Robert L C Voeten1,2, Iro K Ventouri2,3, Rob Haselberg1, Govert W Somsen1. 1. Division of BioAnalytical Chemistry, Department of Chemistry and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam , de Boelelaan 1085, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 2. TI-COAST , Science Park 904, 1098 XH Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 3. Analytical Chemistry Group, van't Hoff Institute for Molecular Sciences, University of Amsterdam , Science Park 904, 1098 XH Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Since the introduction of modern capillary electrophoresis
(CE) by Jorgenson and Lukacs in 1981, CE has evolved into a highly
mature and versatile separation technique. After a first decade of
development studies and instrument commercialization, CE took its
place among established analytical techniques and, for instance, became
the method of choice for fast high-resolution DNA sequencing in the
nineties of the last century. Although with a considerably smaller
footprint than liquid and gas chromatography, CE remains to play an
essential role in contemporary analytics. For example, with the strong
advent of biopharmaceuticals, CE has shown to be particularly useful
for routine quality control of therapeutic proteins, such as monoclonal
antibodies. Current CE applications range from determination of small
inorganic ions to characterization of high-molecular-weight biomolecules,
and even particles and intact cells. The research field of CE remains
very active, as exhibited by a steady and significant flow of scientific
reports on theory, separation modes, new instrumentation, and applications
of CE techniques in various areas.The present review provides
a brief cross section of new developments in the broad field of CE,
covering the period between September 2015 and September 2017. An
initial search on Web of Science, considering keywords related to
all modes of CE including their acronyms, yielded about 7000 articles.
A first screening in which reviews and irrelevant references were
omitted, provided 1200 papers of significance. From these a selection
of about 200 was made based on originality, interesting developments
and relevance. Notably, studies utilizing electrophoretic principles
in microfluidic devices were not included in the present review.
Techniques
and Methods
Preconcentration
Injected sample amounts in CE are
inherently small. Moreover, when using optical detectors, the optical
pathway is limited. Consequently, the concentration sensitivity of
CE methods can be poor. Improvement of concentration detection limits
by sample preconcentration, either online or offline, remains a topic
of research activity.
Electrophoretic Preconcentration
Electrophoretic sample preconcentration in CE often relies on an
abrupt and temporary reduction of the migration velocity of analytes.
This is clear in commonly applied methods like field-amplified sample
stacking (FASS),[1] large-volume sample stacking/injection
(LVSS/LVSI),[2] field-enhanced sample injection
(FESI),[3,4] sweeping,[5] and
electrokinetic supercharging (EKS).[6] The
fundamentals of electrokinetic processes occurring during FASS were
studied experimentally and with computer simulation by Sestak and
Thormann.[7] The authors investigated the
effect of injected plug lengths, buffer concentration, sample composition,
and linear velocity for the analysis of cationic compounds.Another study described the use of a free liquid membrane (FLM) to
further enhance stacking efficiency of a EKS-CE-UV method.[8] The FLM presents a water-immiscible organic solvent
interface facilitating the electrically induced transfer of charged
analytes, such as paraquat and diquat. The sensitivity gain was almost
2000-fold. Similar improvements in sensitivity were achieved by Cheng
et al., who combined LVSI, anion selective exhaustive injection, and
sweeping for the online preconcentration of tetrahydrocannabinol and
metabolites.[9] The resulting CE method allowed
direct detection of target analytes in urine.Multiple isotachophoresis
(M-ITP) injections were explored to enhance sensitivity.[10] In M-ITP, the ITP sample preconcentration procedure
is repeated several times allowing injection of up to 300 times the
normal volume. With 6 M-ITPcycles, quantification of the Aβ
1-40 amyloid peptide down to 50 nM was achieved using UV detection.
Chromatographic Preconcentration
Solid-phase extraction
(SPE) remains a popular chromatographic preconcentration technique
for CE. Zhao et al. demonstrated the effectiveness of offline C5 reversed-phase
liquid chromatography (RPLC) prior to top-down capillary zone electrophoresis
coupled to electrospray ionization mass spectrometry (CZE-ESI-MS)
analysis of a yeast proteome.[11] In total,
580 proteoforms and 180 protein groups were identified from 23 proteome
fractions analyzed. Another study used C8 SPE cartridges for reduction
of sample complexity and preconcentration.[12] Melatonin and indole compounds in plant extracts could be detected
down to low ppb levels. Rodriguez et al. performed SPE based on synthesized
Fe3O4–fullerene–activated carbon
magnetic adsorbents for analysis of azo dyes in wastewater in the
low mg/L range.[13]In online SPE-CE
a small trapping column is introduced just before or in the initial
part of the separation capillary. Tascon et al. proposed an online
SPE-CE-MS method for sensitive alkaloid analysis.[14] A micro-C18-column ensured sample cleanup and simultaneous
preconcentration, providing limits of detection (LODs) in the 2–77
pg/mL range for algal extracts. Espina-Benitez et al. used a short
segment of silica-based monolith with a locally functionalized acrylamide
derivative of phenylboronic acid to isolate and preconcentrate diols
from 2 μL of complex matrixes (Figure ).[15] Column elution
with a small plug of acidic solution allowed FASS of the analytes
prior to their CE separation, ensuring LODs in the ng/mL range. This
inline coupling was subsequently successfully used for the fully automated
analysis of catecholamines (neurotransmitters) in urine samples.
Figure 1
Schematic
illustration of the different steps of cis-diols compounds analysis.
A miniaturized boronate affinity monolithic column (μBAMC) at
the inlet of an open fused silica capillary is used to preconcentrate
and purify cis-diol containing molecules. After their capture under
alkaline conditions, catecholamines are eluted in a short acidic plug
before their subsequent inline CE separation and UV detection. Reprinted
from J. Chromatogr. A, Vol. 1494, Espina-Benitez, M. B.; Randon, J.; Demesmay, C.; Dugas, V., Development
and application of a new in-line coupling of a miniaturized boronate
affinity monolithic column with capillary zone electrophoresis for
the selective enrichment and analysis of cis-diol-containing compounds,
pp. 65–76 (ref (15)). Copyright 2017, with permission from Elsevier.
Schematic
illustration of the different steps of cis-diols compounds analysis.
A miniaturized boronate affinity monolithic column (μBAMC) at
the inlet of an open fused silica capillary is used to preconcentrate
and purify cis-diol containing molecules. After their capture under
alkaline conditions, catecholamines are eluted in a short acidic plug
before their subsequent inline CE separation and UV detection. Reprinted
from J. Chromatogr. A, Vol. 1494, Espina-Benitez, M. B.; Randon, J.; Demesmay, C.; Dugas, V., Development
and application of a new in-line coupling of a miniaturized boronate
affinity monolithic column with capillary zone electrophoresis for
the selective enrichment and analysis of cis-diol-containing compounds,
pp. 65–76 (ref (15)). Copyright 2017, with permission from Elsevier.
Miscellaneous
An online sample preconcentration
method was developed exclusively for catecholamines that were fluorogenically
derivatized with naphthalene-2,3-dicarboxaldehyde.[16] It takes advantage of diol-borate complexation, through
which one negative charge is added to the analytes. The sample was
electrokinetically introduced via flow-gated injection. The analytes
were selectively focused to a narrow zone by reversible complexation,
leading to 100-fold preconcentration for catecholamines in artificial
cerebrospinal fluid.Shimura and Nagai combined immunoaffinity
chromatography (IAC) with isoelectric focusing (IEF) in a single capillary.[17] IAC was ensured by immobilizing an anti-E-tag
antibody at the inlet of the capillary. The remainder of the capillary
was coated with neutral polydimethylacrylamide to ensure efficient
IEF separations. Fluorescently labeled recombinant Fab with an E-tag
spiked at 16 pM to 10 nM in 50% serum was separated and detected with
high precision.An online high-throughput microdialysis-capillary
electrophoresis (MD-CE) assay was designed to investigate branched-chain
amino acids as possible biomarkers.[18] Analytes
were sampled using microdialysis, fluorescently labeled in an online
reaction, separated using CE and detected using laser-induced fluorescence
(LIF) in a sheath flow cuvette. CE separations were performed in less
than 30 s, and the temporal resolution of the online MD-CE assay was
within 60 s. In a next study, the MD-CE assay was used to monitor in vivo dynamics, achieving a temporal resolution of 22
s for small bioamines.[19]
Coatings
When conventional bare fused-silica capillaries are used in CE,
resolution and peak widths and shapes may be compromised by adverse
interactions of the analytes with the inner capillary surface. Furthermore,
adsorption of sample matrix components, e.g., proteins, may cause
uncontrollable changes of the electroosmotic flow (EOF) and poor migration-time
reproducibility. In order to avoid unwanted adsorptions, coating of
the capillary wall is a common strategy which remains the subject
of research.Poulsen et al. posed new capillary coating procedures
using polyethylene glycol (PEG).[20] These
include in-capillary surface-initiated atom transfer radical polymerization
ensuring covalent binding to the capillary wall and an electrostatic
adsorption process. Coating procedures were followed by monitoring
adsorption of 2-propylisochinolinium bromide and Sunset Yellow as
a positive and negative marker, respectively. Multiple injections
of high concentrations of proteins covering a pI range
of 3.4–8.4 could be performed without depletion of capillary
performance, indicating coating stability of at least 100 days.A capillary coating procedure allowing regulation of the magnitude
and direction of the EOF was proposed by Fu and co-workers.[21] This was achieved by coadsorption of polydopamine
and polyethylenimine of different molecular weights in variable mass
ratios. The polymer chains were stabilized by complexation with Fe3+. The obtained coatings were further characterized by field
emission scanning electron microscopy and attenuated total reflection
Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy analysis.Moreno-Gordaliza
et al. used pretreated surface layer protein A from Lactobacillus
acidophilus bacteria as a capillary coating,[22] which was characterized by contact angle, fluorescence,
and atomic force microscopy (AFM) analysis. The new coatings were
used for analysis of lipoproteins from human serum with capillary
ITP (cITP). The coating could be used for over 100 injections without
loss of separation performance with coefficients of variation of 3%
for protein migration times over a period of 7 days.AFM with
an adhesive tip was used by Stock et al. to assess topographic and
charge-induced features on capillary coatings.[23] The charge distribution of different successive multiple
ionic polymer layer (SMIL) coatings was assessed with nanometer resolution
employing avidin as a single molecule sensor. The acquired surface
properties of a four-layer SMIL with poly(acrylamide-co-2-acrylamido-2-methyl-1-propansulfonate) as the terminal layer were
related to the observed EOF and CE performance for model proteins
and peptides on the same capillary.[24]Optimization of capillary coating procedures and their tuning toward
specific applications commonly is time-consuming and a trial-and-error
process. Monteferrante et al. proposed a method to describe the EOF
behavior of a polymer coating as a function of pH, allowing predictive
analysis of electroosmosis under different polymeric coating conditions.[25] By means of a theoretical argument and numerical
simulations involving the linearized Poisson–Boltzmann equation
and the Lattice Boltzmann scheme, the experimental curve for the EOF
of an acrylamide/methacrylate coating is assessed.
Separation
Media
Pseudostationary Phases
Pseudostationary phases (PSP)
enable separations not achievable with regular CZE. Micellar electrokinetic
chromatography (MEKC) was used for the resolution of insulin and closely
related peptides.[26] The use of neutral
surfactants such as Thesit and Tween20 increased selectivity by reducing
adverse interactions with the capillary wall,[26] avoiding the use of a capillary coating while using an aqueous background
electrolyte (BGE). For separation of different insulins, negatively
charged surfactants were required,[27] from
whichperfluorooctanoic acid was found to provide the best resolution.The new chiral ionic ligand 1-ethyl-3-methyl imidazole L-tartrate
([EMIM][L-Tar]) was introduced for the separation of tryptophan, tyrosine,
and phenylalanine enantiomers by chiral-ligand-exchange CE. A comparison
with L-tartaric and [EMIM]l-proline indicated the potential
of [EMIM][L-Tar] for the enantioseparation of amino acids (AAs).[28] Liu et al. synthesized and used the sugar-based
surfactant poly(sodium N-alkenyl-α-d-glucopyranoside) with various size and headgroup functionalities
for chiral separation of ephedrine alkaloids and β-blockers
by MEKC analysis.[29] Polymers as compared
to monomers showed to strongly enhance separation, while sulfate groups
gave less resolution enhancement than phosphate head groups.
Capillary
Electrochromatography
Capillary electrochromatography (CEC)
offers a dual separation mechanism based on analyte partitioning between
a stationary and mobile phase as well as analyte electrophoretic mobility.
Over the years, routine CEC has proven difficult, partly due to robustness
issues related to bubble formation in frits of microparticulate columns
at higher electric fields. These problems may be circumvented by use
of open-tubular (OT) or monolithic columns. Sepehrifar et al. used
pH-responsive poly(2-dimethylaminoethyl methacrylate)-block-poly(-acrylic acid) as stationary phase in an OT column for efficient
CEC analysis of acidic and basic compounds.[30] Selectivity could be manipulated via differential contributions
from chromatographic and electrophoretic mechanisms by changing the
pH or the ionic strength of the BGE.[31] The
established packing was used to analyze egg white samples containing
β-lactoglobulin and ovalbumin resulting in the separation of,
respectively, two and eight variants thereof.Zhao et al. designed
glutathione-, somatostatin acetate-, and ovomucoid-functionalized
silica-monolithic stationary phases achieving hydrophilic interaction
and chiral selectivity in CEC.[32] The phases
showed EOF tunability by pH control of the mobile phase. Enantioseparation
capabilities were enhanced by incorporating gold nanoparticles (NPs)
in the glutathione-silica monolithic column. Application to dl-AAs and drug enantiomers was demonstrated.Stationary phases
for CEC based on metal–organic frameworks (MOFs) were introduced
by Pan et al. by in situ rapid synthesis of the homochiral
MOF [Zn(s-nip)2] accompanied
by zinc oxide nucleating agents.[33] Monoamine
neurotransmitter enantiomers, nitrophenol isomers, and bisphenols
analogues were separated by the new CEC method, showing similar performance
as layer-by-layer assembled stationary phases but having the advantage
of a significantly reduced preparation and analysis time.In
an attempt to enhance the separation of chiral compounds, Kulsing
et al. used peak sharpening effects in CEC by employing molecularly
imprinted porous layer OT.[34] Enantioseparation
required overloading and introduction of an acetonitrile-enriched
sharpening zone.
Chiral Media
Enantioseparation can
be achieved by CE using chiral selectors in the BGE. CE has the advantages
of high peak efficiency and resolution, relatively fast separation,
and low sample and reagent consumption. Still, chiral selectors can
be expensive and their selection time-consuming. Therefore, the group
of Escuder-Gilabert presented a modeling approach to predict enantioresolution
for a given selector.[35] The model is based
on trial runs of selected compounds, correlating mobility to their
physicochemical and topological characteristics. Principal component
analysis and partial least-squares discriminant analysis models were
used to determine the most essential parameters.Cyclodextrins
(CDs) are still the most common chiral selectors used in CE,[36−38] but alternative selectors have been studied. Zhang et al. investigated
the performance of the spirocyclic chiral ionic liquids (CILs) BMIm+BLHvB–
and BMIm+BSMB– for the enantioseparation of five racemic drugs.[39] The CILs did not provide chiral separation on
their own, but in combination with the CDs, superior enantioseparation
was achieved. Molecular dynamics were used to predict interaction
configurations and chiral resolution.Microemulsion electrokinetic
chromatography employing sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS) and potassium
sodium tartrate (PST) as a chiral selector was used to separate caffeoylquinic
acid (CQA) isomers.[40] The PST concentration
as well as the pH of the BGE was essential for analyte resolution,
which was based on differences in chiral carbon positions. The method
was successfully applied to determine individual CQA isomers in honeysuckle
and its preparations.
Multidimensional Separations
For
the analysis of complex samples, two-dimensional separations are increasingly
applied. CE in principle encompasses an interesting separation dimension
as it may provide an orthogonal mechanism and favorable separation
efficiency at high speed. However, coupling of CE to other separation
principles is not straightforward due to voltage handling and the
very small volumes involved and therefore demands ingenuity to be
established.Johnson and Bowser described the first coupling
of CE to continuous free flow electrophoresis (FFE), circumventing
voltage and sampling issues.[41] The CE separation
capillary was directly inserted into the FFE separation channel (Figure ). Proof-of-principle
measurements involved CE × FFE analysis of fluorescently labeled
peptides and bioamines. Taking into to account that these analytes
covered only 20–30% of the available separation space, corrected
peak capacities of 778 (in 7.6 min) and 377 (in 1.8 min) were obtained
for peptides and bioamines, respectively.
Figure 2
Schematic representation
of the CE × FFE-LIF system. (A) CE peaks migrate into the FFE
separation channel where a lateral deflection ensures a second dimension
separation based on mobility. (B) Visualization of the 2D separation
based on CE migration time and the FFE deflection distance. (C) CE
× μFFE separation of a fluorescently labeled BSA tryptic
digest. Reproduced from Johnson, A. C.; Bowser, M. T. Anal.
Chem.2017, 89, 1665–1673
(ref (41)). Copyright
2017 American Chemical Society.
Schematic representation
of the CE × FFE-LIF system. (A) CE peaks migrate into the FFE
separation channel where a lateral deflection ensures a second dimension
separation based on mobility. (B) Visualization of the 2D separation
based on CE migration time and the FFE deflection distance. (C) CE
× μFFE separation of a fluorescently labeled BSA tryptic
digest. Reproduced from Johnson, A. C.; Bowser, M. T. Anal.
Chem.2017, 89, 1665–1673
(ref (41)). Copyright
2017 American Chemical Society.Kohl and co-workers developed a heart-cut two-dimensional
CE system (CE-CE) employing a fully insulated mechanical valve with
an internal loop of 20 nL, in order to overcome compatibility issues
frequently encountered in CE-ESI-MS.[42] A
portion of interest in the first CE dimension is cut by the loop of
the valve and reintroduced to the second CE dimension where interfering
compounds are removed, followed by ESI-MS detection. The valve accommodates
different CE modes. Capillary isoelectric focusing (cIEF), employing
MS-incompatible ampholytes and buffers, was combined with CE-MS method
allowing selective distinction of charge variants of a monoclonal
antibody (mAb) as well.[43]
Detection
Mass
Spectrometry
The high identification power of MS has driven
development of new CE-MS interfaces and optimization/application of
existing CE-MS interfaces, achieving better sensitivity and/or ease
of use. Wenz et al. reported a collaborative study on the robustness
of CE-MS for peptide analysis involving 13 laboratories.[44] The equipment used varied in brand, type, and
software engaged, while using the same batch of samples, reagents,
and capillaries. Relative migration time and peak area reproducibility
were below 1.4% relative standard deviation (RSD) and 30% RSD, respectively,
indicating that CE-MS performance allows method transfer across multiple
laboratories.CE-MS interfacing remains a field of development.
