Quantitation with chemical tagging reagents in biomarker studies

Proteomics - Clinical Applications

Volumn 9, Issue 3-4, 2015, Pages 295-300

  Westbrook, Jules A ^a   Noirel, Josselin ^b   Brown, Janet E ^a   Wright, Phillip C ^c   Evans, Caroline A ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD   (United Kingdom)

^b Bioinformatique et Chimie Moléculaire   (France)

^c UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Biomarker; ITRAQ; MTRAQ; Tandem mass tags

Indexed keywords

BIOLOGICAL MARKER;

ACCURACY; CHEMICAL LABELING; HUMAN; INFORMATION RETRIEVAL; ISOBARIC TAGS FOR RELATIVE AND ABSOLUTE QUANTITATION; MASS DIFFERENTIAL TAGS FOR RELATIVE AND ABSOLUTE QUANTIFICATION; MOLECULAR DYNAMICS; MOLECULAR RECOGNITION; NOTE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROCESS OPTIMIZATION; PROTEIN EXPRESSION; PROTEIN PROTEIN INTERACTION; PROTEIN STRUCTURE; PROTEOMICS; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; TANDEM MASS TAG; VALIDATION STUDY; TANDEM MASS SPECTROMETRY;

BIOMARKERS; HUMANS; TANDEM MASS SPECTROMETRY;

EID: 84928077354     PISSN: 18628346     EISSN: 18628354     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/prca.201400120     Document Type: Note

References (39)

