DIANA-algorithmic improvements for analysis of data-independent acquisition MS data

Bioinformatics

Volumn 31, Issue 4, 2015, Pages 555-562

  Teleman, Johan ^a   Röst, Hannes L ^b   Rosenberger, George ^b   Schmitt, Uwe ^c   Malmström, Lars ^d   Malmström, Johan ^a   Levander, Fredrik ^a  

^a LUND UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

^b Institute of Molecular Systems Biology   (Switzerland)

^c ETH ZURICH   (Switzerland)

^d UNIVERSITY OF ZURICH   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BACTERIAL PROTEIN; PEPTIDE FRAGMENT;

ALGORITHM; CHEMISTRY; COMPUTER PROGRAM; DATA MINING; HUMAN; METABOLISM; PROBABILITY; PROCEDURES; PROTEIN DATABASE; PROTEOMICS; STREPTOCOCCUS PYOGENES; TANDEM MASS SPECTROMETRY;

ALGORITHMS; BACTERIAL PROTEINS; DATA MINING; DATABASES, PROTEIN; HUMANS; MARKOV CHAINS; PEPTIDE FRAGMENTS; PROTEOMICS; SOFTWARE; STREPTOCOCCUS PYOGENES; TANDEM MASS SPECTROMETRY;

EID: 84928999619     PISSN: 13674803     EISSN: 14602059     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btu686     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Bailey, D.J. et al. (2014) Intelligent data acquisition blends targeted and discovery methods. J. Proteome Res., 13, 2152-2161.
2. Bernhardt, O.M. et al. (2012) Spectronaut: a fast and efficient algorithm for MRM-like processing of data independent acquisition (SWATH-MS) data. In: Proceedings of 60th American Society for Mass Spectometry Conference American Society for Mass Spectrometry, Vancouver 2012.
3. Carapetis, J.R. et al. (2005) The global burden of group A streptococcal diseases. Lancet Infect. Dis., 5, 685-694.
4. Chambers, M.C. et al. (2012) A cross-platform toolkit for mass spectrometry and proteomics. Nat. Biotechnol., 30, 918-920.
5. Collins, B.C. et al. (2013) Quantifying protein interaction dynamics by SWATH mass spectrometry: application to the 14-3-3 system. Nat. Methods, 10, 1246-1253.
6. Desiere, F. et al. (2006) The PeptideAtlas project. Nucleic Acids Res., 34, D655-658.
7. Deutsch, E.W. et al. (2012) TraML-a standard format for exchange of selected reaction monitoring transition lists. Mol. Cell. Proteomics, 11, R111.015040.
8. Egertson, J.D. et al. (2013) Multiplexed MS/MS for improved data-independent acquisition. Nat. Methods, 10, 744-746.
9. Elias, J.E. and Gygi, S.P. (2007) Target-decoy search strategy for increased confidence in large-scale protein identifications by mass spectrometry. Nat. Methods, 4, 207-214.
10. Escher, C. et al. (2012) Using iRT, a normalized retention time for more targeted measurement of peptides. Proteomics, 12, 1111-1121.
11. Farrah, T. et al. (2012) PASSEL: the PeptideAtlas SRMexperiment library. Proteomics, 12, 1170-1175.
12. Gillet, L.C. et al. (2012) Targeted data extraction of the MS/MS spectra generated by data independent acquisition: a new concept for consistent and accurate proteome analysis. Mol. Cell. Proteomics, 11, O111.016717.
13. Hakkinen, J. et al. (2009) The proteios software environment: an extensible multiuser platform for management and analysis of proteomics data. J. Proteome Res., 8, 3037-3043.
14. Jones, A.R. et al. (2009) Improving sensitivity in proteome studies by analysis of false discovery rates for multiple search engines. Proteomics, 9, 1220-1229.
15. Kall, L. et al. (2008) Assigning significance to peptides identified by tandem mass spectrometry using decoy databases. J. Proteome Res., 7, 29-34.
16. Karlsson, C. et al. (2012) Proteome-wide selected reaction monitoring assays for the human pathogen Streptococcus pyogenes. Nat. Commun., 3, 1301.