An ideal interface is easy to assemble and use, while achieving efficient
analyte ionization and minimize peak dispersion. Gonzalez-Ruiz et
al. proposed a low sheath-flow interface operating in the nanospray
regime without using nebulizer gas.[45] Sensitivity
and separation efficiency were somewhat improved as compared to conventional
sheath liquid interfacing. Guo et al. posed a new interface based
on an integrated metal-coated ESI emitter[46] (Figure ). Employing
a 30-μm capillary inner diameter with a similarly sized tapered
outer diameter emitter, clogging was avoided. ITP/CZE-MS quantification
of peptides using single-reaction monitoring indicated limits of quantification
down to 5 amol. A new commercialized system, developed by the lab
of Dovichi, was extensively evaluated for proteomics applications
over the past few years.[47] In this interface,
the outlet of the separation capillary is connected to a borosilicate
glass spray emitter tip through a tee providing sheath liquid. According
to the authors, the ESI voltage generates a steady electroosmotic
flow providing a nanoflow of sheath liquid which aids analyte ionization.
Figure 3
Schematic
of the sheathless CITP/CZE-nanoESI-MS setup. After CITP/CZE separation,
the CE effluent passes through an integrated metal-coated ESI emitter.
An electrically conductive liquid that is in contact with the outer
surface of the emitter ensures the electrical connection required
for CE prior to single reaction monitoring mass spectrometry (SRM-MS).
Reproduced from Guo, X. J.; Fillmore, T. L.; Gao, Y. Q.; Tang, K.
Q. Anal. Chem.2016, 88, 4418–4425 (ref (46)). Copyright 2016 American Chemical Society.
Schematic
of the sheathless CITP/CZE-nanoESI-MS setup. After CITP/CZE separation,
the CE effluent passes through an integrated metal-coated ESI emitter.
An electrically conductive liquid that is in contact with the outer
surface of the emitter ensures the electrical connection required
for CE prior to single reaction monitoring mass spectrometry (SRM-MS).
Reproduced from Guo, X. J.; Fillmore, T. L.; Gao, Y. Q.; Tang, K.
Q. Anal. Chem.2016, 88, 4418–4425 (ref (46)). Copyright 2016 American Chemical Society.With the development of nanospray interfaces for
CE-MS, strategies to enhance both ionization efficiency and spray
stability have also surfaced. For example, nitrogen gas enriched with
an organic dopant in combination with sheathless CE-MS was evaluated
for glycopeptide analysis.[48] In combination
with online preconcentration, this technique yielded higher sensitivity
than nano-LC-ESI-MS and sheath-liquid CE-ESI-MS.
Optical Spectroscopy
Fluorescence provides one of the most sensitive means of detection
in CE. Two fluorescently labeled mirror image aptamers (Spiegelmers)
were developed and used as affinity probes in noncompetitive affinity
CE assays with fluorescence detection for the analysis of glucagon
and amylin in picomolar concentrations.[49] The Spiegelmers specifically bind to the target compounds and offer
good stability in biological matricxs as opposed to the conventional
aptamers.Boutonnet et al. evaluated the differences between
pulsed and continuous light sources in CE with fluorescence detection
studying the compounds 7-hydroxycoumarin, Tamra, and tryptophan.[50] Pulsed high energy lasers showed to induce photodegradation
of compounds, which could be observed using a dual fluorescence detector
setup. ESI-MS was used for structural elucidation of the degradation
products. The authors propose the use of continuous LED light sources
for the excitation of the analytes.Gogiashvili et al. developed
a cITP-nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) method employing a microslot
probe.[51] cITP ensures sample preconcentration,
whereas the microslot eliminates spectral broadening due to the magnetic
field induced by the separation current, thereby allowing continuous-flow
measurements. High-resolution NMR spectra of charged analytes were
obtained, but changes in chemical shift were observed at currents
above 20 μA. The potential of the microslot probe for hyphenated
electrophoretic separations was demonstrated by performing cITP focusing
and online 1HNMR detection of a system containing spermine
and aniline.
Capacitively coupled contactless conductivity detection
(C4Ds) allows simple and contactless detection in CE, without relying
on electrochemical reactions and electrode surfaces (as amperometric
and potentiometric detection do). Nyugen et al. developed an in-house
built portable CE-C4D system and used it for the separation and detection
of 14 rare earth elements within 12 min.[52] Achieved LODs were comparable to inductively coupled plasma (ICP)
MS detection.C4Ds were also used to study the fundamental dynamics
of CE separation in various modes. Caslavska et al. placed eight C4Ds
along a 70 cm capillary to attain temporal insights during CE separation
and compared that with theoretical simulations.[53] The authors focused their study on the dynamics regarding
electroosmosis and hydrodynamic flow, CZE, discontinuous buffer systems,
and ITP.Adelantado et al.
used an online triple-tube based CE evaporative light scattering detector
(ELSD) for the concentration and size determination of silicon dioxideNPs in aqueous solution.[54] The coupling
thereof is straightforward and bypasses conventional sensitivity discrepancies
related to spectroscopic characteristics. ELSD can be used for various
analytes provided that the analyte is less volatile than the buffer
solution. The method showed to be applicable toward 20–100
nm NPs and resulted in ng/mL LODs.Cao et al. developed a highly
sensitive, in situ real-time imaging of individual
metalNPs flowing inside a capillary by using light-sheet scattering
microscopy with a supercontinuum[55] (Figure ). The method was
applied to measure single plasmonic gold NPs with different sizes
or chemical modifications, where separation was achieved in a few
minutes based on their different electrophoretic mobility. The fast
movement of small NPs with scattering cross-section equivalent to
a ∼20 nm gold NP or less was successfully captured. The main
issue of Rayleigh scattering background interference from the glass
capillary wall was reduced with either a narrow slit or orthogonal
polarization detection leading to high S/N imaging of the NPs inside
the capillary.
Figure 4
Schematic of the supercontinuum laser
light-sheet plasmonic imaging system for CE detection. The combination
of the apochromatic (cylindrical) lenses ensure a laterally compressed
beam shaped into a planar sheet which forms a detection volume of
∼0.02 nL. Abbreviations: S, shutter; SP, short pass filter;
AL1, AL2, ACl1, ACl2, ACl3, apochromatic (cylindrical) lens; M, reflection
mirror; P1, P2, polarizer; IL, illumination lens; OL, objective lens;
RL, relay lens system. Reproduced from Cao, X.; Feng, J. J.; Pan,
Q.; Xiong, B.; He, Y.; Yeung, E. S. Anal. Chem.2017, 89, 2692–2697 (ref (55)). Copyright 2017 American
Chemical Society.
Schematic of the supercontinuum laser
light-sheet plasmonic imaging system for CE detection. The combination
of the apochromatic (cylindrical) lenses ensure a laterally compressed
beam shaped into a planar sheet which forms a detection volume of
∼0.02 nL. Abbreviations: S, shutter; SP, short pass filter;
AL1, AL2, ACl1, ACl2, ACl3, apochromatic (cylindrical) lens; M, reflection
mirror; P1, P2, polarizer; IL, illumination lens; OL, objective lens;
RL, relay lens system. Reproduced from Cao, X.; Feng, J. J.; Pan,
Q.; Xiong, B.; He, Y.; Yeung, E. S. Anal. Chem.2017, 89, 2692–2697 (ref (55)). Copyright 2017 American
Chemical Society.
Applications
Inorganic
Compounds
The analysis of inorganic materials remains a field
of interest in which CE has been applied for either quantitative,[56] complexation,[57] or
kinetic analysis.[58] Such analyses were
predominantly performed using (indirect) UV–vis absorbance
detection,[59,60] but C4D is increasingly applied.
Saiz et al. utilized CE-C4D for the analysis of common cations and
compared the performance of the conductivity detection-compatible
BGEs (MES/HIS, Lac/His, and Lac/β-Ala) and emphasized that addition
of 18-crown-6 and hydroxyisobutyric acid were essential for increasing
the detection sensitivity.[61] CE-C4D was
also used for the determination of bromate in water.[62] Utilizing electromembrane extraction as a sample pretreatment,
LODs were in the subng/mL range.Double opposite end injection
(DOEI) was shown to allow detection of both metal cations and anions
in a single analysis. DOEI-CE-C4D enabled Durc et al. to detect Cl–, Na+, and K+ simultaneously
from skin-wipe sweat samples in order to diagnose cystic fybrosis.[63] Their approach proved more robust and reliable
by monitoring the Cl–/K+ ratio rather
than the Cl– concentration only. A similar DOEI-CE-C4D
approach was used to monitor four cations and eight anions in saliva
of wrestlers that were attempting rapid weight loss.[64] Correlations were established between cortisol concentrations
and those of several salivary ions. Another option for speeding up
analysis is the use of multiple capillaries. Mai et al. developed
a portable CE-C4D instrument with three capillary channels employing
different BGEs allowing the determination of three different categories
of charged analytes[65] (Figure ). The system was used for
the concurrent separation of cations and anions in various beverage
and food matrixes. Kuban and Bocek developed a dual microelectromembrane
extraction approach that enables simultaneous extraction of anions
and cations which could subsequently be quantified by CE-C4D.[66]
Figure 5
CE-C4D electropherograms for the concurrent separations
of inorganic cations, inorganic anions or artificial sweeteners, and
organic anions. Channel 1, inorganic cations. Channel 2, option 1,
inorganic anions; option 2, artificial sweeteners, aspartame (Asp),
cyclamate (Cyc), saccharine (Sac), and acesulfame-K (Ace). Channel
3, organic anions (1) oxalate, (2) formate, (3) tartrate, (4) malate,
(5) succinate, (6) citrate, (7) pyruvate, (8) acetate, (9) lactate,
and (10) ascorbate. Reprinted from Anal. Chim. Acta, Vol. 911, Mai, T. D., Le, M. D., Sáiz J.,
Duong, H. A., Koenka, I. J., Pham, H. V., Hauser, P. C., Triple-channel
portable capillary electrophoresis instrument with individual background
electrolytes for the concurrent separations of anionic and cationic
species, pp. 121–128 (ref (65)). Copyright 2016, with permission from Elsevier.
CE-C4D electropherograms for the concurrent separations
of inorganic cations, inorganic anions or artificial sweeteners, and
organic anions. Channel 1, inorganic cations. Channel 2, option 1,
inorganic anions; option 2, artificial sweeteners, aspartame (Asp),
cyclamate (Cyc), saccharine (Sac), and acesulfame-K (Ace). Channel
3, organic anions (1) oxalate, (2) formate, (3) tartrate, (4) malate,
(5) succinate, (6) citrate, (7) pyruvate, (8) acetate, (9) lactate,
and (10) ascorbate. Reprinted from Anal. Chim. Acta, Vol. 911, Mai, T. D., Le, M. D., Sáiz J.,
Duong, H. A., Koenka, I. J., Pham, H. V., Hauser, P. C., Triple-channel
portable capillary electrophoresis instrument with individual background
electrolytes for the concurrent separations of anionic and cationic
species, pp. 121–128 (ref (65)). Copyright 2016, with permission from Elsevier.For rare earth elements and actinide
analysis, different approaches have been described. Optical detection
in combination with either analyte complextion[67] or sample stacking[68] provided
the required sensitivity. However, ICP-optical emission spectroscopy
or ICPMS remain the preferred detection techniques, as demonstrated
by Bonin et al. and Matczuk and co-workers. They successfully established
complexation parameters for tetravalent actinide-diethylenetriaminepentaacetic
acid systems,[69] respectively, and studied
the interaction of quantum dots (QDs) with biologically relevant proteins.[70]
Nanoparticles
CE has seen significant
applied in the still expanding field of NPs, such as QDs and gold
NPs, which exhibit high stability, ease of chemical synthesis, and
low toxicity. CE was mainly used for obtaining information on the
size and surface characteristics of NPs and their interaction with
biomolecules. Efficient CE separations of NPs often require addition
of stabilizers to the BGE. For example, poly(4-styrenesulfonate) (PSS)
was studied as an alternative to SDS for improved separation and size
determination of AuNPs.[71] The addition
of PSS along with a stepwise field gradient significantly improved
the resolution for AuNPs with diameters ranging from 5 to 20 nm. Similar
observations were made for stabilizers such as Pluronic F-127, citrate,
and cetyltrimethylammonium allowing differences in AuNP surface chemistry
and size to be revealed.[72] In order to
establish selective UV detection of titanium dioxide nanoparticles,
they were bound to single stranded (ss)DNA followed by coating with
PEG,[73] whereas detection of zinc oxideNPs was achieved by their interaction with dithiothreitol in phosphate
buffer.[74] These approaches led to 13–27-fold
enhanced UV absorbance signal intensities, respectively.Qu
et al. studied the use of CE for NP size determinations and evaluated
the effect of surface chemistry on the electrophoretic mobility of
NPs.[75] For referencing, surface coated
gold NPs in complex matrixes (natural organic matters and fetal bovine
serum) were analyzed by CE-ICPMS. Even after addition of surfactants
to the BGE, it was not possible to eliminate matrix effects on NP
mobility, highlighting the necessity of size calibration using surface
coating and matrix-matched standards.Fichtner et al. studied
aqueous dispersions of amorphous silicaNPs of various sizes by CE.[76] The method allowed the determination of the
mean, dispersion width, and skewness of monomodal or multimodal NP
size distributions. There was no need for calibration or additional
microscopic techniques, under the assumption that the investigated
NPs had a constant, size-invariant zeta potential.CE was also
used for the investigation of interactions between proteins and NPs
used for biological applications. CE-ICPMS of functionalized Au nanorods
interacting with serum proteins revealed metal-specific protein profiles
for the differently functionalized AuNPs.[77] However, identification of the proteins was not always possible
due to the large number of possible candidates.The development
and assessment of new ligands for QDs has developed into a popular
field of interest.[78] CE with fluorescence
detection was extensively applied in order to explore the binding
of QDs and polypeptide ligands.[78−82] For example, based on meta-affinity driven assembly, the CdSe/ZnS-QDs
were functionalized using polyhistidinepeptide tags. Longer polyhistidine
tags (n = 6) provided optimal self-assembly efficiency.[80] New His-peptide ligands were synthesized providing
CE-LIF assays for the analysis of the interaction between QDs and
functionally important biomolecules.[82]
Affinity
CE has shown particular useful for the study of
(bio)molecular interactions, providing short analysis times, low sample
size requirements, high separation efficiencies, and ability to cover
a large range of affinities. Li et al. employed affinity CE (ACE)
in order to study the binding of sulfated β-CD to uranyl compounds
in aqueous solutions.[83] ACE was also employed
for establishing apparent binding constants of complexes between enantiomers
of acyclic nucleoside phosphonates (ANPs) and β-CD in aqueous
alkaline medium.[84] Estimation of the equilibrium
dissociation constants by nonlinear regression and linearized plots
showed that the ANP-β-CD complexes are relatively weak. Limitations
of ACE for quantification of the supramolecular interactions between
the CD cavity and ionic liquids and their effect on the stability
of the inclusion complexes were investigated as well.[85]The effect of surface oxidation state on the intensity
and mode of particle–protein conjugation was quantitatively
evaluated by CZE and ACE methods.[86] Partial
filling (PF) ACE was combined with adsorption energy distribution
to determine the heterogeneity of interaction of apoB-100 containing
lipoproteins and their antibodies.[87] The
interaction proved homogeneous and PF-ACE results were in alignment
with quartz crystal microbalance experiments.The use of CE
for studying enzymatic activity and inhibition gained attention. The
inhibition of humanneutrophil elastase was studied using both transverse
diffusion of laminar flow profiles (TDLFP) and microscale thermophoresis
with LIF detection[88] (Figure ). Two natural pentacyclictriterpenes, ursolic and oleanolic acid, were used to validate the
developed CE assay. The method enabled estimation of the IC50 and Ki values of these interactions,
which were in agreement with those reported in the literature. In
a similar work, cIEF-LIF was compared to CZE for its ability to simultaneously
study composition and inhibition of multiple protein kinases.[89] The method was successful regardless of structure
and charge of the substrate peptides. The use of nanogels to physically
constrain an enzyme in a separation capillary while performing electrophoretically
mediated microanalysis (EMMA) was proposed for improving sensitivity
and separation specificity.[90] As immobilization
of enzymes is not required, more precise estimation of the Michaelis–Menten
constants was achieved. Moreover, it enabled the study of different
degrees of stereo specificity in the presence of substrates with different
linkages. A comparison between EMMA, pressure-mediated microanalysis,
and a spectrophotometric assay was reported for probing the enzyme
kinetics of tyrosinase and its inhibition by kojic acid.[91]
Figure 6
Inhibition assay of human neutrophil elastase (HNE) using
transverse diffusion of laminar flow profiles and CZE-LIF. (A) Online
CE assay steps: (a) injection sequence of inhibition buffer (IB),
enzyme (E), inhibitor (I), and substrate (S); (b) mixing and incubation
by transverse diffusion; (c) separation of product (P), I, S, and
E. (B) Examples of electropherograms obtained by CZE-LIF for HNE inhibition
by increasing concentrations ursolic acid. Blank assays were conducted
by injecting the IB instead of E (0% enzymatic activity) or instead
of I (100% enzymatic activity). Reprinted (adapted) from J.
Chromatogr. A, Vol. 1431, Syntia, F., Nehmé,
R., Claude, B., Morin, P., Human neutrophil elastase inhibition studied
by capillary electrophoresis with laser-induced fluorescence detection
and microscale thermophoresis, pp. 215–223 (ref (88)). Copyright 2016, with
permission from Elsevier.
