The clinical impact of recent advances in LC-MS for cancer biomarker discovery and verification

Expert Review of Proteomics

Volumn 13, Issue 1, 2016, Pages 99-114

  Wang, Hui ^a   Shi, Tujin ^a   Qian, Wei Jun ^a   Liu, Tao ^a   Kagan, Jacob ^b   Srivastava, Sudhir ^b   Smith, Richard D ^a   Rodland, Karin D ^a   Camp, David G ^a  

^a PACIFIC NORTHWEST NATIONAL LABORATORY   (United States)

^b NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE   (United States)

Author keywords

Cancer biomarker; Isobaric labelling; Label free; LC MS; Multiple reaction monitoring; PRISM; Proteomics; Selected reaction monitoring; Targeted quantification

Indexed keywords

PEPTIDE; PROTEIN; TUMOR MARKER; PROTEOME;

CLINICAL PRACTICE; HIGH THROUGHPUT SCREENING; HUMAN; ISOTOPE LABELING; LIQUID CHROMATOGRAPHY; MASS SPECTROMETRY; MEASUREMENT ACCURACY; MEASUREMENT PRECISION; NONHUMAN; PROTEIN MODIFICATION; PROTEOMICS; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; REPRODUCIBILITY; REVIEW; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; ANIMAL; ISOLATION AND PURIFICATION; METABOLISM; NEOPLASMS; PROCEDURES; PROTEIN PROCESSING; TANDEM MASS SPECTROMETRY;

ANIMALS; BIOMARKERS, TUMOR; CHROMATOGRAPHY, LIQUID; HUMANS; ISOTOPE LABELING; NEOPLASMS; PROTEIN PROCESSING, POST-TRANSLATIONAL; PROTEOME; TANDEM MASS SPECTROMETRY;

EID: 84950128504     PISSN: 14789450     EISSN: 17448387     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1586/14789450.2016.1122529     Document Type: Review

References (148)