1. Mann, M., Comparative analysis to guide quality improvements in proteomics. Nat. Methods 2009, 6, 717-719.
2. Skates, S. J., Gillette, M. A., LaBaer, J., Carr, S. A. et al., Statistical design for biospecimen cohort size in proteomics-based biomarker discovery and verification studies. J. Proteome Res. 2013, 12, 5383-5394.
3. Karp, N. A., Lilley, K. S., Design and analysis issues in quantitative proteomics studies. Proteomics 2007, 7, 42-50.
4. Christin, C., Hoefsloot, H. C., Smilde, A. K., Hoekman, B. et al., A critical assessment of feature selection methods for biomarker discovery in clinical proteomics. Mol. Cell. Proteomics 2013, 12, 263-276.
5. Rifai, N., Gillette, M. A., Carr, S. A., Protein biomarker discovery and validation: the long and uncertain path to clinical utility. Nat. Biotechnol. 2006, 24, 971-983.
6. Patterson, S. D., Van Eyk, J. E., Banks, R. E., Report from the Wellcome Trust/EBA "Perspectives in Clinical Proteomics" retreat-a strategy to implement next-generation proteomic analyses to the clinic for patient benefit: pathway to translation. Proteomics Clin. Appl. 2010, 4, 883-887.
7. Jackson, D. H., Banks, R. E., Banking of clinical samples for proteomic biomarker studies: a consideration of logistical issues with a focus on pre-analytical variation. Proteomics Clin. Appl. 2010, 4, 250-270
8. Espina, V., Mueller, C., Edmiston, K., Sciro, M. et al., Tissue is alive: new technologies are needed to address the problems of protein biomarker pre-analytical variability. Proteomics Clin. Appl. 2009, 3, 874-882.
9. Frantzi, M., Akshay, B., Latosinska, A., Clinical proteomic biomarkers: relevant issues on study design and technical considerations in biomarker development. Clin. Trans. Med. 2014, 3, 7.
10. Ross, P. L., Huang, Y. N., Marchese, J. N., Williamson, B. et al., Multiplexed protein quantitation in Saccharomyces cerevisiae using amine-reactive isobaric tagging reagents. Mol. Cell. Proteomics 2004, 3, 1154-1169.
11. Thompson, A., Schäfer, J., Kuhn, K., Kienle, S. et al., Tandem mass tags: a novel quantification strategy for comparative analysis of complex protein mixtures by MS/MS. Anal. Chem. 2003, 75, 1895-1904.
12. Evans, C., Noirel, J., Ow, S. Y., Salim, M. et al., An insight into iTRAQ: where do we stand now? Anal. Bioanal. Chem. 2012, 404, 1011-1027.
13. Li, Z., Adams, R. M., Chourey, K., Hurst, G. B. et al., Systematic comparison of label-free, metabolic labeling, and isobaric chemical labeling for quantitative proteomics on LTQ Orbitrap Velos. J. Proteome Res. 2012, 11, 1582-1590.
14. Megger, D. A., Pott, L. L., Ahrens, M., Padden, J. et al., Comparison of label-free and label-based strategies for proteome analysis of hepatoma cell lines. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 2014, 1844, 967-976.
15. Megger, D. A., Bracht, T., Meyer, H. E., Sitek, B., Label-free quantification in clinical proteomics. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 2013, 1834, 1581-1590.
16. Wright, P. C., Jaffe, S., Noirel, J., Zou, X., Opportunities for protein interaction network-guided cellular engineering. IUBMB Life 2013, 65, 17-27.
17. Noirel, J., Evans, C., Salim, M., Mukherjee, J. et al., Methods in quantitative proteomics: setting iTRAQ on the right track. Curr. Proteomics 2011, 8, 17-30.
18. Christoforou, A. L., Lilley, K. S., Isobaric tagging approaches in quantitative proteomics: the ups and downs. Anal. Bioanal. Chem. 2012, 404, 1029-1037.
19. Gan, C. S., Chong, P. K., Pham, T. K., Wright, P. C., Technical, experimental, and biological variations in isobaric tags for relative and absolute quantitation (iTRAQ). J. Proteome Res. 2007, 6, 821-827.
20. Song, X., Bandow, J., Sherman, J., Baker, J. D. et al., iTRAQ experimental design for plasma biomarker discovery. J. Proteome Res. 2008, 7, 2952-2958.
21. Zhou, C., Simpson, K. L., Lancashire, L. J., Walker, M. J. et al., Statistical considerations of optimal study design for human plasma proteomics and biomarker discovery. J. Proteome Res. 2012, 11, 2103-2113.
22. Herbrich, S. M., Cole, R. N., West, K. P. Jr., Schulze K. et al., Statistical inference from multiple iTRAQ experiments without using common reference standards. J. Proteome Res. 2013, 12, 594-604.
23. Navarro, P., Trevisan-Herraz, M., Bonzon-Kulichenko, E., Núñez, E. et al., General statistical framework for quantitative proteomics by stable isotope labeling. J. Proteome Res. 2014, 13, 1234-1247.
24. Franciosi, L., Postma, D. S., Van den Berge, M., Govorukhina, N. et al., Susceptibility to COPD: differential proteomic profiling after acute smoking. PLoS One 2014, 9, e102037.
25. Ow, S. Y., Salim, M., Noirel, J., Evans, C. et al., iTRAQ underestimation in simple and complex mixtures: the good, the bad and the ugly. J. Proteome Res. 2009, 8, 5347-5355.
26. Karp, N. A., Huber, W., Sadowski, P. G., Charles, P. D. et al., Addressing accuracy and precision issues in iTRAQ quantitation. Mol. Cell Proteomics 2010, 9, 1885-1897.
27. DeSouza, L. V., Taylor, A. M., Li, W., Minkoff, M. S. et al., Multiple reaction monitoring of mTRAQ-labeled peptides enables absolute quantification of endogenous levels of a potential cancer marker in cancerous and normal endometrial tissues. J. Proteome Res. 2008, 7, 3525-3534.
28. Glen, A., Evans, C. A., Gan, C. S., Cross, S. S. et al., Eight-plex iTRAQ analysis of variant metastatic human prostate cancer cells identifies candidate biomarkers of progression: an exploratory study. Prostate 2010, 70, 1313-1332.
29. Wenger, C. D., Lee, M. V., Hebert, A. S., McAlister, G. C. et al., Gas-phase purification enables accurate, multiplexed proteome quantification with isobaric tagging. Nat. Methods 2011, 8, 933-935.
30. Ting, L., Rad, R., Gygi, S. P., Haas, W., MS3 eliminates ratio distortion in isobaric multiplexed quantitative proteomics. Nat. Methods 2011, 8, 937-940.
31. Ow, S. Y., Salim, M., Noirel, J., Evans, C. et al., Minimising iTRAQ ratio compression through understanding LC-MS elution dependence and high-resolution HILIC fractionation. Proteomics 2011, 11, 2341-2346.
32. Savitski, M. M., Sweetman, G., Askenazi, M., Marto, J. A. et al., Delayed fragmentation and optimized isolation width settings for improvement of protein identification and accuracy of isobaric mass tag quantification on Orbitrap-type mass spectrometers. Anal. Chem. 2011, 83, 8959-8967.
33. Colangelo, C. M., Chung, L., Bruce, C., Cheung, K. H., Review of software tools for design and analysis of large scale MRM proteomic datasets. Methods 2013, 61, 287-298.
34. Picotti, P., Aebersold, R., Selected reaction monitoring-based proteomics: workflows, potential, pitfalls and future directions. Nat. Methods 2012, 9, 555-566.
35. Editorial. Method of the Year 2012. Nat. Methods 2013, 10, 1.
36. Aebersold, R., Burlingame, A. L., Bradshaw, R. A., Western blots versus selected reaction monitoring assays: time to turn the tables? Mol. Cell. Proteomics 2013, 12, 2381-2382.
37. Picotti, P., Bodenmiller, B., Aebersold, R., Proteomics meets the scientific method. Nat. Methods 2013, 10, 24-27.
38. Yin, H. R., Zhang, L., Xie, L. Q., Huang, L. Y. et al., Hyperplex-MRM: a hybrid multiple reaction monitoring method using mTRAQ/iTRAQ labeling for multiplex absolute quantification of human colorectal cancer biomarker. J. Proteome Res. 2013, 12, 3912-3919.
39. Byers, H. L., Campbell, J., Van Ulsen, P., Tommassen, J. et al., Candidate verification of iron-regulated Neisseria meningitidis proteins using isotopic versions of tandem mass tags (TMT) and single reaction monitoring. J. Proteomics 2009, 73, 231-239.