Inhibition assay of humanneutrophil elastase (HNE) using
transverse diffusion of laminar flow profiles and CZE-LIF. (A) Online
CE assay steps: (a) injection sequence of inhibition buffer (IB),
enzyme (E), inhibitor (I), and substrate (S); (b) mixing and incubation
by transverse diffusion; (c) separation of product (P), I, S, and
E. (B) Examples of electropherograms obtained by CZE-LIF for HNE inhibition
by increasing concentrations ursolic acid. Blank assays were conducted
by injecting the IB instead of E (0% enzymatic activity) or instead
of I (100% enzymatic activity). Reprinted (adapted) from J.
Chromatogr. A, Vol. 1431, Syntia, F., Nehmé,
R., Claude, B., Morin, P., Humanneutrophil elastase inhibition studied
by capillary electrophoresis with laser-induced fluorescence detection
and microscale thermophoresis, pp. 215–223 (ref (88)). Copyright 2016, with
permission from Elsevier.MS detection has been introduced in ACE in order to assess
the interaction of heterogeneous proteins with a target protein.[92] This approach allowed multiple parameters to
be established in a single run: (i) molecular weight of the separate
protein components, (ii) determination of protein–protein dissociation
constants, and (iii) determination of the protein complex stoichiometry.
Similarly, CE-MS with preincubation was used to estimate the kinetic
constants of the degradation of hyaluronic acid by hyaluronidase[93] and for the screening of β-secretase inhibitors
as potential Alzheimer’s disease therapeutics.[94]
Nucleic Acids
Kanoatov and Krylov
pointed out that an ACE experiment under physiological relevant conditions
for the study of DNA–ligand interactions is feasible. With
DNA molecules in phosphate buffered saline, they used a pressure-facilitated
nonequilibrium CE of equilibrium mixtures approach to attain insights
in DNA-ligand kinetics.[95] Similarly, Tohala
et al. used native separation conditions to study the interaction
between homopolymeric sequences and weak DNA binding enantiomers.[96]Studies focusing on the CE analysis of
microRNA (miRNA) remain scarce. Recent advances in separation performances
for long noncoding RNA may alter this.[97] Direct separation of miRNA with CE is not always trivial and often
requires an additive to the buffer for enhanced performance. ssDNA
can be used for such purposes as was shown by Wegman et al., using
a hybridization assay with miRNA-specific DNA probes labeled with
a fluorophore for LIF detection.[98] To separate
the miRNA-DNA hybrids from each other and from the probe excess, an
ssDNA binding protein as well a different sizes of probes were incorporated
in the workflow. The developed approach was sufficiently robust to
allow its integration with sample preconcentration by ITP to achieve
an LOD below 10 pMA CE-LIF method for the analysis of the nucleosides
adenosine (Ado) and inosine (Ino) in brain samples was developed.[99] Interestingly, the fluorescently labeled analytes
exhibited about 25-fold fluorescence enhancement upon the formation
of inclusion complexes with γ-CD. Ado and Ino were simultaneously
quantified in homogenized rat forebrain samples, which were desalted
by ultrafiltration in the presence γ-CD, concentrated on-capillary
by LVSS to achieve detection limits of 32 and 38 nM for Ado and Ino,
respectively.Although often the identification of nucleic acids
is done by polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis, or PAGE, and polymerase
chain reaction, or PCR, analysis, the capability of attaining insights
in post-transcriptional modifications is limited.[100] Recently, CE-MS was used to identify and quantify these
modifications.[101] The authors could detect
two endogenous human circulating miRNAs isolated from B-cell chronic
lymphocytic leukemia serum. The CE separation and following MS analysis
provided label-free quantitation and revealed 5′-phosphorylation
and 3′-uridylation as modifications of miRNAs.
Viruses and
Bacteria
Van Tricht et al.[102] developed
a capillary gel electrophoresis (CGE) method for fast and selective
characterization and quantification of viral proteins in influenza
vaccines. Dilution of the gel buffer allowed higher separation voltages
which led to shorter run times and improved efficiencies. The CGE
method allowed analysis of 100 samples in 4 days making it very suitable
for quality control purposes. In order to enable characterization
of low quantities of adeno-associated virus capsid proteins, Zhang
et al. developed a head-column FASS method as an online sample preconcentration
technique compatible with CGE[103] (Figure ). The effects of
a short water plug, SDS concentration both in sample matrix and in
the matrix exchanging solution, as well as the effect of sample injection
time were investigated. With LODs in the low-picomolar range, the
new method provided 3 orders of magnitude sensitivity enhancement
as compared to conventional CGE.
Figure 7
Comparison of sample stacking to conventional
CGE. Top trace: conventional CGE analysis of three capsid proteins
(i.e., VP3, VP2, and VP1). Middle trace: Sample stacking analysis
of the same three capsid proteins. Bottom trace: Sample stacking analysis
of SDS-MW Size Standards (10–225 kDa). Indicated concentrations
are total protein concentration. Reproduced from Zhang, C. X.; Meagher,
M. M. Anal. Chem.2017, 89, 3285–3292 (ref (103)). Copyright 2017 American Chemical Society.
Comparison of sample stacking to conventional
CGE. Top trace: conventional CGE analysis of three capsid proteins
(i.e., VP3, VP2, and VP1). Middle trace: Sample stacking analysis
of the same three capsid proteins. Bottom trace: Sample stacking analysis
of SDS-MW Size Standards (10–225 kDa). Indicated concentrations
are total protein concentration. Reproduced from Zhang, C. X.; Meagher,
M. M. Anal. Chem.2017, 89, 3285–3292 (ref (103)). Copyright 2017 American Chemical Society.CZE was used for the quantitative analysis of intact
adenovirus types Ad26 and Ad35, both in the upstream and downstream
processing.[104] Because of the complex matrix
and the adverse effects of adsorptions in the bare-fused silica capillaries,
charged and neutral capillary coatings were tested. Best results were
obtained with neutrally coated capillaries in combination with the
use of polysorbate-20 in the BGE, low capillary temperatures, and
pre- and in-between-run flushing with phosphoric acid. A study by
Betonville et al. showed similar results in terms of method requirements
for intact virus-like particles of human papillomavirus.[105] Moreover, the presence of polysorbate in the
sample was indicated to avoid viral particle adsorption to the sample
container.CE has also been evaluated as a tool for the separation
and characterization of living bacterial cells. Phung et al. used
a dual-stage ITP method for the inline fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) and subsequent quantitation of bacteria.[106] ITP was recommended as it seems to enhance
hybridization kinetics. With an LOD (6.0 × 104 cells/mL)
comparable to the CE analysis of a sample processed using an offline
FISH protocol, the total analysis time was reduced from 2.5 h to 30
min. With the selection of the appropriate hybridization probe, this
approach could be used for specific detection of bacterial cells in
aqueous samples.The characterization of intact phytopathogen
bacteria was investigated using cIEF, CZE, and matrix-assisted laser-desorption
ionization-time-of-flight (MALDI-TOF).[107] In total, 43 strains of the Dickeya and Pectobacterium species were
selected among of which some that could not be classified with the
traditional methods. In the case of cIEF, the major challenge was
the similarity on the pI values of some subspecies.
On the other hand, most of these species could be discriminated unambiguously
by CZE. Most discriminatory power was obtained with MALDI-TOF-MS as
unique mass spectral profiles were obtained for all respective species
or subspecies.
Metabolites
One of the major applications
of CE relates to the determination of metabolites in various types
of biologically relevant samples. MS detection plays an important
role since many metabolites cannot be optically detected without prior
derivatization, and it provides opportunities for the identification
of unknowns. To aid in the latter, a chemoinformatics approach for
ranking candidate structures of unidentified peaks was developed.[108] The approach uses information about the known
metabolites detected in samples containing unidentified peaks and
was successfully applied to identify two unknown compounds observed
in a CE-MS urinary metabolite profile. Another study focused more
on big-data handling in a SPE-CE-MS for identifying biomarkers (in
mice) related to Huntington’s disease.[109] The workflow ensured significant data reduction prior to
multivariate curve resolution asymmetric least-squares analysis.Cationic metabolite profiling by CE-MS is routinely applied, however,
profiling of anions proves more problematic. Yamamoto et al. showed
that alkaline ammonia-based buffers (pH > 9) often used for these
analyses react with polyimide outer coatings of fused-silica capillaries
resulting in frequent capillary fractures and poor long-term performance.[110] By making minor adaptations to the BGE, robust
high-throughput profiling of anionic metabolites was achieved. In
an alternative approach, Gulersonmez et al. show that anions can also
be analyzed using a method normally applied for cationic profiling.[111] By applying a reversed polarity separation
with additional pressure, migration of the anions toward the mass
spectrometer was ensured.A targeted CE-TOF-MS method was established
that enables identification of potential biomarkers for hepatocellular
carcinoma based on the creatine/betaineratio.[112] In a similar targeted approach, the metabolic changes in
the polyamine-pathway produced in colon cancerHT-29 cells by difluoromethylornithine
were investigated.[113] More global profiles
were used to look into metabolic changes related to, for example,
type 2 diabetes mellitus evolution[114] and
the effect of exercising.[115] Single-cell
CE-MS analysis with multisolvent extraction was used to identify metabolic
differences between left and right blastomeres in 8-cell frog embryos.[116] To quantify metabolite production between left
and right cells, they analyzed 24 different cells in technical duplicate–triplicate
measurements. Statistical and multivariate analysis revealed 10 distinct
metabolites that were significantly differentially accumulated in
the left or right cells. Other fields of CE-MS activity over the last
years included pharmaceutical,[117] food,[118] and plant metabolism.[119]Notably, in many metabolomics studies CE-MS was used next
to other analytical platforms. CE-MS often is used to target highly
polar analytes, like amino acids, organic acids, and carnitines,[120,121] although in untargeted approaches also often a significant overlap
with other platforms is observed.[122]
Amino Acids
The sensitivity of a CE-based method for AA
analysis and characterization is highly associated with their derivatization,
a process that can be laborious, time-consuming, and difficult to
standardize.[123] Two optimized methods were
developed using EMMA[123] and TDLFP[124] with simultaneous on-capillary derivatization
of standard AAs by naphthalene-2,3-dicarboxaldehyde allowing LIF detection.
Optimal reactant mixing was achieved by TDLFP, leading to a more generic
and robust methodology. However, the optimized EMMA approach proved
to be most suitable for human plasma analysis. AAs from Dunaliella
salina green algae were analyzed by CE-LIF after labeling with fluorescein
isothiocyanate using microwave-assisted derivatization at 80 °C
(680 W) minimizing the derivatization time to 150 s.[125]A new CE-ESI-MS method was proposed for separation
and quantitation of nonstandard AAs.[126] After optimization, separation of 27 AAs, including the isomers l-leucine, l-isoleucine, and l-alloisoleucine,
was achieved in less than 30 min. The applicability of the method
was demonstrated for urine samples from children with vesicoureteral
reflux and was proposed as a potentially useful diagnostic tool to
inspect these samples.An alternative approach for detection
of low or non-UV absorbing compounds like AAs in CE was developed.
It is based on a photochemical reaction of the AAs in the detection
window of the separation capillary under strong alkaline conditions,
introducing a chromophoric group.[127] A
systematic study was conducted focusing on the reaction mechanism,
the influence of BGE concentration, and the irradiation time of analytes
in the detection window. The method was successfully applied to the
determination of seven essential AAs.The use of proteases for
generation of AAs for C-terminal sequencing of peptides was reported
by Tian et al.[128] (Figure ). The described method involved carboxypeptidase
Y (CPY) digestion in combination with rapid online derivatization
using OPA/β-ME and optically gated CE with LIF detection. Gaining
temporal resolutions of 50 s and the possibility to measure AA release
in a time-dependent manner were some of the method’s advantages.
Figure 8
(A) Serial
monitoring of the hydrolysis of the peptide AC-Gln-Arg-Glu-Trp-Phe-Met-Asn-Ser-Tyr
by carboxypepsidase Y using optically gated CE with LIF detection.
(B) Evolution of the concentrations of released amino acids from the
C-terminus of the peptide. Reprinted (adapted) from J. Chromatogr.
A, Vol. 1459, Tian, M., Zhang, N., Liu,
X., Guo, L., Yanh, L., Sequential online C-terminal sequencing of
peptides based on carboxypeptidase Y digestion and optically gated
capillary electrophoresis with laser-induced fluorescence detection,
pp. 152–159 (ref (128)). Copyright 2016, with permission from Elsevier.
(A) Serial
monitoring of the hydrolysis of the peptideAC-Gln-Arg-Glu-Trp-Phe-Met-Asn-Ser-Tyr
by carboxypepsidase Y using optically gated CE with LIF detection.
(B) Evolution of the concentrations of released amino acids from the
C-terminus of the peptide. Reprinted (adapted) from J. Chromatogr.
A, Vol. 1459, Tian, M., Zhang, N., Liu,
X., Guo, L., Yanh, L., Sequential online C-terminal sequencing of
peptides based on carboxypeptidase Y digestion and optically gated
capillary electrophoresis with laser-induced fluorescence detection,
pp. 152–159 (ref (128)). Copyright 2016, with permission from Elsevier.Chiral separation of AAs is an
active field of study due to the importance of d-AAs for
living organisms. More recent approaches focus on the development
of chiral ligands[28] and different derivatization
agents,[129] as well as the coupling of these
approaches with MS. Prior et al. developed chiral CE-MS methods for
enantioselective analysis of proteinogenic AAs in biological samples.[130,131] One method employed β-CD as chiral selector and fluorenylmethyloxycarbonyl
chloride as derivatization agent yielding improved AA enantiomer separation
and ESI efficiency. In the other method the use of involatile chiral
selectors is circumvented by employing (+)-1-(9-fluorenyl)ethyl chloroformate
as a chiral AA derivatizing agent and ammonium perfluorooctanoate
as a volatile pseudostationary phase for separation of the formed
AA diastereomers. d-AA detection in cerebrospinal fluid was
shown for both methods. A similar, fully automatized CE-MS method
using in-capillary derivatization enabled the successful separation
of the diastereomeric derivatives of 14 AAs.[132] A different approach was followed in order to distinguish between
AAs formed by abiotic versus biotic processes using their chemical
distributions.[133] AAs were labeled with
5-carboxyfluorescein succinimidyl ester and two separation methods
ensured fingerprinting of all 17 relevant AAs.
Peptides
CE-MS
of peptides has become quite a routine technique and is applied frequently
in untargeted proteomics and peptidomics fields. For example, urine
samples were screened for peptides[134−137] as suitable biomarkers of disease,
revealing specific biomarkers related to heart failure,[134] deep vein thrombosis, and pulmonary embolism.[135] Related to this, the suitability of mice as
models for human aging was investigated by investigating the urinary
proteome of the mice.[137] Advanced CE-ESI-MS
was used for quantitative analysis of diverse proteins in single embryonic
cells using untargeted bottom-up proteomics.[138,139] The identification of 500–800 protein groups was achieved
from single blastomeres isolated from 16-cells of frog embryos, with
minimum derivatization steps and label-free quantification for single
cells.[139]As LC-MS is the predominant
proteomics technology, several studies focused on benchmarking CE-MS
against LC-MS. For example, a systematic comparison between UPLC-MS/MS
and CZE-MS/MS for analysis of an enriched phosphoproteome from the
MCF-10A cell line showed that, when the same sample loading amounts
(2–200 ng) are used, CZE-MS/MS consistently outperformed UPLC-MS/MS
in terms of phosphorylated peptide and total peptide identifications.[140] For Xenopus laevis fertilized
egg digests, which were prefractionated by RPLC,[141] 4134 and 5787 proteins could be identified by CE-MS and
LC-MS, respectively. The combination of orthogonal separation technologies
as RPLC and CE can significantly improve protein coverage, as also
shown for the complex proteome of a yeast mitochondrial extract.[142]CZE-MS has shown to be very powerful
for the characterization of post-translational modifications (PTMs)
on the peptide level. A sheathless CZE-ESI-MS/MS method was developed
for separation of asparagine deamidation (deaN) and aspartic acid
isomerization (isoD).[143] CZE could separate
the unmodified peptide from modified homologous exhibiting deaN, isoD,
or both with a resolution above 1.29. The CE-MS method was successfully
applied for the characterization of PTMs on monoclonal antibodies
and complex protein mixture. In a similar study, CE-MS with a sheathless
interface was used to analyze challenging modifications, such as asparagine
deamidation, aspartate isomerization, arginine citrullination, and
phosphorylation.[144] High resolution was
achieved for asparagine, aspartic acid, and isoaspartic acid containing
peptides. Applying the CE-MS method for fast and sensitive analysis
of intact and enzymatically digested histone H4 revealed a variety
of citrullinated proteoforms.Surfactants often present a source
of undesirable interferences during (glyco)proteomics studies. Whereas
the surfactants are required to ensure full digestion, their elimination
at low pH (when using RapiGest) has shown to lead to loss of sialic
acid residues on glycan structures of transferrin and distortion of
glycopeptide peaks in general.[145] Changing
the type of acid and sample desalting helped minimizing desialylation
and excellent peak shapes were obtained. CE enabled fast and efficient
separation of the sialylated glycopeptides improving detection sensitivity
due to decreased ion suppression. Differences in transferrin glycoforms
serum from a healthy control and patients with congenital disorders
of glycosylation could be observed.
Proteins
CE holds
very strong potential for intact protein analysis and methodological
improvements remain the subject of research. Double injection capillary
zone electrophoresis was used for identification of human chorionic
gonadotropin.[146] Samples of unknown content
were analyzed together with a reference standard and identification
was based on the closeness of agreement between the observed migration
times of the two peaks. Fu et al. used velocity gap CE to separate
groups of reference protein mixtures, obtaining increasing separation
efficiency, especially for low-abundance protein species.[147]A CE-TOF-MS method was developed for
the characterization of intact Mycobacterium tuberculosis (TB) antigens TB10.4 and Ag85B and their chemically produced glycoconjugates,
which are glycovaccine candidates against TB.[148] A SMIL coating of Polybrene-dextran sulfate-Polybrene was
used in combination with acetic acid as BGE in order to prevent protein
adsorption and allow the efficient separation of different antigen
proteoforms and degradation products. The presence of several closely
related degradation products, including truncated, oxidized, deamidated,
and conformational variants, were revealed next to the glycoform composition
of the neo-glycoproteins.CE allows protein analysis under near-physiological
conditions, allowing detection of the different conformers.[149−151] For example, the unfolding of wild-type β2-microglobulin under
nondenaturing conditions was investigated with CE-UV[149] and CE-ESI-MS.[150] In the latter
study, several interfaces and mass spectrometers were compared. With
CE-ESI-TOF MS proteoforms differing by 1 Da only could be assigned
and sheathless interfacing appeared best suited to preserve protein
structure integrity. A CE-MS method developed to separate the conformers
and dimers of the drug antithrombin employed a neutral poly(vinyl
alcohol)-coated capillary.[151] The protein
conformation was preserved by using a BGE at physiological pH. The
developed method allowed the detection of the native, latent, and
heterodimer conformers in formulation.Iwabuchi et al. developed
a CGE method for α-synuclein using nonlinear laser wave-mixing
detection, which has a quadratic dependence on analyte concentration,
allowing small changes in concentration to be monitored.[152] Various fluorescently labeled protein oligomers
could be separated and detected down to sub-pM concentrations, making
the method potentially suitable for Parkinson’s Disease diagnostics.