1. Srinivas PR, Kramer BS, Srivastava S. Trends in biomarker research for cancer detection. Lancet Oncol. 2001;2(11):698-704.
2. Kulasingam V, Diamandis EP. Strategies for discovering novel cancer biomarkers through utilization of emerging technologies. Nat Clin Pract Oncol. 2008;5(10):588-599.
3. Etzioni R, Urban N, Ramsey S, et al. The case for early detection. Nat Rev Cancer. 2003;3(4):243-252.
4. Pepe MS, Etzioni R, Feng ZD, et al. Phases of biomarker development for early detection of cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2001;93(14):1054-1061.
5. Aebersold R, Anderson L, Caprioli R, et al. Perspective: a program to improve protein biomarker discovery for cancer. J Proteome Res. 2005;4(4):1104-1109.
6. Diamandis EP. Towards identification of true cancer biomarkers. BMC Med. 2014;12:1-4.
7. Srinivas PR, Srivastava S, Hanash S, et al. Proteomics in early detection of cancer. Clin Chem. 2001;47(10):1901-1911.
8. Srinivas PR, Verma M, Zhao YM, et al. Proteomics for cancer biomarker discovery. Clin Chem. 2002;48(8):1160-1169.
9. Rifai N, Gillette MA, Carr SA. Protein biomarker discovery and validation: the long and uncertain path to clinical utility. Nat Biotechnol. 2006;24(8):971-983.
10. Bergman N, Bergquist J. Recent developments in proteomic methods and disease biomarkers. Analyst. 2014;139(16):3836-3851.
11. Qian W-J, Jacobs JM, Liu T, et al. Advances and challenges in liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry-based proteomics profiling for clinical applications. Mol Cell Proteomics. 2006;5(10):1727-1744., A review of LC-MS-based proteomic quantification with discussion of their advantages and limitations, and highlights of their potential applications
12. Xie F, Liu T, Qian W-J, et al. Liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry-based quantitative proteomics. J Biol Chem. 2011;286(29):25443-25449.
13. Choudhary C, Mann M. Decoding signalling networks by mass spectrometrybased proteomics. Nat Rev Mol Biol. 2010;11(6):427-439.
14. Aebersold R, Mann M. Mass spectrometry-based proteomics. Nature. 2003;422(6928):198-207.
15. Nesvizhskii AI, Vitek O, Aebersold R. Analysis and validation of proteomic data generated by tandem mass spectrometry. Nat Methods. 2007;4(10):787-797., The first introduction of parallel reaction monitoring (PRM) with demonstration of this concept by quantitative analysis applying Q Exactive MS and discussion of its advantages over traditional selected reaction monitoring (SRM) approach
16. Wang Q, Chaerkady R, Wu J, et al. Mutant proteins as cancer-specific biomarkers. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2011;108(6):2444-2449.
17. Domon B, Aebersold R. Options and considerations when selecting a quantitative proteomics strategy. Nat Biotechnol. 2010;28(7):710-721.
18. Ross PL, Huang YLN, Marchese JN, et al. Multiplexed protein quantitation in Saccharomyces cerevisiae using aminereactive isobaric tagging reagents. Mol Cell Proteomics. 2004;3(12):1154-1169.
19. Dayon L, Hainard A, Licker V, et al. Relative quantification of proteins in human cerebrospinal fluids by MS/MS using 6-plex isobaric tags. Anal Chem. 2008;80(8):2921-2931.
20. Thompson A, Schafer J, Kuhn K, et al. Tandem mass tags: a novel quantification strategy for comparative analysis of complex protein mixtures by MS/MS. Anal Chem. 2003;75(8):1895-1904.
21. Wiese S, Reidegeld KA, Meyer HE, et al. Protein labeling by iTRAQ: a new tool for quantitative mass spectrometry in proteome research. Proteomics. 2007;7(3):340-350.
22. DeSouza L, Diehl G, Rodrigues MJ, et al. Search for cancer markers from endometrial tissues using differentially labeled tags iTRAQ and clCAT with multidimensional liquid chromatography and tandem mass spectrometry. J Proteome Res. 2005;4(2):377-386.
