Literature DB >> 26051676

Experimental Null Method to Guide the Development of Technical Procedures and to Control False-Positive Discovery in Quantitative Proteomics.

Xiaomeng Shen, Qiang Hu1, Jun Li, Jianmin Wang1, Jun Qu.   

Abstract

Comprehensive and accurate evaluation of data quality and false-positive biomarker discovery is critical to direct the method development/optimization for quantitative proteomics, which nonetheless remains challenging largely due to the high complexity and unique features of proteomic data. Here we describe an experimental null (EN) method to address this need. Because the method experimentally measures the null distribution (either technical or biological replicates) using the same proteomic samples, the same procedures and the same batch as the case-vs-contol experiment, it correctly reflects the collective effects of technical variability (e.g., variation/bias in sample preparation, LC-MS analysis, and data processing) and project-specific features (e.g., characteristics of the proteome and biological variation) on the performances of quantitative analysis. To show a proof of concept, we employed the EN method to assess the quantitative accuracy and precision and the ability to quantify subtle ratio changes between groups using different experimental and data-processing approaches and in various cellular and tissue proteomes. It was found that choices of quantitative features, sample size, experimental design, data-processing strategies, and quality of chromatographic separation can profoundly affect quantitative precision and accuracy of label-free quantification. The EN method was also demonstrated as a practical tool to determine the optimal experimental parameters and rational ratio cutoff for reliable protein quantification in specific proteomic experiments, for example, to identify the necessary number of technical/biological replicates per group that affords sufficient power for discovery. Furthermore, we assessed the ability of EN method to estimate levels of false-positives in the discovery of altered proteins, using two concocted sample sets mimicking proteomic profiling using technical and biological replicates, respectively, where the true-positives/negatives are known and span a wide concentration range. It was observed that the EN method correctly reflects the null distribution in a proteomic system and accurately measures false altered proteins discovery rate (FADR). In summary, the EN method provides a straightforward, practical, and accurate alternative to statistics-based approaches for the development and evaluation of proteomic experiments and can be universally adapted to various types of quantitative techniques.

Entities:  

Keywords:  experimental null (EN); false altered proteins discovery rate (FADR); ion-current-based quantification; quantitative proteomics

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26051676      PMCID: PMC5905339          DOI: 10.1021/acs.jproteome.5b00200

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Proteome Res        ISSN: 1535-3893            Impact factor:   4.466


  39 in total

1.  Unscaled Bayes factors for multiple hypothesis testing in microarray experiments.

Authors:  Francesco Bertolino; Stefano Cabras; Maria Eugenia Castellanos; Walter Racugno
Journal:  Stat Methods Med Res       Date:  2012-02-15       Impact factor: 3.021

2.  Mass spectrometric discovery and selective reaction monitoring (SRM) of putative protein biomarker candidates in first trimester Trisomy 21 maternal serum.

Authors:  Mary F Lopez; Ramesh Kuppusamy; David A Sarracino; Amol Prakash; Michael Athanas; Bryan Krastins; Taha Rezai; Jennifer N Sutton; Scott Peterman; Kypros Nicolaides
Journal:  J Proteome Res       Date:  2010-06-04       Impact factor: 4.466

Review 3.  Protein biomarker discovery and validation: the long and uncertain path to clinical utility.

Authors:  Nader Rifai; Michael A Gillette; Steven A Carr
Journal:  Nat Biotechnol       Date:  2006-08       Impact factor: 54.908

4.  ChromAlign: A two-step algorithmic procedure for time alignment of three-dimensional LC-MS chromatographic surfaces.

Authors:  Rovshan G Sadygov; Fernando Martin Maroto; Andreas F R Hühmer
Journal:  Anal Chem       Date:  2006-12-15       Impact factor: 6.986

5.  On multiple-testing correction in genome-wide association studies.

Authors:  Valentina Moskvina; Karl Michael Schmidt
Journal:  Genet Epidemiol       Date:  2008-09       Impact factor: 2.135

6.  Comparison of spectral counting and metabolic stable isotope labeling for use with quantitative microbial proteomics.

Authors:  Erik L Hendrickson; Qiangwei Xia; Tiansong Wang; John A Leigh; Murray Hackett
Journal:  Analyst       Date:  2006-10-11       Impact factor: 4.616

7.  An ion-current-based, comprehensive and reproducible proteomic strategy for comparative characterization of the cellular responses to novel anti-cancer agents in a prostate cell model.