In another method, prostate specific antigen (PSA) was isolated from
serum in a way that is compatible for further analysis with CZE.[153] The protocol employs an anti-PSA column for
isolation. SDS-PAGE followed by Western blotting, circular dichroism,
and CZE were used to check for possible protein alterations during
the procedure. A CZE method for the characterization of human serum
protein components like immunoglobulins and albumins was described
by Christians et al.[154] As all requirements
of the ICH guidelines on validation were met, the developed method
could replace conventional CGE methods used to characterize these
proteins.
Carbohydrates
CE methods remain
of particular interest for identification and quantification of carbohydrates
(CHs). CHs are typically UV inactive and require additional consideration
or treatment to achieve their detection. These involve indirect UV,[155] complexation with a ligand for direct UV analysis,[156] or derivatization with, e.g., the fluorescent
label APTS for subsequent LIF detection.[157]CGE-LIF is commonly used for the analysis of released glycans.
For identification purposes, a software tool was developed that correlates
the relative migration of a glycan to a glucose size ladder and expresses
this in so-called glucose unit (GU) values.[158] A database with known structures and correlated GU values aids in
identifying structures. GU values strongly depend on temperature,
making temperature control essential.[159] Interestingly, by using a temperature gradient during the CGE separation,
the separation selectivity for branched glycans can be incresed.[159,160] This method was demonstrated for mixtures of complex N-glycans (afucosylated,
fucosylated, and high mannose oligosaccharides) of biopharmaceutical
and biomedical importance. In order to overcome the problem of migration-time
shifts, a triple-internal standard approach was proposed.[161] Glucose α-1-4-linked oligomers with a
degree of polymerization of 2, 3, and 15 were employed. The method
provided small errors and showed to be in good agreement with available
reference data. Another study looked into determination of activation
energies of migration regarding maltooligosaccharides with and without
the presence of a monomeric viscosity modifier (ethylene glycol) and
a polymeric additive (linear polyacrylamide) in correlation with the
GU.[162] This study provided an insight in
molecular conformation changes of the labeled glycans and possible
matrix interaction effects.Normally, glycans are released from
protein in solution. However, within biobanks there are many formalin
fixated and paraffin embedded (FFPE) tissue samples of whichglycan
profiling could be of interest. CGE-LIF was used to identify possible
protein N-glycosylation alterations due to FFPE.[163] The N-linked sugars of FFPE treated samples were released
using PNGase F digestion. No significant changes were revealed in
the N-glycome profile upon FFPE, indicating that global N-glycome
analysis on the FFPE samples might be feasible.Hennig et al.
performed a longitudinal sampling for biomarker discovery[164] (Figure ). For this complex study, the analysis of the plasma N-glycome
was performed by multiplexed CGE-LIF. The results proved a long-term
stability of the plasma N-glycome over the examined period of seven
years and minor longitudinal changes are more correlated with lifestyle
and environmental factors. This work can be considered a step forward
for personalized diagnostics.
Figure 9
(A) CGE-LIF generated human plasma N-glycan
fingerprints. Signal intensity in relative fluorescence units [RFU]
is plotted over the normalized migration time [MTU″]. The fingerprint
is of a native (sialylated) frozen normal control plasma-derived N-glycome,
labeled with APTS. (B) Evaluation of the intraindividual and interindividual
variability of the plasma N-glycome, by plotting three peaks (high,
middle, and low abundance) over the sampling time points (volunteer
3, blue circles; volunteer 5, red squares) and making box plots of
the relative peak height over the whole time period per volunteer
and total population. Reprinted (adapted) from Biochim. Biophys.
Acta Gen. Subj., Vol. 1860, Hennig, R.,
Cajic, S., Borowiak, M., Hoffmann, M., Kottler, R., Reichl, U., Rapp,
E., Toward personalized diagnostics via longitudinal study of the
human plasma N-glycome, pp. 1728–1738, DOI: 10.1016/j.bbagen.2016.03.035, under the terms of the Creative Commons
Attribution License (CC BY) (ref (164)).
(A) CGE-LIF generated human plasma N-glycan
fingerprints. Signal intensity in relative fluorescence units [RFU]
is plotted over the normalized migration time [MTU″]. The fingerprint
is of a native (sialylated) frozen normal control plasma-derived N-glycome,
labeled with APTS. (B) Evaluation of the intraindividual and interindividual
variability of the plasma N-glycome, by plotting three peaks (high,
middle, and low abundance) over the sampling time points (volunteer
3, blue circles; volunteer 5, red squares) and making box plots of
the relative peak height over the whole time period per volunteer
and total population. Reprinted (adapted) from Biochim. Biophys.
Acta Gen. Subj., Vol. 1860, Hennig, R.,
Cajic, S., Borowiak, M., Hoffmann, M., Kottler, R., Reichl, U., Rapp,
E., Toward personalized diagnostics via longitudinal study of the
human plasma N-glycome, pp. 1728–1738, DOI: 10.1016/j.bbagen.2016.03.035, under the terms of the Creative Commons
Attribution License (CC BY) (ref (164)).Guan et al. developed a CE method for the precise and accurate
determination of glucose levels in blood.[165] The first part of the capillary is used as a microreactor for the
coupled enzymatic assay of glucose oxidase and horseradish peroxidase.
These enzymes are separately injected and govern two sequential reactions,
where through peroxide formation a fluorogenic reagent is converted
into fluorescein. The latter is subsequently separated via CE analysis
from the other reagents and detected with LIF. LODs were down to 10
nM and the method showed potential toward additional peroxide generating
systems.In the work of Bucsella et al., a CE-UV method utilizing
dynamic coating for the separation and quantification of structurally
very similar nucleotides and nucleotide sugars was developed.[166] A total of 11 nucleotides and 6 nucleotide
sugars were analyzed. The addition of PEG was indicated to enhance
the separation efficiency. The method was tested for Chinese hamster
ovarian cell extracts where 3 sugar nucleotides and 7 nucleotides
were identified and quantified.
Pharmaceutics
Biopharmaceuticals
CE has emerged as an essential tool for the characterization of
biopharmaceuticals, including mAbs, using both intact and middle-up
approaches. A useful protocol based on a two-phase-four-step mode
was proposed for rapid CZE method development for top-down and middle-up
analysis of mAbs.[167] This approach focused
on the screening of the effect and subsequent optimization of the
pH and ionic strength of the BGE, the percentage of organic additive,
and viscosity enhancer. The protocol was tested using commercially
available mAbs.The dose determination of a newly developed
recombinant subunit envelope protein-based vaccine against all four
serotypes produced in DrosophilaS2 cells was performed in a comparative
study comprising LC and CE methods.[168] CZE
appeared more suitable as a concentration assay for the tetravalent
dengue subunit-based vaccine as separation of all four units was achieved.Francois et al. described the use of offline CZE-UV/ESI-MS for
the middle-up characterization of Fc/2 variants of cetuximab.[169] Obtained mass spectral information was cross-validated
with CZE-UV/MALDI-MS. In a subsequent publication, a top-down characterization
after sample enrichment using CE-UV/MALDI-MS was used for the middle-down
characterization of Fc/2 cetuximab variants.[170] About 9% sequence coverage of Fc/2 cetuximab fragments was achieved,
showing the feasibility of the strategy for middle-down characterization.
CZE separation was mainly based on Fc/2 fragments with and without
C-terminal truncation.A sheathless CZE-MS method for middle
up analysis of the antibody-drug conjugate (ADC) brentuximab vedotin
was developed.[171] Native MS was achieved
using a nanoESI infusion apparatus, which allowed accurate mass determination
with parallel estimation of the average drug to antibody ratio and
drug load distribution. In a further step, middle up CZE-ESI-MS/MS
analysis was performed after proteolysis with IdeS. This method increased
the level of characterization, as complete amino acid sequence identification
was achieved alongside glycosylation and drug-loaded-peptides. A similar
approach was used for the analysis of the ADC trastuzumab emtansine.[172] Here, various analytical techniques including
MS, imaging cIEF, and CGE were used for structural characterization
and probing protein interactions.The charge heterogeneity of
mAbs is an important quality attribute. An improved method for the
characterization of the acidic and basic variants of an IgG1 antibody
utilized preparative immobilized pH gradient isoelectric focusing
fractionation.[173] The fractions were further
characterized by CGE and Lys-C peptide mapping via LC-MS/MS. Deamidation,
sialylation, glycation, and fragmentation were identified as the main
modifications contributing to acidic variants of the mAb, whereas
C-terminal lysine, C-terminal proline amidation, and uncyclized N-terminal
glutamine were the major species contributing to the basic variants.
Another approach for isolation of mAb charge variants was based on
FFE.[174] Both acidic and basic variants
were successfully identified and related back to the cIEF charge profile.
SEC, CGE, reduced and intact LC-MS, and LC-MS/MS tryptic peptide mapping
were subsequently used to characterize the collected fractions.In many studies CGE is employed to characterize mAbs. The United
States Pharmacopeia (USP) has released a protocol for this method.
However, it was shown that the USP method run under nonreducing conditions
induced fragmentation for three different mAbs.[175] An in-house developed method did not show this extent of
fragmentation for the same samples. The findings support the conclusion
that molecule-specific methods are still essential to minimize method
induced artifacts and address molecule specific behavior.Incompatibility
of the separation medium components is one of the greatest limitations
in hyphenation of separation technologies with MS detection. A CE-MS
method was recently developed for the analysis of mAbs in SDS-complex
matrixes.[176] This in-capillary approach
incorporates the coinjection of cationic surfactants (CTAB or ADBAC)
in the presence of methanol. Successful removal of the SDS was achieved
in neutral coated capillaries as well as positively charged coated
ones with simultaneous application of reversed polarity. This method
allows direct MS analysis of SDS denatured antibodies and protein
samples without extensive sample pretreatment. The same authors also
presented a heart-cut CZE-CZE-MS setup with an implemented mechanical
four-port valve that used a generic ε-aminocaproic acid based
BGE in the first dimension and acetic acid in the second dimension[177] (Figure ). Interference-free, highly precise mass data (deviation
less than 1 Da) of charge variants of trastuzumab were obtained.
Figure 10
(A)
Complete two-dimensional CE-CE-MS setup. During the separation in
the first dimension, the mechanical valve is kept in the loading position
(top), where the sample loop is connected to channels S and W. When
the desired analyte is located in the sample loop, the valve is switched
to the inject position (bottom), transferring the analyte from the
first dimension to the second dimension. (B) CZE-UV electropherogram
of deglycosylated trastuzumab. Separation was performed with the CE-CE-MS
setup. The raw and deconvoluted mass spectra obtained after the second
dimension separation of the main variant (M, 10-nL cut), acidic variant
A2 (20-nL cut), and acidic variant A3 (20-nL cut) show the presence
of deamidated antibody variants. Adapted by permission from Springer, Anal. Bioanal. Chem., Two-dimensional capillary zone electrophoresis–mass
spectrometry for the characterization of intact monoclonal antibody
charge variants, including deamidation products, Jooß, K., Hühner,
J., Kiessig, S., Moritz, B., Neusüß, C., Vol. 409, pp. 6057–6067, Copyright 2017 (ref (177)).
(A)
Complete two-dimensional CE-CE-MS setup. During the separation in
the first dimension, the mechanical valve is kept in the loading position
(top), where the sample loop is connected to channels S and W. When
the desired analyte is located in the sample loop, the valve is switched
to the inject position (bottom), transferring the analyte from the
first dimension to the second dimension. (B) CZE-UV electropherogram
of deglycosylated trastuzumab. Separation was performed with the CE-CE-MS
setup. The raw and deconvoluted mass spectra obtained after the second
dimension separation of the main variant (M, 10-nL cut), acidic variant
A2 (20-nL cut), and acidic variant A3 (20-nL cut) show the presence
of deamidated antibody variants. Adapted by permission from Springer, Anal. Bioanal. Chem., Two-dimensional capillary zone electrophoresis–mass
spectrometry for the characterization of intact monoclonal antibody
charge variants, including deamidation products, Jooß, K., Hühner,
J., Kiessig, S., Moritz, B., Neusüß, C., Vol. 409, pp. 6057–6067, Copyright 2017 (ref (177)).In order to facilitate large scale N-glycosylation analysis,
multiplexed CGE-LIF has sparked interest. The technique was used to
evaluate the purification of rhEPO glycoforms when using serotonin
as affinity ligand for preparative chromatography by monitoring changes
in the N-glycan fingerprint.[178] An automated
sample preparation workflow based on a magnetic bead protocol for
N-glycosylation analysis of antibodies was proposed.[179] The protocol comprised the endoglycosidase digestion, fluorophore
labeling, and cleanup, with CGE-LIF separations of less than 3 min,
leading to the entire analysis of the 96-well plate format in a couple
of hours. Along the same lines, a multiple injection approach for
rapid large scale CE analysis followed by multicomponent optical detection
with LIF was proposed.[180] As a proof of
principle, the protocol was applied for rapid and large scale analysis
of major monoclonal antibody (IgG) N-glycans. Nearly 100 samples were
introduced in a single capillary, leading to a full analysis time
of 4 h rather than 12 h when the conventional approach was applied.
For the analysis of even more complex samples, the potential of multidimensional
systems were explored. A multiplexing CE mapping method was introduced
for the identification of N-glycans of two human IgG samples that
gave similar electropherograms, in both CZE and MEKC modes.[181] Different orthogonal CE separation mechanisms
were combined in parallel applications of CZE, MEKC, and CGE all providing
acceptable detection limits, repeatability, and linearity. The combination
of CZE and MEKC mechanisms showed optimal orthogonality allowing a
larger space for glycan analysis.A CZE-ESI-MS/MS method was
developed for the intact analysis of recombinant human interferon-β1
(rhIFN-β1), a biopharmaceutical with complex glycosylation at
a single N-linked site.[182] Top-down MS/MS
and exoglycosidase digestion were applied in order to elucidate the
complex structures. Charged species due to deamidation and sialylation
were sufficiently separated by CZE, and high resolution MS and MS/MS
along with the enzymatic treatments proved essential for characterization.
Low-Molecular-Weight Drugs
CE in all of its variants is
well-established in analysis of small drug analysis. Recent work focused
on sensitivity improvement by including sample-stacking approaches[183,184] and probing drug chirality.[185,186]A fast CZE method
for the simultaneous analysis of glibenclamide and its impurities
(IA and IB) in pharmaceutical dosage forms was fully developed within a quality
by design framework.[187] Critical quality
attributes were represented by IA peak
efficiency, critical resolution between glibenclamide and IB, and analysis time. After optimized conditions
were selected, the full separation of the analytes was obtained in
less than 2 min. The method was fully validated and was applied to
real samples of glibenclamide tablets.Malá et al. describe
the combination of electrophoretic focusing on inverse electromigration
dispersion (EMD) gradient with ESI-MS detection.[188] The separation of analytes along the electromigrating EMD
profile proceeds so that each analyte is at a particular position
governed by its pKa and ionic mobility.
The focused zones are transported to the capillary end by electromigration,
electroosmotic flow, and ESI suction. The system allowed sensitive
analyses of trace amounts of weak acids in the pKa range between 6 and 9. The analysis of several sulfonamides
at the nanomolar-level in waters was reported.A new method
for screening tyrosinase inhibitors from traditional Chinese medicines
utilizing immobilized enzyme reactor technology was described.[189] Parallel molecular docking was used to investigate
the interaction between the enzyme and inhibitors. Aiming for high-throughput
and shorten analysis time, a short-end injection in CE was implemented,
leading to a successful method with which four compounds were determined
as tyrosinase active inhibitors.Interactions between the consumed
drug and HSA and other serum proteins play a major role in drug distribution
and pharmacokinetics. Fluorophore-assisted carbohydrate electrophoresis
was used for the evaluation of the affinity and drug–protein
interactions between HSA or its equivalent glycated form and the first
generation of sulfonylurea antidiabetics.[190] The binding constants vary between the different drugs for normal
and glycated human serum albumins, with glycated giving lower values.
Polymers
CE finds increasing application for the characterization
of complex (bio)polymers. CE under critical conditions has shown to
be a suitable approach to separate both natural and synthetic charged
polymers.[191] Composition distributions
heterogeneity of branching could be probed by the obtained separation
distributions. The dispersity was quantified, including monitoring
of grafting on polymers. Using peak dispersity values, a numerical
representation of the mobility and composition distributions was calculated
allowing comparisons between samples.Nitrocelluloses (NCs)
and glycosaminoglycans (GAGs) have also been analyzed by CE. Alinat
et al. provided a method for the characterization of nonexplosive
NCs.[192] The CE instrument was used as a
viscometer rather than for separation. The viscosity of NC samples
was successfully correlated to molecular weight and nitrogen content.
A CE-MS method to characterize the GAG heparin was developed by Lin
et al.,[193] based on a method proposed earlier.[194] Reverse polarity CE separation and negative-mode
electrospray ionization were optimized using a volatile methanolic
ammonium acetateBGE and sheath liquid. An Orbitrap mass spectrometer
appeared useful in disaccharide compositional analysis and bottom-up
and top-down analysis of low molecular weight heparin.A CE-UV
method was developed for the qualitative and quantitative determination
of oligosaccharides.[195] Reference compounds
consisting of five xylo-, three manno-, and five cello-oligosaccharides
were concurrently measured in a highly alkaline solution without derivatization.