23. Lesur A, Domon B. Advances in highresolution accurate mass spectrometry application to targeted proteomics. Proteomics. 2015;15(5-6):880-890.
24. Peterson AC, Russell JD, Bailey DJ, et al. Parallel reaction monitoring for high resolution and high mass accuracy quantitative, targeted proteomics. Mol Cell Proteomics. 2012;11(11):1475-1488.
25. Gallien S, Bourmaud A, Kim SY, et al. Technical considerations for large-scale parallel reaction monitoring analysis. J Proteomics. 2014;100:147-159.
26. Pan S, Aebersold R, Chen R, et al. Mass spectrometry based targeted protein quantification: methods and applications. J Proteome Res. 2009;8(2):787-797.
27. Picotti P, Aebersold R. Selected reaction monitoring-based proteomics: workflows, potential, pitfalls and future directions. Nat Methods. 2012;9(6):555-566.
28. Gillet LC, Navarro P, Tate S, et al. 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. 2012;11(6):O111.016717. DOI:10.1074/mcp. O111.016717.
29. Simpson KL, Whetton AD, Dive C. Quantitative mass spectrometry-based techniques for clinical use: biomarker identification and quantification. J Chromatogr B Analyt Technol Biomed Life Sci. 2009;877(13):1240-1249.
30. Bantscheff M, Lemeer S, Savitski MM, et al. Quantitative mass spectrometry in proteomics: critical review update from 2007 to the present. Anal Bioanal Chem. 2012;404(4):939-965.
31. Diamandis EP. Mass spectrometry as a diagnostic and a cancer biomarker discovery tool - opportunities and potential limitations. Mol Cell Proteomics. 2004;3(4):367-378.
32. Domon B, Aebersold R. Review - mass spectrometry and protein analysis. Science. 2006;312(5771):212-217.
33. Ong SE, Mann M. Mass spectrometrybased proteomics turns quantitative. Nat Chem Biol. 2005;1(5):252-262.
34. Swaney DL, McAlister GC, Coon JJ. Decision tree-driven tandem mass spectrometry for shotgun proteomics. Nat Methods. 2008;5(11):959-964.
35. Swaney DL, Wenger CD, Coon JJ. Value of using multiple proteases for large-scale mass spectrometry-based proteomics. J Proteome Res. 2010;9(3):1323-1329.
36. Lipton MS, Pasa-Tolic L, Anderson GA, et al. Global analysis of the Deinococcus radiodurans proteome by using accurate mass tags. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2002;99(17):11049-11054.
37. Tu C, Li J, Bu Y, et al. An ion-currentbased, comprehensive and reproducible proteomic strategy for comparative characterization of the cellular responses to novel anti-cancer agents in a prostate cell model. J Proteomics. 2012;77:187-201.
38. Liu HB, Sadygov RG, Yates JR. A model for random sampling and estimation of relative protein abundance in shotgun proteomics. Anal Chem. 2004;76(14):4193-4201.
39. Megger DA, Bracht T, Meyer HE, et al. Label-free quantification in clinical proteomics. Biochim Biophys Acta Proteins Proteomics. 2013;1834(8):1581-1590.
40. Stern E, Vacic A, Rajan NK, et al. Label-free biomarker detection from whole blood. Nat Nanotechnol. 2010;5(2):138-142.
41. Zhu W, Smith JW, Huang C-M. Mass spectrometry-based label-free quantitative proteomics. J Biomed Biotechnol. 2010;2010:6. Article ID 840518.
42. Zhou Y, Shan Y, Zhang L, et al. Recent advances in stable isotope labeling based techniques for proteome relative quantification. J Chromatogr A. 2014;1365:1-11.
43. Rauniyar N, Yates JR III. Isobaric labeling-based relative quantification in shotgun proteomics. J Proteome Res. 2014;13(12):5293-5309., A latest review paper of isobaric labeling based shotgun proteomic quantification that focuses on different isobaric reagents, their chemical reactions and a variety of factors affecting quantification and the extended applications
44. Ong SE, Blagoev B, Kratchmarova I, et al. Stable isotope labeling by amino acids in cell culture, SILAC, as a simple and accurate approach to expression proteomics. Mol Cell Proteomics. 2002;1(5):376-386.