Authors:  Chengjian Tu; Jun Li; Yahao Bu; David Hangauer; Jun Qu
Journal:  J Proteomics       Date:  2012-09-07       Impact factor: 4.044

8.  Experimental and statistical considerations to avoid false conclusions in proteomics studies using differential in-gel electrophoresis.

Authors:  Natasha A Karp; Paul S McCormick; Matthew R Russell; Kathryn S Lilley
Journal:  Mol Cell Proteomics       Date:  2007-05-17       Impact factor: 5.911

Review 9.  Mass spectrometry-based label-free quantitative proteomics.

Authors:  Wenhong Zhu; Jeffrey W Smith; Chun-Ming Huang
Journal:  J Biomed Biotechnol       Date:  2009-11-10

10.  ICan: an optimized ion-current-based quantification procedure with enhanced quantitative accuracy and sensitivity in biomarker discovery.

Authors:  Chengjian Tu; Quanhu Sheng; Jun Li; Xiaomeng Shen; Ming Zhang; Yu Shyr; Jun Qu
Journal:  J Proteome Res       Date:  2014-10-20       Impact factor: 4.466

View more
  9 in total

1.  Large-Scale, Ion-Current-Based Proteomic Investigation of the Rat Striatal Proteome in a Model of Short- and Long-Term Cocaine Withdrawal.

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

2.  Temporal Effects of Combined Birinapant and Paclitaxel on Pancreatic Cancer Cells Investigated via Large-Scale, Ion-Current-Based Quantitative Proteomics (IonStar).

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

3.  An IonStar Experimental Strategy for MS1 Ion Current-Based Quantification Using Ultrahigh-Field Orbitrap: Reproducible, In-Depth, and Accurate Protein Measurement in Large Cohorts.

Authors:  Xiaomeng Shen; Shichen Shen; Jun Li; Qiang Hu; Lei Nie; Chengjian Tu; Xue Wang; Benjamin Orsburn; Jianmin Wang; Jun Qu
Journal:  J Proteome Res       Date:  2017-05-25       Impact factor: 4.466

4.  Quantitative proteomic profiling of paired cancerous and normal colon epithelial cells isolated freshly from colorectal cancer patients.

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

5.  Quantitative proteomic and phosphoproteomic profiling of ischemic myocardial stunning in swine.

Authors:  Xue Wang; Xiaomeng Shen; Brian R Weil; Rebeccah F Young; John M Canty; Jun Qu
Journal:  Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol       Date:  2020-03-30       Impact factor: 4.733

6.  IonStar enables high-precision, low-missing-data proteomics quantification in large biological cohorts.

Authors:  Xiaomeng Shen; Shichen Shen; Jun Li; Qiang Hu; Lei Nie; Chengjian Tu; Xue Wang; David J Poulsen; Benjamin C Orsburn; Jianmin Wang; Jun Qu
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2018-05-09       Impact factor: 12.779

7.  GPR56/ADGRG1 regulates development and maintenance of peripheral myelin.

Authors:  Sarah D Ackerman; Rong Luo; Yannick Poitelon; Amit Mogha; Breanne L Harty; Mitchell D'Rozario; Nicholas E Sanchez; Asvin K K Lakkaraju; Paul Gamble; Jun Li; Jun Qu; Matthew R MacEwan; Wilson Zachary Ray; Adriano Aguzzi; M Laura Feltri; Xianhua Piao; Kelly R Monk
Journal:  J Exp Med       Date:  2018-01-24       Impact factor: 14.307

Review 8.  MS1 ion current-based quantitative proteomics: A promising solution for reliable analysis of large biological cohorts.

Authors:  Xue Wang; Shichen Shen; Sailee Suryakant Rasam; Jun Qu
Journal:  Mass Spectrom Rev       Date:  2019-03-28       Impact factor: 10.946

9.  Potential Neuroprotective Mechanisms of Methamphetamine Treatment in Traumatic Brain Injury Defined by Large-Scale IonStar-Based Quantitative Proteomics.

Authors:  Shichen Shen; Ming Zhang; Min Ma; Sailee Rasam; David Poulsen; Jun Qu
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2021-02-24       Impact factor: 5.923

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.