The method was applied for the determination oligosaccharides from
hot-water extracts of a bleached birch and pine kraft pulp in order
to study the degradation of hemicelluloses into oligosaccharides as
functions of time and temperature.Binding characteristics of
oppositely charged poly(l-lysine) (PLL) and copolymers of
acrylamide and 2-acrylamido-2-methyl-1-propanesulfonate (PAMAMPS)
were determined by frontal analysis continuous CE at different ionic
strengths.[196] PAMAMPS charge densities
between 15% and 100% were investigated showing that the chain stoichiometry
decreases with increasing PAMAMPS charge density, while the charge
stoichiometry was in good agreement with a general predicting rule.
Modeling of binding constants was used to predict the interaction
binding constant between PLL and PAMAMPS of different charge densities
at a given ionic strength.
Authors: A Prior; R C Moldovan; J Crommen; A C Servais; M Fillet; G J de Jong; G W Somsen Journal: Anal Chim Acta Date: 2016-09-10 Impact factor: 6.558
Authors: Elena Sánchez-López; Alberto Marcos; Emilio Ambrosio; María Luisa Marina; Antonio L Crego Journal: J Chromatogr A Date: 2016-06-17 Impact factor: 4.759
Authors: William E Arter; Catherine K Xu; Marta Castellana-Cruz; Therese W Herling; Georg Krainer; Kadi L Saar; Janet R Kumita; Christopher M Dobson; Tuomas P J Knowles Journal: Nano Lett Date: 2020-10-20 Impact factor: 11.189
Authors: Daniel J Klionsky; Amal Kamal Abdel-Aziz; Sara Abdelfatah; Mahmoud Abdellatif; Asghar Abdoli; Steffen Abel; Hagai Abeliovich; Marie H Abildgaard; Yakubu Princely Abudu; Abraham Acevedo-Arozena; Iannis E Adamopoulos; Khosrow Adeli; Timon E Adolph; Annagrazia Adornetto; Elma Aflaki; Galila Agam; Anupam Agarwal; Bharat B Aggarwal; Maria Agnello; Patrizia Agostinis; Javed N Agrewala; Alexander Agrotis; Patricia V Aguilar; S Tariq Ahmad; Zubair M Ahmed; Ulises Ahumada-Castro; Sonja Aits; Shu Aizawa; Yunus Akkoc; Tonia Akoumianaki; Hafize Aysin Akpinar; Ahmed M Al-Abd; Lina Al-Akra; Abeer Al-Gharaibeh; Moulay A Alaoui-Jamali; Simon Alberti; Elísabet Alcocer-Gómez; Cristiano Alessandri; Muhammad Ali; M Abdul Alim Al-Bari; Saeb Aliwaini; Javad Alizadeh; Eugènia Almacellas; Alexandru Almasan; Alicia Alonso; Guillermo D Alonso; Nihal Altan-Bonnet; Dario C Altieri; Élida M C Álvarez; Sara Alves; Cristine Alves da Costa; Mazen M Alzaharna; Marialaura Amadio; Consuelo Amantini; Cristina Amaral; Susanna Ambrosio; Amal O Amer; Veena Ammanathan; Zhenyi An; Stig U Andersen; Shaida A Andrabi; Magaiver Andrade-Silva; Allen M Andres; Sabrina Angelini; David Ann; Uche C Anozie; Mohammad Y Ansari; Pedro Antas; Adam Antebi; Zuriñe Antón; Tahira Anwar; Lionel Apetoh; Nadezda Apostolova; Toshiyuki Araki; Yasuhiro Araki; Kohei Arasaki; Wagner L Araújo; Jun Araya; Catherine Arden; Maria-Angeles Arévalo; Sandro Arguelles; Esperanza Arias; Jyothi Arikkath; Hirokazu Arimoto; Aileen R Ariosa; Darius Armstrong-James; Laetitia Arnauné-Pelloquin; Angeles Aroca; Daniela S Arroyo; Ivica Arsov; Rubén Artero; Dalia Maria Lucia Asaro; Michael Aschner; Milad Ashrafizadeh; Osnat Ashur-Fabian; Atanas G Atanasov; Alicia K Au; Patrick Auberger; Holger W Auner; Laure Aurelian; Riccardo Autelli; Laura Avagliano; Yenniffer Ávalos; Sanja Aveic; Célia Alexandra Aveleira; Tamar Avin-Wittenberg; Yucel Aydin; Scott Ayton; Srinivas Ayyadevara; Maria Azzopardi; Misuzu Baba; Jonathan M Backer; Steven K Backues; Dong-Hun Bae; Ok-Nam Bae; Soo Han Bae; Eric H Baehrecke; Ahruem Baek; Seung-Hoon Baek; Sung Hee Baek; Giacinto Bagetta; Agnieszka Bagniewska-Zadworna; Hua Bai; Jie Bai; Xiyuan Bai; Yidong Bai; Nandadulal Bairagi; Shounak Baksi; Teresa Balbi; Cosima T Baldari; Walter Balduini; Andrea Ballabio; Maria Ballester; Salma Balazadeh; Rena Balzan; Rina Bandopadhyay; Sreeparna Banerjee; Sulagna Banerjee; Ágnes Bánréti; Yan Bao; Mauricio S Baptista; Alessandra Baracca; Cristiana Barbati; Ariadna Bargiela; Daniela Barilà; Peter G Barlow; Sami J Barmada; Esther Barreiro; George E Barreto; Jiri Bartek; Bonnie Bartel; Alberto Bartolome; Gaurav R Barve; Suresh H Basagoudanavar; Diane C Bassham; Robert C Bast; Alakananda Basu; Henri Batoko; Isabella Batten; Etienne E Baulieu; Bradley L Baumgarner; Jagadeesh Bayry; Rupert Beale; Isabelle Beau; Florian Beaumatin; Luiz R G Bechara; George R Beck; Michael F Beers; Jakob Begun; Christian Behrends; Georg M N Behrens; Roberto Bei; Eloy Bejarano; Shai Bel; Christian Behl; Amine Belaid; Naïma Belgareh-Touzé; Cristina Bellarosa; Francesca Belleudi; Melissa Belló Pérez; Raquel Bello-Morales; Jackeline Soares de Oliveira Beltran; Sebastián Beltran; Doris Mangiaracina Benbrook; Mykolas Bendorius; Bruno A Benitez; Irene Benito-Cuesta; Julien Bensalem; Martin W Berchtold; Sabina Berezowska; Daniele Bergamaschi; Matteo Bergami; Andreas Bergmann; Laura Berliocchi; Clarisse Berlioz-Torrent; Amélie Bernard; Lionel Berthoux; Cagri G Besirli; Sebastien Besteiro; Virginie M Betin; Rudi Beyaert; Jelena S Bezbradica; Kiran Bhaskar; Ingrid Bhatia-Kissova; Resham Bhattacharya; Sujoy Bhattacharya; Shalmoli Bhattacharyya; Md Shenuarin Bhuiyan; Sujit Kumar Bhutia; Lanrong Bi; Xiaolin Bi; Trevor J Biden; Krikor Bijian; Viktor A Billes; Nadine Binart; Claudia Bincoletto; Asa B Birgisdottir; Geir Bjorkoy; Gonzalo Blanco; Ana Blas-Garcia; Janusz Blasiak; Robert Blomgran; Klas Blomgren; Janice S Blum; Emilio Boada-Romero; Mirta Boban; Kathleen Boesze-Battaglia; Philippe Boeuf; Barry Boland; Pascale Bomont; Paolo Bonaldo; Srinivasa Reddy Bonam; Laura Bonfili; Juan S Bonifacino; Brian A Boone; Martin D Bootman; Matteo Bordi; Christoph Borner; Beat C Bornhauser; Gautam Borthakur; Jürgen Bosch; Santanu Bose; Luis M Botana; Juan Botas; Chantal M Boulanger; Michael E Boulton; Mathieu Bourdenx; Benjamin Bourgeois; Nollaig M Bourke; Guilhem Bousquet; Patricia Boya; Peter V Bozhkov; Luiz H M Bozi; Tolga O Bozkurt; Doug E Brackney; Christian H Brandts; Ralf J Braun; Gerhard H Braus; Roberto Bravo-Sagua; José M Bravo-San Pedro; Patrick Brest; Marie-Agnès Bringer; Alfredo Briones-Herrera; V Courtney Broaddus; Peter Brodersen; Jeffrey L Brodsky; Steven L Brody; Paola G Bronson; Jeff M Bronstein; Carolyn N Brown; Rhoderick E Brown; Patricia C Brum; John H Brumell; Nicola Brunetti-Pierri; Daniele Bruno; Robert J Bryson-Richardson; Cecilia Bucci; Carmen Buchrieser; Marta Bueno; Laura Elisa Buitrago-Molina; Simone Buraschi; Shilpa Buch; J Ross Buchan; Erin M Buckingham; Hikmet Budak; Mauricio Budini; Geert Bultynck; Florin Burada; Joseph R Burgoyne; M Isabel Burón; Victor Bustos; Sabrina Büttner; Elena Butturini; Aaron Byrd; Isabel Cabas; Sandra Cabrera-Benitez; Ken Cadwell; Jingjing Cai; Lu Cai; Qian Cai; Montserrat Cairó; Jose A Calbet; Guy A Caldwell; Kim A Caldwell; Jarrod A Call; Riccardo Calvani; Ana C Calvo; Miguel Calvo-Rubio Barrera; Niels Os Camara; Jacques H Camonis; Nadine Camougrand; Michelangelo Campanella; Edward M Campbell; François-Xavier Campbell-Valois; Silvia Campello; Ilaria Campesi; Juliane C Campos; Olivier Camuzard; Jorge Cancino; Danilo Candido de Almeida; Laura Canesi; Isabella Caniggia; Barbara Canonico; Carles Cantí; Bin Cao; Michele Caraglia; Beatriz Caramés; Evie H Carchman; Elena Cardenal-Muñoz; Cesar Cardenas; Luis Cardenas; Sandra M Cardoso; Jennifer S Carew; Georges F Carle; Gillian Carleton; Silvia Carloni; Didac Carmona-Gutierrez; Leticia A Carneiro; Oliana Carnevali; Julian M Carosi; Serena Carra; Alice Carrier; Lucie Carrier; Bernadette Carroll; A Brent Carter; Andreia Neves Carvalho; Magali Casanova; Caty Casas; Josefina Casas; Chiara Cassioli; Eliseo F Castillo; Karen Castillo; Sonia Castillo-Lluva; Francesca Castoldi; Marco Castori; Ariel F Castro; Margarida Castro-Caldas; Javier Castro-Hernandez; Susana Castro-Obregon; Sergio D Catz; Claudia Cavadas; Federica Cavaliere; Gabriella Cavallini; Maria Cavinato; Maria L Cayuela; Paula Cebollada Rica; Valentina Cecarini; Francesco Cecconi; Marzanna Cechowska-Pasko; Simone Cenci; Victòria Ceperuelo-Mallafré; João J Cerqueira; Janete M Cerutti; Davide Cervia; Vildan Bozok Cetintas; Silvia Cetrullo; Han-Jung Chae; Andrei S Chagin; Chee-Yin Chai; Gopal Chakrabarti; Oishee Chakrabarti; Tapas Chakraborty; Trinad Chakraborty; Mounia Chami; Georgios Chamilos; David W Chan; Edmond Y W Chan; Edward D Chan; H Y Edwin Chan; Helen H Chan; Hung Chan; Matthew T V Chan; Yau Sang Chan; Partha K Chandra; Chih-Peng Chang; Chunmei Chang; Hao-Chun Chang; Kai Chang; Jie Chao; Tracey Chapman; Nicolas Charlet-Berguerand; Samrat Chatterjee; Shail K Chaube; Anu Chaudhary; Santosh Chauhan; Edward Chaum; Frédéric Checler; Michael E Cheetham; Chang-Shi Chen; Guang-Chao Chen; Jian-Fu Chen; Liam L Chen; Leilei Chen; Lin Chen; Mingliang Chen; Mu-Kuan Chen; Ning Chen; Quan Chen; Ruey-Hwa Chen; Shi Chen; Wei Chen; Weiqiang Chen; Xin-Ming Chen; Xiong-Wen Chen; Xu Chen; Yan Chen; Ye-Guang Chen; Yingyu Chen; Yongqiang Chen; Yu-Jen Chen; Yue-Qin Chen; Zhefan Stephen Chen; Zhi Chen; Zhi-Hua Chen; Zhijian J Chen; Zhixiang Chen; Hanhua Cheng; Jun Cheng; Shi-Yuan Cheng; Wei Cheng; Xiaodong Cheng; Xiu-Tang Cheng; Yiyun Cheng; Zhiyong Cheng; Zhong Chen; Heesun Cheong; Jit Kong Cheong; Boris V Chernyak; Sara Cherry; Chi Fai Randy Cheung; Chun Hei Antonio Cheung; King-Ho Cheung; Eric Chevet; Richard J Chi; Alan Kwok Shing Chiang; Ferdinando Chiaradonna; Roberto Chiarelli; Mario Chiariello; Nathalia Chica; Susanna Chiocca; Mario Chiong; Shih-Hwa Chiou; Abhilash I Chiramel; Valerio Chiurchiù; Dong-Hyung Cho; Seong-Kyu Choe; Augustine M K Choi; Mary E Choi; Kamalika Roy Choudhury; Norman S Chow; Charleen T Chu; Jason P Chua; John Jia En Chua; Hyewon Chung; Kin Pan Chung; Seockhoon Chung; So-Hyang Chung; Yuen-Li Chung; Valentina Cianfanelli; Iwona A Ciechomska; Mariana Cifuentes; Laura Cinque; Sebahattin Cirak; Mara Cirone; Michael J Clague; Robert Clarke; Emilio Clementi; Eliana M Coccia; Patrice Codogno; Ehud Cohen; Mickael M Cohen; Tania Colasanti; Fiorella Colasuonno; Robert A Colbert; Anna Colell; Miodrag Čolić; Nuria S Coll; Mark O Collins; María I Colombo; Daniel A Colón-Ramos; Lydie Combaret; Sergio Comincini; Márcia R Cominetti; Antonella Consiglio; Andrea Conte; Fabrizio Conti; Viorica Raluca Contu; Mark R Cookson; Kevin M Coombs; Isabelle Coppens; Maria Tiziana Corasaniti; Dale P Corkery; Nils Cordes; Katia Cortese; Maria do Carmo Costa; Sarah Costantino; Paola Costelli; Ana Coto-Montes; Peter J Crack; Jose L Crespo; Alfredo Criollo; Valeria Crippa; Riccardo Cristofani; Tamas Csizmadia; Antonio Cuadrado; Bing Cui; Jun Cui; Yixian Cui; Yong Cui; Emmanuel Culetto; Andrea C Cumino; Andrey V Cybulsky; Mark J Czaja; Stanislaw J Czuczwar; Stefania D'Adamo; Marcello D'Amelio; Daniela D'Arcangelo; Andrew C D'Lugos; Gabriella D'Orazi; James A da Silva; Hormos Salimi Dafsari; Ruben K Dagda; Yasin Dagdas; Maria Daglia; Xiaoxia Dai; Yun Dai; Yuyuan Dai; Jessica Dal Col; Paul Dalhaimer; Luisa Dalla Valle; Tobias Dallenga; Guillaume Dalmasso; Markus Damme; Ilaria Dando; Nico P Dantuma; April L Darling; Hiranmoy Das; Srinivasan Dasarathy; Santosh K Dasari; Srikanta Dash; Oliver Daumke; Adrian N Dauphinee; Jeffrey S Davies; Valeria A Dávila; Roger J Davis; Tanja Davis; Sharadha Dayalan Naidu; Francesca De Amicis; Karolien De Bosscher; Francesca De Felice; Lucia De Franceschi; Chiara De Leonibus; Mayara G de Mattos Barbosa; Guido R Y De Meyer; Angelo De Milito; Cosimo De Nunzio; Clara De Palma; Mauro De Santi; Claudio De Virgilio; Daniela De Zio; Jayanta Debnath; Brian J DeBosch; Jean-Paul Decuypere; Mark A Deehan; Gianluca Deflorian; James DeGregori; Benjamin Dehay; Gabriel Del Rio; Joe R Delaney; Lea M D Delbridge; Elizabeth Delorme-Axford; M Victoria Delpino; Francesca Demarchi; Vilma Dembitz; Nicholas D Demers; Hongbin Deng; Zhiqiang Deng; Joern Dengjel; Paul Dent; Donna Denton; Melvin L DePamphilis; Channing J Der; Vojo Deretic; Albert Descoteaux; Laura Devis; Sushil Devkota; Olivier Devuyst; Grant Dewson; Mahendiran Dharmasivam; Rohan Dhiman; Diego di Bernardo; Manlio Di Cristina; Fabio Di Domenico; Pietro Di Fazio; Alessio Di Fonzo; Giovanni Di Guardo; Gianni M Di Guglielmo; Luca Di Leo; Chiara Di Malta; Alessia Di Nardo; Martina Di Rienzo; Federica Di Sano; George Diallinas; Jiajie Diao; Guillermo Diaz-Araya; Inés Díaz-Laviada; Jared M Dickinson; Marc Diederich; Mélanie Dieudé; Ivan Dikic; Shiping Ding; Wen-Xing Ding; Luciana Dini; Jelena Dinić; Miroslav Dinic; Albena T Dinkova-Kostova; Marc S Dionne; Jörg H W