45. Mann M. Functional and quantitative proteomics using SILAC. Nat Rev Mol Biol. 2006;7(12):952-958.
46. Qian WJ, Monroe ME, Liu T, et al. Quantitative proteome analysis of human plasma following in vivo lipopolysaccharide administration using O-16/O-18 labeling and the accurate mass and time tag approach. Mol Cell Proteomics. 2005;4(5):700-709.
47. Stewart II, Thomson T, Figeys D. O-18 labeling: a tool for proteomics. Rapid Commun Mass Spectrom. 2001;15(24):2456-2465.
48. Yao XD, Freas A, Ramirez J, et al. Proteolytic O-18 labeling for comparative proteomics: model studies with two serotypes of adenovirus. Anal Chem. 2001;73(13):2836-2842.
49. Hsu JL, Huang SY, Chow NH, et al. Stable-isotope dimethyl labeling for quantitative proteomics. Anal Chem. 2003;75(24):6843-6852.
50. Wu R, Haas W, Dephoure N, et al. A large-scale method to measure absolute protein phosphorylation stoichiometries. Nat Methods. 2011;8(8):677-U111.
51. Schmidt A, Kellermann J, Lottspeich F. A novel strategy for quantitative proteornics using isotope-coded protein labels. Proteomics. 2005;5(1):4-15.
52. DeSouza LV, Taylor AM, Li W, 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(8):3525-3534.
53. DeSouza LV, Krakovska O, Darfler MM, et al. mTRAQ-based quantification of potential endometrial carcinoma biomarkers from archived formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissues. Proteomics. 2010;10(17):3108-3116.
54. Geiger T, Cox J, Ostasiewicz P, et al. Super-SILAC mix for quantitative proteomics of human tumor tissue. Nat Methods. 2010;7(5):383-U364.
55. Miyagi M, Rao KCS. Proteolytic O-18-labeling strategies for quantitative proteomics. Mass Spectrom Rev. 2007;26(1):121-136.
56. Zhang S, Yuan H, Zhao B, et al. Integrated platform with a combination of online digestion and O-18 labeling for proteome quantification via an immobilized trypsin microreactor. Analyst. 2015;140(15):5227-5234.
57. Boersema PJ, Raijmakers R, Lemeer S, et al. Multiplex peptide stable isotope dimethyl labeling for quantitative proteomics. Nat Protoc. 2009;4(4):484-494.
58. Leroy B, Rosier C, Erculisse V, et al. Differential proteomic analysis using isotope-coded protein-labeling strategies: comparison, improvements and application to simulated microgravity effect on Cupriavidus metallidurans CH34. Proteomics. 2010;10(12):2281-2291.
59. Zhang S, Wen B, Zhou B, et al. Quantitative analysis of the human AKR family members in cancer cell lines using the mTRAQ/MRM approach. J Proteome Res. 2013;12(5):2022-2033.
60. Mertins P, Udeshi ND, Clauser KR, et al. iTRAQ labeling is superior to mTRAQ for quantitative global proteomics and phosphoproteomics. Mol Cell Proteomics. 2012;11(6):M111.014423. DOI:10.1074/mcp. M111.014423.
61. Evans C, Noirel J, Ow SY, et al. An insight into iTRAQ: where do we stand now? Anal Bioanal Chem. 2012;404(4):1011-1027.
62. Rhein V, Song X, Wiesner A, et al. Amyloid-beta and tau synergistically impair the oxidative phosphorylation system in triple transgenic Alzheimer's disease mice. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2009;106(47):20057-20062.
63. Zieske LR. A perspective on the use of iTRAQ (TM) reagent technology for protein complex and profiling studies. J Exp Bot. 2006;57(7):1501-1508.
64. Pichler P, Koecher T, Holzmann J, et al. Peptide labeling with isobaric tags yields higher identification rates using iTRAQ 4-plex compared to TMT 6-plex and iTRAQ 8-plex on LTQ Orbitrap. Anal Chem. 2010;82(15):6549-6558.
65. Everley RA, Kunz RC, McAllister FE, et al. Increasing throughput in targeted proteomics assays: 54-plex quantitation in a single mass spectrometry run. Anal Chem. 2013;85(11):5340-5346.
