng Shen; Shichen Shen; Robert M Straubinger; Jun Qu Journal: Mol Cell Proteomics Date: 2018-01-22 Impact factor: 5.911
Authors: Chengjian Tu; Wilfrido Mojica; Robert M Straubinger; Jun Li; Shichen Shen; Miao Qu; Lei Nie; Rick Roberts; Bo An; Jun Qu Journal: Proteomics Clin Appl Date: 2017-01-20 Impact factor: 3.494
Authors: Vivaswath S Ayyar; Siddharth Sukumaran; Debra C DuBois; Richard R Almon; William J Jusko Journal: J Pharmacol Exp Ther Date: 2018-08-07 Impact factor: 4.030