Distler; Abhinav Diwan; Ian M C Dixon; Mojgan Djavaheri-Mergny; Ina Dobrinski; Oxana Dobrovinskaya; Radek Dobrowolski; Renwick C J Dobson; Jelena Đokić; Serap Dokmeci Emre; Massimo Donadelli; Bo Dong; Xiaonan Dong; Zhiwu Dong; Gerald W Dorn Ii; Volker Dotsch; Huan Dou; Juan Dou; Moataz Dowaidar; Sami Dridi; Liat Drucker; Ailian Du; Caigan Du; Guangwei Du; Hai-Ning Du; Li-Lin Du; André du Toit; Shao-Bin Duan; Xiaoqiong Duan; Sónia P Duarte; Anna Dubrovska; Elaine A Dunlop; Nicolas Dupont; Raúl V Durán; Bilikere S Dwarakanath; Sergey A Dyshlovoy; Darius Ebrahimi-Fakhari; Leopold Eckhart; Charles L Edelstein; Thomas Efferth; Eftekhar Eftekharpour; Ludwig Eichinger; Nabil Eid; Tobias Eisenberg; N Tony Eissa; Sanaa Eissa; Miriam Ejarque; Abdeljabar El Andaloussi; Nazira El-Hage; Shahenda El-Naggar; Anna Maria Eleuteri; Eman S El-Shafey; Mohamed Elgendy; Aristides G Eliopoulos; María M Elizalde; Philip M Elks; Hans-Peter Elsasser; Eslam S Elsherbiny; Brooke M Emerling; N C Tolga Emre; Christina H Eng; Nikolai Engedal; Anna-Mart Engelbrecht; Agnete S T Engelsen; Jorrit M Enserink; Ricardo Escalante; Audrey Esclatine; Mafalda Escobar-Henriques; Eeva-Liisa Eskelinen; Lucile Espert; Makandjou-Ola Eusebio; Gemma Fabrias; Cinzia Fabrizi; Antonio Facchiano; Francesco Facchiano; Bengt Fadeel; Claudio Fader; Alex C Faesen; W Douglas Fairlie; Alberto Falcó; Bjorn H Falkenburger; Daping Fan; Jie Fan; Yanbo Fan; Evandro F Fang; Yanshan Fang; Yognqi Fang; Manolis Fanto; Tamar Farfel-Becker; Mathias Faure; Gholamreza Fazeli; Anthony O Fedele; Arthur M Feldman; Du Feng; Jiachun Feng; Lifeng Feng; Yibin Feng; Yuchen Feng; Wei Feng; Thais Fenz Araujo; Thomas A Ferguson; Álvaro F Fernández; Jose C Fernandez-Checa; Sonia Fernández-Veledo; Alisdair R Fernie; Anthony W Ferrante; Alessandra Ferraresi; Merari F Ferrari; Julio C B Ferreira; Susan Ferro-Novick; Antonio Figueras; Riccardo Filadi; Nicoletta Filigheddu; Eduardo Filippi-Chiela; Giuseppe Filomeni; Gian Maria Fimia; Vittorio Fineschi; Francesca Finetti; Steven Finkbeiner; Edward A Fisher; Paul B Fisher; Flavio Flamigni; Steven J Fliesler; Trude H Flo; Ida Florance; Oliver Florey; Tullio Florio; Erika Fodor; Carlo Follo; Edward A Fon; Antonella Forlino; Francesco Fornai; Paola Fortini; Anna Fracassi; Alessandro Fraldi; Brunella Franco; Rodrigo Franco; Flavia Franconi; Lisa B Frankel; Scott L Friedman; Leopold F Fröhlich; Gema Frühbeck; Jose M Fuentes; Yukio Fujiki; Naonobu Fujita; Yuuki Fujiwara; Mitsunori Fukuda; Simone Fulda; Luc Furic; Norihiko Furuya; Carmela Fusco; Michaela U Gack; Lidia Gaffke; Sehamuddin Galadari; Alessia Galasso; Maria F Galindo; Sachith Gallolu Kankanamalage; Lorenzo Galluzzi; Vincent Galy; Noor Gammoh; Boyi Gan; Ian G Ganley; Feng Gao; Hui Gao; Minghui Gao; Ping Gao; Shou-Jiang Gao; Wentao Gao; Xiaobo Gao; Ana Garcera; Maria Noé Garcia; Verónica E Garcia; Francisco García-Del Portillo; Vega Garcia-Escudero; Aracely Garcia-Garcia; Marina Garcia-Macia; Diana García-Moreno; Carmen Garcia-Ruiz; Patricia García-Sanz; Abhishek D Garg; Ricardo Gargini; Tina Garofalo; Robert F Garry; Nils C Gassen; Damian Gatica; Liang Ge; Wanzhong Ge; Ruth Geiss-Friedlander; Cecilia Gelfi; Pascal Genschik; Ian E Gentle; Valeria Gerbino; Christoph Gerhardt; Kyla Germain; Marc Germain; David A Gewirtz; Elham Ghasemipour Afshar; Saeid Ghavami; Alessandra Ghigo; Manosij Ghosh; Georgios Giamas; Claudia Giampietri; Alexandra Giatromanolaki; Gary E Gibson; Spencer B Gibson; Vanessa Ginet; Edward Giniger; Carlotta Giorgi; Henrique Girao; Stephen E Girardin; Mridhula Giridharan; Sandy Giuliano; Cecilia Giulivi; Sylvie Giuriato; Julien Giustiniani; Alexander Gluschko; Veit Goder; Alexander Goginashvili; Jakub Golab; David C Goldstone; Anna Golebiewska; Luciana R Gomes; Rodrigo Gomez; Rubén Gómez-Sánchez; Maria Catalina Gomez-Puerto; Raquel Gomez-Sintes; Qingqiu Gong; Felix M Goni; Javier González-Gallego; Tomas Gonzalez-Hernandez; Rosa A Gonzalez-Polo; Jose A Gonzalez-Reyes; Patricia González-Rodríguez; Ing Swie Goping; Marina S Gorbatyuk; Nikolai V Gorbunov; Kıvanç Görgülü; Roxana M Gorojod; Sharon M Gorski; Sandro Goruppi; Cecilia Gotor; Roberta A Gottlieb; Illana Gozes; Devrim Gozuacik; Martin Graef; Markus H Gräler; Veronica Granatiero; Daniel Grasso; Joshua P Gray; Douglas R Green; Alexander Greenhough; Stephen L Gregory; Edward F Griffin; Mark W Grinstaff; Frederic Gros; Charles Grose; Angelina S Gross; Florian Gruber; Paolo Grumati; Tilman Grune; Xueyan Gu; Jun-Lin Guan; Carlos M Guardia; Kishore Guda; Flora Guerra; Consuelo Guerri; Prasun Guha; Carlos Guillén; Shashi Gujar; Anna Gukovskaya; Ilya Gukovsky; Jan Gunst; Andreas Günther; Anyonya R Guntur; Chuanyong Guo; Chun Guo; Hongqing Guo; Lian-Wang Guo; Ming Guo; Pawan Gupta; Shashi Kumar Gupta; Swapnil Gupta; Veer Bala Gupta; Vivek Gupta; Asa B Gustafsson; David D Gutterman; Ranjitha H B; Annakaisa Haapasalo; James E Haber; Aleksandra Hać; Shinji Hadano; Anders J Hafrén; Mansour Haidar; Belinda S Hall; Gunnel Halldén; Anne Hamacher-Brady; Andrea Hamann; Maho Hamasaki; Weidong Han; Malene Hansen; Phyllis I Hanson; Zijian Hao; Masaru Harada; Ljubica Harhaji-Trajkovic; Nirmala Hariharan; Nigil Haroon; James Harris; Takafumi Hasegawa; Noor Hasima Nagoor; Jeffrey A Haspel; Volker Haucke; Wayne D Hawkins; Bruce A Hay; Cole M Haynes; Soren B Hayrabedyan; Thomas S Hays; Congcong He; Qin He; Rong-Rong He; You-Wen He; Yu-Ying He; Yasser Heakal; Alexander M Heberle; J Fielding Hejtmancik; Gudmundur Vignir Helgason; Vanessa Henkel; Marc Herb; Alexander Hergovich; Anna Herman-Antosiewicz; Agustín Hernández; Carlos Hernandez; Sergio Hernandez-Diaz; Virginia Hernandez-Gea; Amaury Herpin; Judit Herreros; Javier H Hervás; Daniel Hesselson; Claudio Hetz; Volker T Heussler; Yujiro Higuchi; Sabine Hilfiker; Joseph A Hill; William S Hlavacek; Emmanuel A Ho; Idy H T Ho; Philip Wing-Lok Ho; Shu-Leong Ho; Wan Yun Ho; G Aaron Hobbs; Mark Hochstrasser; Peter H M Hoet; Daniel Hofius; Paul Hofman; Annika Höhn; Carina I Holmberg; Jose R Hombrebueno; Chang-Won Hong Yi-Ren Hong; Lora V Hooper; Thorsten Hoppe; Rastislav Horos; Yujin Hoshida; I-Lun Hsin; Hsin-Yun Hsu; Bing Hu; Dong Hu; Li-Fang Hu; Ming Chang Hu; Ronggui Hu; Wei Hu; Yu-Chen Hu; Zhuo-Wei Hu; Fang Hua; Jinlian Hua; Yingqi Hua; Chongmin Huan; Canhua Huang; Chuanshu Huang; Chuanxin Huang; Chunling Huang; Haishan Huang; Kun Huang; Michael L H Huang; Rui Huang; Shan Huang; Tianzhi Huang; Xing Huang; Yuxiang Jack Huang; Tobias B Huber; Virginie Hubert; Christian A Hubner; Stephanie M Hughes; William E Hughes; Magali Humbert; Gerhard Hummer; James H Hurley; Sabah Hussain; Salik Hussain; Patrick J Hussey; Martina Hutabarat; Hui-Yun Hwang; Seungmin Hwang; Antonio Ieni; Fumiyo Ikeda; Yusuke Imagawa; Yuzuru Imai; Carol Imbriano; Masaya Imoto; Denise M Inman; Ken Inoki; Juan Iovanna; Renato V Iozzo; Giuseppe Ippolito; Javier E Irazoqui; Pablo Iribarren; Mohd Ishaq; Makoto Ishikawa; Nestor Ishimwe; Ciro Isidoro; Nahed Ismail; Shohreh Issazadeh-Navikas; Eisuke Itakura; Daisuke Ito; Davor Ivankovic; Saška Ivanova; Anand Krishnan V Iyer; José M Izquierdo; Masanori Izumi; Marja Jäättelä; Majid Sakhi Jabir; William T Jackson; Nadia Jacobo-Herrera; Anne-Claire Jacomin; Elise Jacquin; Pooja Jadiya; Hartmut Jaeschke; Chinnaswamy Jagannath; Arjen J Jakobi; Johan Jakobsson; Bassam Janji; Pidder Jansen-Dürr; Patric J Jansson; Jonathan Jantsch; Sławomir Januszewski; Alagie Jassey; Steve Jean; Hélène Jeltsch-David; Pavla Jendelova; Andreas Jenny; Thomas E Jensen; Niels Jessen; Jenna L Jewell; Jing Ji; Lijun Jia; Rui Jia; Liwen Jiang; Qing Jiang; Richeng Jiang; Teng Jiang; Xuejun Jiang; Yu Jiang; Maria Jimenez-Sanchez; Eun-Jung Jin; Fengyan Jin; Hongchuan Jin; Li Jin; Luqi Jin; Meiyan Jin; Si Jin; Eun-Kyeong Jo; Carine Joffre; Terje Johansen; Gail V W Johnson; Simon A Johnston; Eija Jokitalo; Mohit Kumar Jolly; Leo A B Joosten; Joaquin Jordan; Bertrand Joseph; Dianwen Ju; Jeong-Sun Ju; Jingfang Ju; Esmeralda Juárez; Delphine Judith; Gábor Juhász; Youngsoo Jun; Chang Hwa Jung; Sung-Chul Jung; Yong Keun Jung; Heinz Jungbluth; Johannes Jungverdorben; Steffen Just; Kai Kaarniranta; Allen Kaasik; Tomohiro Kabuta; Daniel Kaganovich; Alon Kahana; Renate Kain; Shinjo Kajimura; Maria Kalamvoki; Manjula Kalia; Danuta S Kalinowski; Nina Kaludercic; Ioanna Kalvari; Joanna Kaminska; Vitaliy O Kaminskyy; Hiromitsu Kanamori; Keizo Kanasaki; Chanhee Kang; Rui Kang; Sang Sun Kang; Senthilvelrajan Kaniyappan; Tomotake Kanki; Thirumala-Devi Kanneganti; Anumantha G Kanthasamy; Arthi Kanthasamy; Marc Kantorow; Orsolya Kapuy; Michalis V Karamouzis; Md Razaul Karim; Parimal Karmakar; Rajesh G Katare; Masaru Kato; Stefan H E Kaufmann; Anu Kauppinen; Gur P Kaushal; Susmita Kaushik; Kiyoshi Kawasaki; Kemal Kazan; Po-Yuan Ke; Damien J Keating; Ursula Keber; John H Kehrl; Kate E Keller; Christian W Keller; Jongsook Kim Kemper; Candia M Kenific; Oliver Kepp; Stephanie Kermorgant; Andreas Kern; Robin Ketteler; Tom G Keulers; Boris Khalfin; Hany Khalil; Bilon Khambu; Shahid Y Khan; Vinoth Kumar Megraj Khandelwal; Rekha Khandia; Widuri Kho; Noopur V Khobrekar; Sataree Khuansuwan; Mukhran Khundadze; Samuel A Killackey; Dasol Kim; Deok Ryong Kim; Do-Hyung Kim; Dong-Eun Kim; Eun Young Kim; Eun-Kyoung Kim; Hak-Rim Kim; Hee-Sik Kim; Jeong Hun Kim; Jin Kyung Kim; Jin-Hoi Kim; Joungmok Kim; Ju Hwan Kim; Keun Il Kim; Peter K Kim; Seong-Jun Kim; Scot R Kimball; Adi Kimchi; Alec C Kimmelman; Tomonori Kimura; Matthew A King; Kerri J Kinghorn; Conan G Kinsey; Vladimir Kirkin; Lorrie A Kirshenbaum; Sergey L Kiselev; Shuji Kishi; Katsuhiko Kitamoto; Yasushi Kitaoka; Kaio Kitazato; Richard N Kitsis; Josef T Kittler; Ole Kjaerulff; Peter S Klein; Thomas Klopstock; Jochen Klucken; Helene Knævelsrud; Roland L Knorr; Ben C B Ko; Fred Ko; Jiunn-Liang Ko; Hotaka Kobayashi; Satoru Kobayashi; Ina Koch; Jan C Koch; Ulrich Koenig; Donat Kögel; Young Ho Koh; Masato Koike; Sepp D Kohlwein; Nur M Kocaturk; Masaaki Komatsu; Jeannette König; Toru Kono; Benjamin T Kopp; Tamas Korcsmaros; Gözde Korkmaz; Viktor I Korolchuk; Mónica Suárez Korsnes; Ali Koskela; Janaiah Kota; Yaichiro Kotake; Monica L Kotler; Yanjun Kou; Michael I Koukourakis; Evangelos Koustas; Attila L Kovacs; Tibor Kovács; Daisuke Koya; Tomohiro Kozako; Claudine Kraft; Dimitri Krainc; Helmut Krämer; Anna D Krasnodembskaya; Carole Kretz-Remy; Guido Kroemer; Nicholas T Ktistakis; Kazuyuki Kuchitsu; Sabine Kuenen; Lars Kuerschner; Thomas Kukar; Ajay Kumar; Ashok Kumar; Deepak Kumar; Dhiraj Kumar; Sharad Kumar; Shinji Kume; Caroline Kumsta; Chanakya N Kundu; Mondira Kundu; Ajaikumar B Kunnumakkara; Lukasz Kurgan; Tatiana G Kutateladze; Ozlem Kutlu; SeongAe Kwak; Ho Jeong Kwon; Taeg Kyu Kwon; Yong Tae Kwon; Irene Kyrmizi; Albert La Spada; Patrick Labonté; Sylvain Ladoire; Ilaria Laface; Frank Lafont; Diane C Lagace; Vikramjit Lahiri; Zhibing Lai; Angela S Laird; Aparna Lakkaraju; Trond Lamark; Sheng-Hui Lan; Ane Landajuela; Darius J R Lane; Jon D Lane; Charles H Lang; Carsten Lange; Ülo Langel; Rupert Langer; Pierre Lapaquette; Jocelyn Laporte; Nicholas F LaRusso; Isabel Lastres-Becker; Wilson Chun Yu Lau; Gordon W Laurie; Sergio Lavandero; Betty Yuen Kwan Law; Helen Ka-Wai Law; Rob Layfield; Weidong Le; Herve Le Stunff; Alexandre Y Leary; Jean-Jacques Lebrun; Lionel Y W Leck; Jean-Philippe Leduc-Gaudet; Changwook Lee; Chung-Pei Lee; Da-Hye Lee; Edward B Lee; Erinna F Lee; Gyun Min Lee; He-Jin Lee; Heung Kyu Lee; Jae Man Lee; Jason S Lee; Jin-A Lee; Joo-Yong Lee; Jun Hee Lee; Michael Lee; Min Goo Lee; Min Jae Lee; Myung-Shik Lee; Sang Yoon Lee; Seung-Jae Lee; Stella Y Lee; Sung Bae Lee; Won Hee Lee; Ying-Ray Lee; Yong-Ho Lee; Youngil Lee; Christophe Lefebvre; Renaud Legouis; Yu L Lei; Yuchen Lei; Sergey Leikin; Gerd Leitinger; Leticia Lemus; Shuilong Leng; Olivia Lenoir; Guido Lenz; Heinz Josef Lenz; Paola Lenzi; Yolanda León; Andréia M Leopoldino; Christoph Leschczyk; Stina Leskelä; Elisabeth Letellier; Chi-Ting Leung; Po Sing Leung; Jeremy S Leventhal; Beth Levine; Patrick A Lewis; Klaus Ley; Bin Li; Da-Qiang Li; Jianming Li; Jing Li; Jiong Li; Ke Li; Liwu Li; Mei Li; Min Li; Min Li; Ming Li; Mingchuan Li; Pin-Lan Li; Ming-Qing Li; Qing Li; Sheng Li; Tiangang Li; Wei Li; Wenming Li; Xue Li; Yi-Ping Li; Yuan Li; Zhiqiang Li; Zhiyong Li; Zhiyuan Li; Jiqin Lian; Chengyu Liang; Qiangrong Liang; Weicheng Liang; Yongheng Liang; YongTian Liang; Guanghong Liao; Lujian Liao; Mingzhi Liao; Yung-Feng