66. Qian W-J, Liu T, Petyuk VA, et al. Largescale multiplexed quantitative discovery proteomics enabled by the use of an O-18-labeled "universal" reference sample. J Proteome Res. 2009;8(1):290-299.
67. Xiang F, Ye H, Chen R, et al. N, N-dimethyl leucines as novel isobaric tandem mass tags for quantitative proteomics and peptidomics. Anal Chem. 2010;82(7):2817-2825.
68. Zhang J, Wang Y, Li S. Deuterium isobaric amine-reactive tags for quantitative proteomics. Anal Chem. 2010;82(18):7588-7595.
69. Palmese A, De Rosa C, Chiappetta G, et al. Novel method to investigate protein carbonylation by iTRAQ strategy. Anal Bioanal Chem. 2012;404(6-7):1631-1635.
70. Qu Z, Meng F, Bomgarden RD, et al. Proteomic quantification and site-mapping of S-nitrosylated proteins using isobaric iodoTMT reagents. J Proteome Res. 2014;13(7):3200-3211.
71. Yoon H-J, Seo J, Shin SK. Multi-functional MBIT for peptide tandem mass spectrometry. Mass Spectrom Rev. 2015;34(2):209-218.
72. Rehman I, Evans CA, Glen A, et al. iTRAQ identification of candidate serum biomarkers associated with metastatic progression of human prostate cancer. PLoS One. 2012;7(2):1-10.
73. Boylan KLM, Andersen JD, Anderson LB, et al. Quantitative proteomic analysis by iTRAQ (R) for the identification of candidate biomarkers in ovarian cancer serum. Proteome Sci. 2010;8:1-9.
74. White NMA, Masui O, DeSouza LV, et al. Quantitative proteomic analysis reveals potential diagnostic markers and pathways involved in pathogenesis of renal cell carcinoma. Oncotarget. 2014;5(2):506-518.
75. Pawar H, Kashyap MK, Sahasrabuddhe NA, et al. Quantitative tissue proteomics of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma for novel biomarker discovery. Cancer Biol Ther. 2011;12(6):510-522.
76. Muraoka S, Kume H, Watanabe S, et al. Strategy for SRM-based verification of biomarker candidates discovered by iTRAQ method in limited breast cancer tissue samples. J Proteome Res. 2012;11(8):4201-4210.
77. Papachristou EK, Roumeliotis TI, Chrysagi A, et al. The shotgun proteomic study of the human ThinPrep cervical smear using iTRAQ mass-tagging and 2D LC-FT-Orbitrap-MS: the detection of the human papillomavirus at the protein level. J Proteome Res. 2013;12(5):2078-2089.
78. Yang Y, Huang J, Rabii B, et al. Quantitative proteomic analysis of serum proteins from oral cancer patients: comparison of two analytical methods. Int J Mol Sci. 2014;15(8):14386-14395.
79. Meng R, Gormley M, Bhat VB, et al. Low abundance protein enrichment for discovery of candidate plasma protein biomarkers for early detection of breast cancer. J Proteomics. 2011;75(2):366-374.
80. Sinclair J, Metodieva G, Dafou D, et al. Profiling signatures of ovarian cancer tumour suppression using 2D-DIGE and 2D-LC-MS/MS with tandem mass tagging. J Proteomics. 2011;74(4):451-465.
81. Xu X, Qiao M, Zhang Y, et al. Quantitative proteomics study of breast cancer cell lines isolated from a single patient: discovery of TIMM17A as a marker for breast cancer. Proteomics. 2010;10(7):1374-1390.
82. Yeh C-C, Hsu C-H, Shao Y-Y, et al. Integrated stable isotope labeling by amino acids in cell culture (SILAC) and isobaric tags for relative and absolute quantitation (iTRAQ) quantitative proteomic analysis identifies galectin-1 as a potential biomarker for predicting sorafenib resistance in liver cancer. Mol Cell Proteomics. 2015;14(6):1527-1545.
83. Yang N, Feng S, Shedden K, et al. Urinary glycoprotein biomarker discovery for bladder cancer detection using LC/MS-MS and label-free quantification. Clin Cancer Res. 2011;17(10):3349-3359.
84. Bereman MS, MacLean B, Tomazela DM, et al. The development of selected reaction monitoring methods for targeted proteomics via empirical refinement. Proteomics. 2012;12(8):1134-1141.