17. Kost, J.T. and McDermott, M.P. (2002) Combining dependent P-values. Stat. Probab. Lett., 60, 183-190.
18. Liu, H. et al. (2004) A model for random sampling and estimation of relative protein abundance in shotgun proteomics. Anal. Chem., 76, 4193-4201.
19. Malmstrom, J. et al. (2012) Streptococcus pyogenes in human plasma: adaptive mechanisms analyzed by mass spectrometry-based proteomics. J. Biol. Chem., 287, 1415-1425.
20. Martens, L. et al. (2011) mzML-a community standard for mass spectrometry data. Mol. Cell. Proteomics, 10, R110.000133.
21. Nahnsen, S. et al. (2011) Probabilistic consensus scoring improves tandem mass spectrometry peptide identification. J. Proteome Res., 10, 3332-3343.
22. Panchaud, A. et al. (2009) Precursor acquisition independent from ion count: how to dive deeper into the proteomics ocean. Anal. Chem., 81, 6481-6488.
23. Pedregosa, F. et al. (2011) Scikit-learn: machine learning in Python. J. Mach. Learn. Res., 12, 2825-2830.
24. Picotti, P. et al. (2008) A database of mass spectrometric assays for the yeast prote-ome. Nat. Methods, 5, 913-914.
25. Picotti, P. et al. (2009) Full dynamic range proteome analysis of S. cerevisiae by targeted proteomics. Cell, 138, 795-806.
26. Plumb, R.S. et al. (2006) UPLC/MS(E); a new approach for generating molecular fragment information for biomarker structure elucidation. Rapid Commun. Mass Spectrom., 20, 1989-1994.
27. Purvine, S. et al. (2003) Shotgun collision-induced dissociation of peptides using a time of flight mass analyzer. Proteomics, 3, 847-850.
28. Reiter, L. et al. (2011) mProphet: automated data processing and statistical validation for large-scale SRM experiments. Nat. Methods, 8, 430-435.
29. Rost, H.L. et al. (2014) OpenSWATH enables automated, targeted analysis of data-independent acquisition MS data. Nat. Biotechnol., 32, 219-223.
30. Shteynberg, D. et al. (2011) iProphet: multi-level integrative analysis of shotgun proteomic data improves peptide and protein identification rates and error estimates. Mol. Cell. Proteomics, 10, M111.007690.
31. Shteynberg, D. et al. (2013) Combining results of multiple search engines in prote-omics. Mol. Cell. Proteomics, 12, 2383-2393.
32. Storey, J.D. (2002) A direct approach to false discovery rates. J. R. Stat. Soc. Ser. B Stat. Methodol., 64, 479-498.
33. Tabb, D.L. et al. (2010) Repeatability and reproducibility in proteomic identifications by liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. J. Proteome Res., 9, 761-776.
34. Teleman, J. et al. (2012) Automated selected reaction monitoring software for accurate label-free protein quantification. J. Proteome Res., 11, 3766-3773.
35. Teleman, J. et al. (2014) Numerical compression schemes for proteomics mass spec-trometry data. Mol. Cell. Proteomics, 13, 1537-1542.
36. Vincent, C.E. et al. (2013) Segmentation of precursor mass range using 'tiling' approach increases peptide identifications for MS1-based label-free quantification. Anal. Chem., 85, 2825-2832.
37. Waldemarson, S. et al. (2012) Protein expression changes in ovarian cancer during the transition from benign to malignant. J. Proteome Res., 11, 2876-2889.
38. Weisbrod, C.R. et al. (2012)Accuratepeptidefragmentmassanalysis:multiplexed pep-tide identification and quantification. J. Proteome Res., 11, 1621-1632.
39. Wolf-Yadlin, A. et al. (2007) Multiple reaction monitoring for robust quantitative proteomic analysis of cellular signaling networks. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA, 104, 5860-5865.