Liao; Mariangela Librizzi; Pearl P Y Lie; Mary A Lilly; Hyunjung J Lim; Thania R R Lima; Federica Limana; Chao Lin; Chih-Wen Lin; Dar-Shong Lin; Fu-Cheng Lin; Jiandie D Lin; Kurt M Lin; Kwang-Huei Lin; Liang-Tzung Lin; Pei-Hui Lin; Qiong Lin; Shaofeng Lin; Su-Ju Lin; Wenyu Lin; Xueying Lin; Yao-Xin Lin; Yee-Shin Lin; Rafael Linden; Paula Lindner; Shuo-Chien Ling; Paul Lingor; Amelia K Linnemann; Yih-Cherng Liou; Marta M Lipinski; Saška Lipovšek; Vitor A Lira; Natalia Lisiak; Paloma B Liton; Chao Liu; Ching-Hsuan Liu; Chun-Feng Liu; Cui Hua Liu; Fang Liu; Hao Liu; Hsiao-Sheng Liu; Hua-Feng Liu; Huifang Liu; Jia Liu; Jing Liu; Julia Liu; Leyuan Liu; Longhua Liu; Meilian Liu; Qin Liu; Wei Liu; Wende Liu; Xiao-Hong Liu; Xiaodong Liu; Xingguo Liu; Xu Liu; Xuedong Liu; Yanfen Liu; Yang Liu; Yang Liu; Yueyang Liu; Yule Liu; J Andrew Livingston; Gerard Lizard; Jose M Lizcano; Senka Ljubojevic-Holzer; Matilde E LLeonart; David Llobet-Navàs; Alicia Llorente; Chih Hung Lo; Damián Lobato-Márquez; Qi Long; Yun Chau Long; Ben Loos; Julia A Loos; Manuela G López; Guillermo López-Doménech; José Antonio López-Guerrero; Ana T López-Jiménez; Óscar López-Pérez; Israel López-Valero; Magdalena J Lorenowicz; Mar Lorente; Peter Lorincz; Laura Lossi; Sophie Lotersztajn; Penny E Lovat; Jonathan F Lovell; Alenka Lovy; Péter Lőw; Guang Lu; Haocheng Lu; Jia-Hong Lu; Jin-Jian Lu; Mengji Lu; Shuyan Lu; Alessandro Luciani; John M Lucocq; Paula Ludovico; Micah A Luftig; Morten Luhr; Diego Luis-Ravelo; Julian J Lum; Liany Luna-Dulcey; Anders H Lund; Viktor K Lund; Jan D Lünemann; Patrick Lüningschrör; Honglin Luo; Rongcan Luo; Shouqing Luo; Zhi Luo; Claudio Luparello; Bernhard Lüscher; Luan Luu; Alex Lyakhovich; Konstantin G Lyamzaev; Alf Håkon Lystad; Lyubomyr Lytvynchuk; Alvin C Ma; Changle Ma; Mengxiao Ma; Ning-Fang Ma; Quan-Hong Ma; Xinliang Ma; Yueyun Ma; Zhenyi Ma; Ormond A MacDougald; Fernando Macian; Gustavo C MacIntosh; Jeffrey P MacKeigan; Kay F Macleod; Sandra Maday; Frank Madeo; Muniswamy Madesh; Tobias Madl; Julio Madrigal-Matute; Akiko Maeda; Yasuhiro Maejima; Marta Magarinos; Poornima Mahavadi; Emiliano Maiani; Kenneth Maiese; Panchanan Maiti; Maria Chiara Maiuri; Barbara Majello; Michael B Major; Elena Makareeva; Fayaz Malik; Karthik Mallilankaraman; Walter Malorni; Alina Maloyan; Najiba Mammadova; Gene Chi Wai Man; Federico Manai; Joseph D Mancias; Eva-Maria Mandelkow; Michael A Mandell; Angelo A Manfredi; Masoud H Manjili; Ravi Manjithaya; Patricio Manque; Bella B Manshian; Raquel Manzano; Claudia Manzoni; Kai Mao; Cinzia Marchese; Sandrine Marchetti; Anna Maria Marconi; Fabrizio Marcucci; Stefania Mardente; Olga A Mareninova; Marta Margeta; Muriel Mari; Sara Marinelli; Oliviero Marinelli; Guillermo Mariño; Sofia Mariotto; Richard S Marshall; Mark R Marten; Sascha Martens; Alexandre P J Martin; Katie R Martin; Sara Martin; Shaun Martin; Adrián Martín-Segura; Miguel A Martín-Acebes; Inmaculada Martin-Burriel; Marcos Martin-Rincon; Paloma Martin-Sanz; José A Martina; Wim Martinet; Aitor Martinez; Ana Martinez; Jennifer Martinez; Moises Martinez Velazquez; Nuria Martinez-Lopez; Marta Martinez-Vicente; Daniel O Martins; Joilson O Martins; Waleska K Martins; Tania Martins-Marques; Emanuele Marzetti; Shashank Masaldan; Celine Masclaux-Daubresse; Douglas G Mashek; Valentina Massa; Lourdes Massieu; Glenn R Masson; Laura Masuelli; Anatoliy I Masyuk; Tetyana V Masyuk; Paola Matarrese; Ander Matheu; Satoaki Matoba; Sachiko Matsuzaki; Pamela Mattar; Alessandro Matte; Domenico Mattoscio; José L Mauriz; Mario Mauthe; Caroline Mauvezin; Emanual Maverakis; Paola Maycotte; Johanna Mayer; Gianluigi Mazzoccoli; Cristina Mazzoni; Joseph R Mazzulli; Nami McCarty; Christine McDonald; Mitchell R McGill; Sharon L McKenna; BethAnn McLaughlin; Fionn McLoughlin; Mark A McNiven; Thomas G McWilliams; Fatima Mechta-Grigoriou; Tania Catarina Medeiros; Diego L Medina; Lynn A Megeney; Klara Megyeri; Maryam Mehrpour; Jawahar L Mehta; Alfred J Meijer; Annemarie H Meijer; Jakob Mejlvang; Alicia Meléndez; Annette Melk; Gonen Memisoglu; Alexandrina F Mendes; Delong Meng; Fei Meng; Tian Meng; Rubem Menna-Barreto; Manoj B Menon; Carol Mercer; Anne E Mercier; Jean-Louis Mergny; Adalberto Merighi; Seth D Merkley; Giuseppe Merla; Volker Meske; Ana Cecilia Mestre; Shree Padma Metur; Christian Meyer; Hemmo Meyer; Wenyi Mi; Jeanne Mialet-Perez; Junying Miao; Lucia Micale; Yasuo Miki; Enrico Milan; Małgorzata Milczarek; Dana L Miller; Samuel I Miller; Silke Miller; Steven W Millward; Ira Milosevic; Elena A Minina; Hamed Mirzaei; Hamid Reza Mirzaei; Mehdi Mirzaei; Amit Mishra; Nandita Mishra; Paras Kumar Mishra; Maja Misirkic Marjanovic; Roberta Misasi; Amit Misra; Gabriella Misso; Claire Mitchell; Geraldine Mitou; Tetsuji Miura; Shigeki Miyamoto; Makoto Miyazaki; Mitsunori Miyazaki; Taiga Miyazaki; Keisuke Miyazawa; Noboru Mizushima; Trine H Mogensen; Baharia Mograbi; Reza Mohammadinejad; Yasir Mohamud; Abhishek Mohanty; Sipra Mohapatra; Torsten Möhlmann; Asif Mohmmed; Anna Moles; Kelle H Moley; Maurizio Molinari; Vincenzo Mollace; Andreas Buch Møller; Bertrand Mollereau; Faustino Mollinedo; Costanza Montagna; Mervyn J Monteiro; Andrea Montella; L Ruth Montes; Barbara Montico; Vinod K Mony; Giacomo Monzio Compagnoni; Michael N Moore; Mohammad A Moosavi; Ana L Mora; Marina Mora; David Morales-Alamo; Rosario Moratalla; Paula I Moreira; Elena Morelli; Sandra Moreno; Daniel Moreno-Blas; Viviana Moresi; Benjamin Morga; Alwena H Morgan; Fabrice Morin; Hideaki Morishita; Orson L Moritz; Mariko Moriyama; Yuji Moriyasu; Manuela Morleo; Eugenia Morselli; Jose F Moruno-Manchon; Jorge Moscat; Serge Mostowy; Elisa Motori; Andrea Felinto Moura; Naima Moustaid-Moussa; Maria Mrakovcic; Gabriel Muciño-Hernández; Anupam Mukherjee; Subhadip Mukhopadhyay; Jean M Mulcahy Levy; Victoriano Mulero; Sylviane Muller; Christian Münch; Ashok Munjal; Pura Munoz-Canoves; Teresa Muñoz-Galdeano; Christian Münz; Tomokazu Murakawa; Claudia Muratori; Brona M Murphy; J Patrick Murphy; Aditya Murthy; Timo T Myöhänen; Indira U Mysorekar; Jennifer Mytych; Seyed Mohammad Nabavi; Massimo Nabissi; Péter Nagy; Jihoon Nah; Aimable Nahimana; Ichiro Nakagawa; Ken Nakamura; Hitoshi Nakatogawa; Shyam S Nandi; Meera Nanjundan; Monica Nanni; Gennaro Napolitano; Roberta Nardacci; Masashi Narita; Melissa Nassif; Ilana Nathan; Manabu Natsumeda; Ryno J Naude; Christin Naumann; Olaia Naveiras; Fatemeh Navid; Steffan T Nawrocki; Taras Y Nazarko; Francesca Nazio; Florentina Negoita; Thomas Neill; Amanda L Neisch; Luca M Neri; Mihai G Netea; Patrick Neubert; Thomas P Neufeld; Dietbert Neumann; Albert Neutzner; Phillip T Newton; Paul A Ney; Ioannis P Nezis; Charlene C W Ng; Tzi Bun Ng; Hang T T Nguyen; Long T Nguyen; Hong-Min Ni; Clíona Ní Cheallaigh; Zhenhong Ni; M Celeste Nicolao; Francesco Nicoli; Manuel Nieto-Diaz; Per Nilsson; Shunbin Ning; Rituraj Niranjan; Hiroshi Nishimune; Mireia Niso-Santano; Ralph A Nixon; Annalisa Nobili; Clevio Nobrega; Takeshi Noda; Uxía Nogueira-Recalde; Trevor M Nolan; Ivan Nombela; Ivana Novak; Beatriz Novoa; Takashi Nozawa; Nobuyuki Nukina; Carmen Nussbaum-Krammer; Jesper Nylandsted; Tracey R O'Donovan; Seónadh M O'Leary; Eyleen J O'Rourke; Mary P O'Sullivan; Timothy E O'Sullivan; Salvatore Oddo; Ina Oehme; Michinaga Ogawa; Eric Ogier-Denis; Margret H Ogmundsdottir; Besim Ogretmen; Goo Taeg Oh; Seon-Hee Oh; Young J Oh; Takashi Ohama; Yohei Ohashi; Masaki Ohmuraya; Vasileios Oikonomou; Rani Ojha; Koji Okamoto; Hitoshi Okazawa; Masahide Oku; Sara Oliván; Jorge M A Oliveira; Michael Ollmann; James A Olzmann; Shakib Omari; M Bishr Omary; Gizem Önal; Martin Ondrej; Sang-Bing Ong; Sang-Ging Ong; Anna Onnis; Juan A Orellana; Sara Orellana-Muñoz; Maria Del Mar Ortega-Villaizan; Xilma R Ortiz-Gonzalez; Elena Ortona; Heinz D Osiewacz; Abdel-Hamid K Osman; Rosario Osta; Marisa S Otegui; Kinya Otsu; Christiane Ott; Luisa Ottobrini; Jing-Hsiung James Ou; Tiago F Outeiro; Inger Oynebraten; Melek Ozturk; Gilles Pagès; Susanta Pahari; Marta Pajares; Utpal B Pajvani; Rituraj Pal; Simona Paladino; Nicolas Pallet; Michela Palmieri; Giuseppe Palmisano; Camilla Palumbo; Francesco Pampaloni; Lifeng Pan; Qingjun Pan; Wenliang Pan; Xin Pan; Ganna Panasyuk; Rahul Pandey; Udai B Pandey; Vrajesh Pandya; Francesco Paneni; Shirley Y Pang; Elisa Panzarini; Daniela L Papademetrio; Elena Papaleo; Daniel Papinski; Diana Papp; Eun Chan Park; Hwan Tae Park; Ji-Man Park; Jong-In Park; Joon Tae Park; Junsoo Park; Sang Chul Park; Sang-Youel Park; Abraham H Parola; Jan B Parys; Adrien Pasquier; Benoit Pasquier; João F Passos; Nunzia Pastore; Hemal H Patel; Daniel Patschan; Sophie Pattingre; Gustavo Pedraza-Alva; Jose Pedraza-Chaverri; Zully Pedrozo; Gang Pei; Jianming Pei; Hadas Peled-Zehavi; Joaquín M Pellegrini; Joffrey Pelletier; Miguel A Peñalva; Di Peng; Ying Peng; Fabio Penna; Maria Pennuto; Francesca Pentimalli; Cláudia Mf Pereira; Gustavo J S Pereira; Lilian C Pereira; Luis Pereira de Almeida; Nirma D Perera; Ángel Pérez-Lara; Ana B Perez-Oliva; María Esther Pérez-Pérez; Palsamy Periyasamy; Andras Perl; Cristiana Perrotta; Ida Perrotta; Richard G Pestell; Morten Petersen; Irina Petrache; Goran Petrovski; Thorsten Pfirrmann; Astrid S Pfister; Jennifer A Philips; Huifeng Pi; Anna Picca; Alicia M Pickrell; Sandy Picot; Giovanna M Pierantoni; Marina Pierdominici; Philippe Pierre; Valérie Pierrefite-Carle; Karolina Pierzynowska; Federico Pietrocola; Miroslawa Pietruczuk; Claudio Pignata; Felipe X Pimentel-Muiños; Mario Pinar; Roberta O Pinheiro; Ronit Pinkas-Kramarski; Paolo Pinton; Karolina Pircs; Sujan Piya; Paola Pizzo; Theo S Plantinga; Harald W Platta; Ainhoa Plaza-Zabala; Markus Plomann; Egor Y Plotnikov; Helene Plun-Favreau; Ryszard Pluta; Roger Pocock; Stefanie Pöggeler; Christian Pohl; Marc Poirot; Angelo Poletti; Marisa Ponpuak; Hana Popelka; Blagovesta Popova; Helena Porta; Soledad Porte Alcon; Eliana Portilla-Fernandez; Martin Post; Malia B Potts; Joanna Poulton; Ted Powers; Veena Prahlad; Tomasz K Prajsnar; Domenico Praticò; Rosaria Prencipe; Muriel Priault; Tassula Proikas-Cezanne; Vasilis J Promponas; Christopher G Proud; Rosa Puertollano; Luigi Puglielli; Thomas Pulinilkunnil; Deepika Puri; Rajat Puri; Julien Puyal; Xiaopeng Qi; Yongmei Qi; Wenbin Qian; Lei Qiang; Yu Qiu; Joe Quadrilatero; Jorge Quarleri; Nina Raben; Hannah Rabinowich; Debora Ragona; Michael J Ragusa; Nader Rahimi; Marveh Rahmati; Valeria Raia; Nuno Raimundo; Namakkal-Soorappan Rajasekaran; Sriganesh Ramachandra Rao; Abdelhaq Rami; Ignacio Ramírez-Pardo; David B Ramsden; Felix Randow; Pundi N Rangarajan; Danilo Ranieri; Hai Rao; Lang Rao; Rekha Rao; Sumit Rathore; J Arjuna Ratnayaka; Edward A Ratovitski; Palaniyandi Ravanan; Gloria Ravegnini; Swapan K Ray; Babak Razani; Vito Rebecca; Fulvio Reggiori; Anne Régnier-Vigouroux; Andreas S Reichert; David Reigada; Jan H Reiling; Theo Rein; Siegfried Reipert; Rokeya Sultana Rekha; Hongmei Ren; Jun Ren; Weichao Ren; Tristan Renault; Giorgia Renga; Karen Reue; Kim Rewitz; Bruna Ribeiro de Andrade Ramos; S Amer Riazuddin; Teresa M Ribeiro-Rodrigues; Jean-Ehrland Ricci; Romeo Ricci; Victoria Riccio; Des R Richardson; Yasuko Rikihisa; Makarand V Risbud; Ruth M Risueño; Konstantinos Ritis; Salvatore Rizza; Rosario Rizzuto; Helen C Roberts; Luke D Roberts; Katherine J Robinson; Maria Carmela Roccheri; Stephane Rocchi; George G Rodney; Tiago Rodrigues; Vagner Ramon Rodrigues Silva; Amaia Rodriguez; Ruth Rodriguez-Barrueco; Nieves Rodriguez-Henche; Humberto Rodriguez-Rocha; Jeroen Roelofs; Robert S Rogers; Vladimir V Rogov; Ana I Rojo; Krzysztof Rolka; Vanina Romanello; Luigina Romani; Alessandra Romano; Patricia S Romano; David Romeo-Guitart; Luis C Romero; Montserrat Romero; Joseph C Roney; Christopher Rongo; Sante Roperto; Mathias T Rosenfeldt; Philip Rosenstiel; Anne G Rosenwald; Kevin A Roth; Lynn Roth; Steven Roth; Kasper M A Rouschop; Benoit D Roussel; Sophie Roux; Patrizia Rovere-Querini; Ajit Roy; Aurore Rozieres; Diego Ruano; David C Rubinsztein; Maria P Rubtsova; Klaus Ruckdeschel; Christoph Ruckenstuhl; Emil Rudolf; Rüdiger Rudolf; Alessandra Ruggieri; Avnika Ashok Ruparelia; Paola Rusmini; Ryan R Russell; Gian Luigi Russo; Maria Russo; Rossella Russo; Oxana O Ryabaya; Kevin M Ryan; Kwon-Yul Ryu; Maria Sabater-Arcis; Ulka Sachdev; Michael Sacher; Carsten Sachse; Abhishek Sadhu; Junichi Sadoshima; Nathaniel Safren; Paul Saftig; Antonia P Sagona; Gaurav Sahay; Amirhossein