85. Lange V, Picotti P, Domon B, et al. Selected reaction monitoring for quantitative proteomics: a tutorial. Mol Syst Biol. 2008;4:1-14., A very useful tutorial for SRM assay development demonstrating how to establish a proteomic SRM experiment, and giving two case studies as examples
86. Gillette MA, Carr SA. Method of the year quantitative analysis of peptides and proteins in biomedicine by targeted mass spectrometry. Nat Methods. 2013;10(1):28-34.
87. Paul D, Kumar A, Gajbhiye A, et al. Mass spectrometry-based proteomics in molecular diagnostics: discovery of cancer biomarkers using tissue culture. Biomed Res Int. 2013;2013:1-16.
88. Schiess R, Wollscheid B, Aebersold R Targeted proteomic strategy for clinical biomarker discovery. Mol Oncol. 2009;3(1):33-44.
89. Gallien S, Bourmaud A, Domon B. A simple protocol to routinely assess the uniformity of proteomics analyses. J Proteome Res. 2014;13(5):2688-2695.
90. Gallien S, Domon B. Detection and quantification of proteins in clinical samples using high resolution mass spectrometry. Methods. 2015;81:15-23.
91. Lesur A, Ancheva L, Kim YJ, et al. Screening protein isoforms predictive for cancer using immunoaffinity capture and fast LC-MS in PRM mode. Proteomics Clin Appl. 2015;9(7-8):695-705.
92. Venable JD, Dong MQ, Wohlschlegel J, et al. Automated approach for quantitative analysis of complex peptide mixtures from tandem mass spectra. Nat Methods. 2004;1(1):39-45.
93. Liu Y, Huettenhain R, Collins B, et al. Mass spectrometric protein maps for biomarker discovery and clinical research. Expert Rev Mol Diagn. 2013;13(8):811-825.
94. Liu Y, Huettenhain R, Surinova S, et al. Quantitative measurements of N-linked glycoproteins in human plasma by SWATH-MS. Proteomics. 2013;13(8):1247-1256.
95. Liu Y, Chen J, Sethi A, et al. Glycoproteomic analysis of prostate cancer tissues by SWATH mass spectrometry discovers N-acylethanolamine acid amidase and protein tyrosine kinase 7 as signatures for tumor aggressiveness. Mol Cell Proteomics. 2014;13(7):1753-1768.
96. Bellei E, Bergamini S, Monari E, et al. High-abundance proteins depletion for serum proteomic analysis: concomitant removal of non-targeted proteins. Amino Acids. 2011;40(1):145-156.
97. Ray S, Reddy PJ, Jain R, et al. Proteomic technologies for the identification of disease biomarkers in serum: advances and challenges ahead. Proteomics. 2011;11(11):2139-2161.
98. Whiteaker JR, Lin C, Kennedy J, et al. A targeted proteomics-based pipeline for verification of biomarkers in plasma. Nat Biotechnol. 2011;29(7):625-U108.
99. Shi T, Su D, Liu T, et al. Advancing the sensitivity of selected reaction monitoringbased targeted quantitative proteomics. Proteomics. 2012;12(8):1074-1092., A review paper about improvement of sensitivity for SRM quantitative proteomics, with analysis of principles and factors governing SRM sensitivity, as well as front-end sample processing strategies and advances in MS instrumentation
100. Liu T, Hossain M, Schepmoes AA, et al. Analysis of serum total and free PSA using immunoaffinity depletion coupled to SRM: correlation with clinical immunoassay tests. J Proteomics. 2012;75(15):4747-4757.
101. Ruppen-Canas I, Lopez-Casas PP, Garcia F, et al. An improved quantitative mass spectrometry analysis of tumor specific mutant proteins at high sensitivity. Proteomics. 2012;12(9):1319-1327.
102. Torsetnes SB, Levernaes MS, Broughton MN, et al. Multiplexing determination of small cell lung cancer biomarkers and their isovariants in serum by immunocapture LC-MS/MS. Anal Chem. 2014;86(14):6983-6992.
103. Chen Y-T, Tuan L-P, Chen H-W, et al. Quantitative analysis of prostate specific antigen isoforms using immunoprecipitation and stable isotope labeling mass spectrometry. Anal Chem. 2015;87(1):545-553.
