Literature DB >> 29619825

Proteogenomics of Malignant Melanoma Cell Lines: The Effect of Stringency of Exome Data Filtering on Variant Peptide Identification in Shotgun Proteomics.

Anna A Lobas1,2, Mikhail A Pyatnitskiy3,4, Alexey L Chernobrovkin5, Irina Y Ilina3, Dmitry S Karpov3,6, Elizaveta M Solovyeva2, Ksenia G Kuznetsova3, Mark V Ivanov2, Elena Y Lyssuk7, Anna A Kliuchnikova3,8, Olga E Voronko3, Sergey S Larin7, Roman A Zubarev5, Mikhail V Gorshkov2, Sergei A Moshkovskii3,8.   

Abstract

The identification of genetically encoded variants at the proteome level is an important problem in cancer proteogenomics. The generation of customized protein databases from DNA or RNA sequencing data is a crucial stage of the identification workflow. Genomic data filtering applied at this stage may significantly modify variant search results, yet its effect is generally left out of the scope of proteogenomic studies. In this work, we focused on this impact using data of exome sequencing and LC-MS/MS analyses of six replicates for eight melanoma cell lines processed by a proteogenomics workflow. The main objectives were identifying variant peptides and revealing the role of the genomic data filtering in the variant identification. A series of six confidence thresholds for single nucleotide polymorphisms and indels from the exome data were applied to generate customized sequence databases of different stringency. In the searches against unfiltered databases, between 100 and 160 variant peptides were identified for each of the cell lines using X!Tandem and MS-GF+ search engines. The recovery rate for variant peptides was ∼1%, which is approximately three times lower than that of the wild-type peptides. Using unfiltered genomic databases for variant searches resulted in higher sensitivity and selectivity of the proteogenomic workflow and positively affected the ability to distinguish the cell lines based on variant peptide signatures.

Entities:  

Keywords:  cancer genome; cell line; data integration; melanoma; missense mutation; next-generation sequencing; proteogenomics; shotgun proteomics

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29619825     DOI: 10.1021/acs.jproteome.7b00841

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


  3 in total

Review 1.  Clinical potential of mass spectrometry-based proteogenomics.

Authors:  Bing Zhang; Jeffrey R Whiteaker; Andrew N Hoofnagle; Geoffrey S Baird; Karin D Rodland; Amanda G Paulovich
Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol       Date:  2019-04       Impact factor: 66.675

2.  Is It Possible to Find Needles in a Haystack? Meta-Analysis of 1000+ MS/MS Files Provided by the Russian Proteomic Consortium for Mining Missing Proteins.

Authors:  Ekaterina Poverennaya; Olga Kiseleva; Ekaterina Ilgisonis; Svetlana Novikova; Arthur Kopylov; Yuri Ivanov; Alexei Kononikhin; Mikhail Gorshkov; Nikolay Kushlinskii; Alexander Archakov; Elena Ponomarenko
Journal:  Proteomes       Date:  2020-05-23

3.  Clinical protein science in translational medicine targeting malignant melanoma.

Authors:  Jeovanis Gil; Lazaro Hiram Betancourt; Indira Pla; Aniel Sanchez; Roger Appelqvist; Tasso Miliotis; Magdalena Kuras; Henriette Oskolas; Yonghyo Kim; Zsolt Horvath; Jonatan Eriksson; Ethan Berge; Elisabeth Burestedt; Göran Jönsson; Bo Baldetorp; Christian Ingvar; Håkan Olsson; Lotta Lundgren; Peter Horvatovich; Jimmy Rodriguez Murillo; Yutaka Sugihara; Charlotte Welinder; Elisabet Wieslander; Boram Lee; Henrik Lindberg; Krzysztof Pawłowski; Ho Jeong Kwon; Viktoria Doma; Jozsef Timar; Sarolta Karpati; A Marcell Szasz; István Balázs Németh; Toshihide Nishimura; Garry Corthals; Melinda Rezeli; Beatrice Knudsen; Johan Malm; György Marko-Varga
Journal:  Cell Biol Toxicol       Date:  2019-03-21       Impact factor: 6.691

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.