Sahebkar; Mustafa Sahin; Ozgur Sahin; Sumit Sahni; Nayuta Saito; Shigeru Saito; Tsunenori Saito; Ryohei Sakai; Yasuyoshi Sakai; Jun-Ichi Sakamaki; Kalle Saksela; Gloria Salazar; Anna Salazar-Degracia; Ghasem H Salekdeh; Ashok K Saluja; Belém Sampaio-Marques; Maria Cecilia Sanchez; Jose A Sanchez-Alcazar; Victoria Sanchez-Vera; Vanessa Sancho-Shimizu; J Thomas Sanderson; Marco Sandri; Stefano Santaguida; Laura Santambrogio; Magda M Santana; Giorgio Santoni; Alberto Sanz; Pascual Sanz; Shweta Saran; Marco Sardiello; Timothy J Sargeant; Apurva Sarin; Chinmoy Sarkar; Sovan Sarkar; Maria-Rosa Sarrias; Surajit Sarkar; Dipanka Tanu Sarmah; Jaakko Sarparanta; Aishwarya Sathyanarayan; Ranganayaki Sathyanarayanan; K Matthew Scaglione; Francesca Scatozza; Liliana Schaefer; Zachary T Schafer; Ulrich E Schaible; Anthony H V Schapira; Michael Scharl; Hermann M Schatzl; Catherine H Schein; Wiep Scheper; David Scheuring; Maria Vittoria Schiaffino; Monica Schiappacassi; Rainer Schindl; Uwe Schlattner; Oliver Schmidt; Roland Schmitt; Stephen D Schmidt; Ingo Schmitz; Eran Schmukler; Anja Schneider; Bianca E Schneider; Romana Schober; Alejandra C Schoijet; Micah B Schott; Michael Schramm; Bernd Schröder; Kai Schuh; Christoph Schüller; Ryan J Schulze; Lea Schürmanns; Jens C Schwamborn; Melanie Schwarten; Filippo Scialo; Sebastiano Sciarretta; Melanie J Scott; Kathleen W Scotto; A Ivana Scovassi; Andrea Scrima; Aurora Scrivo; David Sebastian; Salwa Sebti; Simon Sedej; Laura Segatori; Nava Segev; Per O Seglen; Iban Seiliez; Ekihiro Seki; Scott B Selleck; Frank W Sellke; Joshua T Selsby; Michael Sendtner; Serif Senturk; Elena Seranova; Consolato Sergi; Ruth Serra-Moreno; Hiromi Sesaki; Carmine Settembre; Subba Rao Gangi Setty; Gianluca Sgarbi; Ou Sha; John J Shacka; Javeed A Shah; Dantong Shang; Changshun Shao; Feng Shao; Soroush Sharbati; Lisa M Sharkey; Dipali Sharma; Gaurav Sharma; Kulbhushan Sharma; Pawan Sharma; Surendra Sharma; Han-Ming Shen; Hongtao Shen; Jiangang Shen; Ming Shen; Weili Shen; Zheni Shen; Rui Sheng; Zhi Sheng; Zu-Hang Sheng; Jianjian Shi; Xiaobing Shi; Ying-Hong Shi; Kahori Shiba-Fukushima; Jeng-Jer Shieh; Yohta Shimada; Shigeomi Shimizu; Makoto Shimozawa; Takahiro Shintani; Christopher J Shoemaker; Shahla Shojaei; Ikuo Shoji; Bhupendra V Shravage; Viji Shridhar; Chih-Wen Shu; Hong-Bing Shu; Ke Shui; Arvind K Shukla; Timothy E Shutt; Valentina Sica; Aleem Siddiqui; Amanda Sierra; Virginia Sierra-Torre; Santiago Signorelli; Payel Sil; Bruno J de Andrade Silva; Johnatas D Silva; Eduardo Silva-Pavez; Sandrine Silvente-Poirot; Rachel E Simmonds; Anna Katharina Simon; Hans-Uwe Simon; Matias Simons; Anurag Singh; Lalit P Singh; Rajat Singh; Shivendra V Singh; Shrawan K Singh; Sudha B Singh; Sunaina Singh; Surinder Pal Singh; Debasish Sinha; Rohit Anthony Sinha; Sangita Sinha; Agnieszka Sirko; Kapil Sirohi; Efthimios L Sivridis; Panagiotis Skendros; Aleksandra Skirycz; Iva Slaninová; Soraya S Smaili; Andrei Smertenko; Matthew D Smith; Stefaan J Soenen; Eun Jung Sohn; Sophia P M Sok; Giancarlo Solaini; Thierry Soldati; Scott A Soleimanpour; Rosa M Soler; Alexei Solovchenko; Jason A Somarelli; Avinash Sonawane; Fuyong Song; Hyun Kyu Song; Ju-Xian Song; Kunhua Song; Zhiyin Song; Leandro R Soria; Maurizio Sorice; Alexander A Soukas; Sandra-Fausia Soukup; Diana Sousa; Nadia Sousa; Paul A Spagnuolo; Stephen A Spector; M M Srinivas Bharath; Daret St Clair; Venturina Stagni; Leopoldo Staiano; Clint A Stalnecker; Metodi V Stankov; Peter B Stathopulos; Katja Stefan; Sven Marcel Stefan; Leonidas Stefanis; Joan S Steffan; Alexander Steinkasserer; Harald Stenmark; Jared Sterneckert; Craig Stevens; Veronika Stoka; Stephan Storch; Björn Stork; Flavie Strappazzon; Anne Marie Strohecker; Dwayne G Stupack; Huanxing Su; Ling-Yan Su; Longxiang Su; Ana M Suarez-Fontes; Carlos S Subauste; Selvakumar Subbian; Paula V Subirada; Ganapasam Sudhandiran; Carolyn M Sue; Xinbing Sui; Corey Summers; Guangchao Sun; Jun Sun; Kang Sun; Meng-Xiang Sun; Qiming Sun; Yi Sun; Zhongjie Sun; Karen K S Sunahara; Eva Sundberg; Katalin Susztak; Peter Sutovsky; Hidekazu Suzuki; Gary Sweeney; J David Symons; Stephen Cho Wing Sze; Nathaniel J Szewczyk; Anna Tabęcka-Łonczynska; Claudio Tabolacci; Frank Tacke; Heinrich Taegtmeyer; Marco Tafani; Mitsuo Tagaya; Haoran Tai; Stephen W G Tait; Yoshinori Takahashi; Szabolcs Takats; Priti Talwar; Chit Tam; Shing Yau Tam; Davide Tampellini; Atsushi Tamura; Chong Teik Tan; Eng-King Tan; Ya-Qin Tan; Masaki Tanaka; Motomasa Tanaka; Daolin Tang; Jingfeng Tang; Tie-Shan Tang; Isei Tanida; Zhipeng Tao; Mohammed Taouis; Lars Tatenhorst; Nektarios Tavernarakis; Allen Taylor; Gregory A Taylor; Joan M Taylor; Elena Tchetina; Andrew R Tee; Irmgard Tegeder; David Teis; Natercia Teixeira; Fatima Teixeira-Clerc; Kumsal A Tekirdag; Tewin Tencomnao; Sandra Tenreiro; Alexei V Tepikin; Pilar S Testillano; Gianluca Tettamanti; Pierre-Louis Tharaux; Kathrin Thedieck; Arvind A Thekkinghat; Stefano Thellung; Josephine W Thinwa; V P Thirumalaikumar; Sufi Mary Thomas; Paul G Thomes; Andrew Thorburn; Lipi Thukral; Thomas Thum; Michael Thumm; Ling Tian; Ales Tichy; Andreas Till; Vincent Timmerman; Vladimir I Titorenko; Sokol V Todi; Krassimira Todorova; Janne M Toivonen; Luana Tomaipitinca; Dhanendra Tomar; Cristina Tomas-Zapico; Sergej Tomić; Benjamin Chun-Kit Tong; Chao Tong; Xin Tong; Sharon A Tooze; Maria L Torgersen; Satoru Torii; Liliana Torres-López; Alicia Torriglia; Christina G Towers; Roberto Towns; Shinya Toyokuni; Vladimir Trajkovic; Donatella Tramontano; Quynh-Giao Tran; Leonardo H Travassos; Charles B Trelford; Shirley Tremel; Ioannis P Trougakos; Betty P Tsao; Mario P Tschan; Hung-Fat Tse; Tak Fu Tse; Hitoshi Tsugawa; Andrey S Tsvetkov; David A Tumbarello; Yasin Tumtas; María J Tuñón; Sandra Turcotte; Boris Turk; Vito Turk; Bradley J Turner; Richard I Tuxworth; Jessica K Tyler; Elena V Tyutereva; Yasuo Uchiyama; Aslihan Ugun-Klusek; Holm H Uhlig; Marzena Ułamek-Kozioł; Ilya V Ulasov; Midori Umekawa; Christian Ungermann; Rei Unno; Sylvie Urbe; Elisabet Uribe-Carretero; Suayib Üstün; Vladimir N Uversky; Thomas Vaccari; Maria I Vaccaro; Björn F Vahsen; Helin Vakifahmetoglu-Norberg; Rut Valdor; Maria J Valente; Ayelén Valko; Richard B Vallee; Angela M Valverde; Greet Van den Berghe; Stijn van der Veen; Luc Van Kaer; Jorg van Loosdregt; Sjoerd J L van Wijk; Wim Vandenberghe; Ilse Vanhorebeek; Marcos A Vannier-Santos; Nicola Vannini; M Cristina Vanrell; Chiara Vantaggiato; Gabriele Varano; Isabel Varela-Nieto; Máté Varga; M Helena Vasconcelos; Somya Vats; Demetrios G Vavvas; Ignacio Vega-Naredo; Silvia Vega-Rubin-de-Celis; Guillermo Velasco; Ariadna P Velázquez; Tibor Vellai; Edo Vellenga; Francesca Velotti; Mireille Verdier; Panayotis Verginis; Isabelle Vergne; Paul Verkade; Manish Verma; Patrik Verstreken; Tim Vervliet; Jörg Vervoorts; Alexandre T Vessoni; Victor M Victor; Michel Vidal; Chiara Vidoni; Otilia V Vieira; Richard D Vierstra; Sonia Viganó; Helena Vihinen; Vinoy Vijayan; Miquel Vila; Marçal Vilar; José M Villalba; Antonio Villalobo; Beatriz Villarejo-Zori; Francesc Villarroya; Joan Villarroya; Olivier Vincent; Cecile Vindis; Christophe Viret; Maria Teresa Viscomi; Dora Visnjic; Ilio Vitale; David J Vocadlo; Olga V Voitsekhovskaja; Cinzia Volonté; Mattia Volta; Marta Vomero; Clarissa Von Haefen; Marc A Vooijs; Wolfgang Voos; Ljubica Vucicevic; Richard Wade-Martins; Satoshi Waguri; Kenrick A Waite; Shuji Wakatsuki; David W Walker; Mark J Walker; Simon A Walker; Jochen Walter; Francisco G Wandosell; Bo Wang; Chao-Yung Wang; Chen Wang; Chenran Wang; Chenwei Wang; Cun-Yu Wang; Dong Wang; Fangyang Wang; Feng Wang; Fengming Wang; Guansong Wang; Han Wang; Hao Wang; Hexiang Wang; Hong-Gang Wang; Jianrong Wang; Jigang Wang; Jiou Wang; Jundong Wang; Kui Wang; Lianrong Wang; Liming Wang; Maggie Haitian Wang; Meiqing Wang; Nanbu Wang; Pengwei Wang; Peipei Wang; Ping Wang; Ping Wang; Qing Jun Wang; Qing Wang; Qing Kenneth Wang; Qiong A Wang; Wen-Tao Wang; Wuyang Wang; Xinnan Wang; Xuejun Wang; Yan Wang; Yanchang Wang; Yanzhuang Wang; Yen-Yun Wang; Yihua Wang; Yipeng Wang; Yu Wang; Yuqi Wang; Zhe Wang; Zhenyu Wang; Zhouguang Wang; Gary Warnes; Verena Warnsmann; Hirotaka Watada; Eizo Watanabe; Maxinne Watchon; Anna Wawrzyńska; Timothy E Weaver; Grzegorz Wegrzyn; Ann M Wehman; Huafeng Wei; Lei Wei; Taotao Wei; Yongjie Wei; Oliver H Weiergräber; Conrad C Weihl; Günther Weindl; Ralf Weiskirchen; Alan Wells; Runxia H Wen; Xin Wen; Antonia Werner; Beatrice Weykopf; Sally P Wheatley; J Lindsay Whitton; Alexander J Whitworth; Katarzyna Wiktorska; Manon E Wildenberg; Tom Wileman; Simon Wilkinson; Dieter Willbold; Brett Williams; Robin S B Williams; Roger L Williams; Peter R Williamson; Richard A Wilson; Beate Winner; Nathaniel J Winsor; Steven S Witkin; Harald Wodrich; Ute Woehlbier; Thomas Wollert; Esther Wong; Jack Ho Wong; Richard W Wong; Vincent Kam Wai Wong; W Wei-Lynn Wong; An-Guo Wu; Chengbiao Wu; Jian Wu; Junfang Wu; Kenneth K Wu; Min Wu; Shan-Ying Wu; Shengzhou Wu; Shu-Yan Wu; Shufang Wu; William K K Wu; Xiaohong Wu; Xiaoqing Wu; Yao-Wen Wu; Yihua Wu; Ramnik J Xavier; Hongguang Xia; Lixin Xia; Zhengyuan Xia; Ge Xiang; Jin Xiang; Mingliang Xiang; Wei Xiang; Bin Xiao; Guozhi Xiao; Hengyi Xiao; Hong-Tao Xiao; Jian Xiao; Lan Xiao; Shi Xiao; Yin Xiao; Baoming Xie; Chuan-Ming Xie; Min Xie; Yuxiang Xie; Zhiping Xie; Zhonglin Xie; Maria Xilouri; Congfeng Xu; En Xu; Haoxing Xu; Jing Xu; JinRong Xu; Liang Xu; Wen Wen Xu; Xiulong Xu; Yu Xue; Sokhna M S Yakhine-Diop; Masamitsu Yamaguchi; Osamu Yamaguchi; Ai Yamamoto; Shunhei Yamashina; Shengmin Yan; Shian-Jang Yan; Zhen Yan; Yasuo Yanagi; Chuanbin Yang; Dun-Sheng Yang; Huan Yang; Huang-Tian Yang; Hui Yang; Jin-Ming Yang; Jing Yang; Jingyu Yang; Ling Yang; Liu Yang; Ming Yang; Pei-Ming Yang; Qian Yang; Seungwon Yang; Shu Yang; Shun-Fa Yang; Wannian Yang; Wei Yuan Yang; Xiaoyong Yang; Xuesong Yang; Yi Yang; Ying Yang; Honghong Yao; Shenggen Yao; Xiaoqiang Yao; Yong-Gang Yao; Yong-Ming Yao; Takahiro Yasui; Meysam Yazdankhah; Paul M Yen; Cong Yi; Xiao-Ming Yin; Yanhai Yin; Zhangyuan Yin; Ziyi Yin; Meidan Ying; Zheng Ying; Calvin K Yip; Stephanie Pei Tung Yiu; Young H Yoo; Kiyotsugu Yoshida; Saori R Yoshii; Tamotsu Yoshimori; Bahman Yousefi; Boxuan Yu; Haiyang Yu; Jun Yu; Jun Yu; Li Yu; Ming-Lung Yu; Seong-Woon Yu; Victor C Yu; W Haung Yu; Zhengping Yu; Zhou Yu; Junying Yuan; Ling-Qing Yuan; Shilin Yuan; Shyng-Shiou F Yuan; Yanggang Yuan; Zengqiang Yuan; Jianbo Yue; Zhenyu Yue; Jeanho Yun; Raymond L Yung; David N Zacks; Gabriele Zaffagnini; Vanessa O Zambelli; Isabella Zanella; Qun S Zang; Sara Zanivan; Silvia Zappavigna; Pilar Zaragoza; Konstantinos S Zarbalis; Amir Zarebkohan; Amira Zarrouk; Scott O Zeitlin; Jialiu Zeng; Ju-Deng Zeng; Eva Žerovnik; Lixuan Zhan; Bin Zhang; Donna D Zhang; Hanlin Zhang; Hong Zhang; Hong Zhang; Honghe Zhang; Huafeng Zhang; Huaye Zhang; Hui Zhang; Hui-Ling Zhang; Jianbin Zhang; Jianhua Zhang; Jing-Pu Zhang; Kalin Y B Zhang; Leshuai W Zhang; Lin Zhang; Lisheng Zhang; Lu Zhang; Luoying Zhang; Menghuan Zhang; Peng Zhang; Sheng Zhang; Wei Zhang; Xiangnan Zhang; Xiao-Wei Zhang; Xiaolei Zhang; Xiaoyan Zhang; Xin Zhang; Xinxin Zhang; Xu Dong Zhang; Yang Zhang; Yanjin Zhang; Yi Zhang; Ying-Dong Zhang; Yingmei Zhang; Yuan-Yuan Zhang; Yuchen Zhang; Zhe Zhang; Zhengguang Zhang; Zhibing Zhang; Zhihai Zhang; Zhiyong Zhang; Zili Zhang; Haobin Zhao; Lei Zhao; Shuang Zhao; Tongbiao Zhao; Xiao-Fan Zhao; Ying Zhao; Yongchao Zhao; Yongliang Zhao; Yuting Zhao; Guoping Zheng; Kai Zheng; Ling Zheng; Shizhong Zheng; Xi-Long Zheng; Yi Zheng; Zu-Guo Zheng; Boris Zhivotovsky; Qing Zhong; Ao Zhou; Ben Zhou; Cefan Zhou; Gang Zhou; Hao Zhou; Hong Zhou; Hongbo Zhou; Jie Zhou; Jing Zhou; Jing Zhou; Jiyong Zhou; Kailiang Zhou; Rongjia Zhou; Xu-Jie Zhou; Yanshuang Zhou; Yinghong Zhou; Yubin Zhou; Zheng-Yu Zhou; Zhou Zhou; Binglin Zhu; Changlian Zhu; Guo-Qing Zhu; Haining Zhu; Hongxin Zhu; Hua Zhu; Wei-Guo Zhu; Yanping Zhu; Yushan Zhu; Haixia Zhuang; Xiaohong Zhuang; Katarzyna Zientara-Rytter; Christine M Zimmermann; Elena Ziviani; Teresa Zoladek; Wei-Xing Zong; Dmitry B Zorov; Antonio Zorzano; Weiping Zou; Zhen Zou; Zhengzhi Zou; Steven Zuryn; Werner Zwerschke; Beate Brand-Saberi; X Charlie Dong; Chandra Shekar Kenchappa; Zuguo Li; Yong Lin; Shigeru Oshima; Yueguang Rong; Judith C Sluimer; Christina L Stallings; Chun-Kit Tong Journal: Autophagy Date: 2021-02-08 Impact factor: 13.391