104. Halvey PJ, Ferrone CR, Liebler DC. GeLC-MRM quantitation of mutant KRAS oncoprotein in complex biological samples. J Proteome Res. 2012;11(7):3908-3913.
105. Whiteaker JR, Zhao L, Frisch C, et al. High-affinity recombinant antibody fragments (Fabs) can be applied in peptide enrichment immuno-MRM assays. J Proteome Res. 2014;13(4):2187-2196.
106. Krisp C, McKay MJ, Wolters DA, et al. Multidimensional protein identification technology-selected reaction monitoring improving detection and quantification for protein biomarker studies. Anal Chem. 2012;84(3):1592-1600.
107. Simon R, Passeron S, Lemoine J, et al. Hydrophilic interaction liquid chromatography as second dimension in multidimensional chromatography with an anionic trapping strategy: application to prostate-specific antigen quantification. J Chromatogr A. 2014;1354:75-84.
108. Rafalko A, Dai S, Hancock WS, et al. Development of a Chip/Chip/SRM platform using digital chip isoelectric focusing and LC-Chip mass spectrometry for enrichment and quantitation of low abundance protein biomarkers in human plasma. J Proteome Res. 2012;11(2):808-817.
109. Schaefer A, Von Toerne C, Becker S, et al. Two-dimensional peptide separation improving sensitivity of selected reaction monitoring-based quantitative proteomics in mouse liver tissue: comparing off-gel electrophoresis and strong cation exchange chromatography. Anal Chem. 2012;84(20):8853-8862.
110. Shi T, Fillmore TL, Sun X, et al. Antibody-free, targeted mass-spectrometric approach for quantification of proteins at low picogram per milliliter levels in human plasma/serum. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2012;109(38):15395-15400., The first report of PRISM-SRM with introduction of the PRISM fractionation platform, the estimation of sensitivity and reproducibility, and its application for quantification of low pg/ml proteins in human plasma/serum
111. Shi T, Sun X, Gao Y, et al. Targeted quantification of low ng/mL level proteins in human serum without immunoaffinity depletion. J Proteome Res. 2013;12(7):3353-3361.
112. Shi T, Gao Y, Quek SI, et al. A highly sensitive targeted mass spectrometric assay for quantification of AGR2 protein in human urine and serum. J Proteome Res. 2014;13(2):875-882.
113. He J, Sun X, Shi T, et al. Antibodyindependent targeted quantification of TMPRSS2-ERG fusion protein products in prostate cancer. Mol Oncol. 2014;8(7):1169-1180.
114. He J, Schepmoes AA, Shi T, et al. Analytical platform evaluation for quantification of ERG in prostate cancer using protein and mRNA detection methods. J Transl Med. 2015;13:418.
115. Solier C, Langen H. Antibody-based proteomics and biomarker research-current status and limitations. Proteomics. 2014;14(6):774-783.
116. Lund H, Lovsletten K, Paus E, et al. Immuno-MS based targeted proteomics: highly specific, sensitive, and reproducible human chorionic gonadotropin determination for clinical diagnostics and doping analysis. Anal Chem. 2012;84(18):7926-7932.
117. Schnell G, Boeuf A, Westermann B, et al. Discovery and targeted proteomics on cutaneous biopsies infected by Borrelia to investigate Lyme disease. Mol Cell Proteomics. 2015;14(5):1254-1264.
118. Tang H-Y, Beer LA, Chang-Wong T, et al. A xenograft mouse model coupled with in-depth plasma proteome analysis facilitates identification of novel serum biomarkers for human ovarian cancer. J Proteome Res. 2012;11(2):678-691.
119. Chen C, Liu X, Zheng W, et al. Screening of missing proteins in the human liver proteome by improved MRM-approach-based targeted proteomics. J Proteome Res. 2014;13(4):1969-1978.
120. Zaenglein N, Tucher J, Pischetsrieder M. Targeted mass spectrometry for the analysis of nutritive modulation of catalase and heme oxygenase-1 expression. J Proteomics. 2015;117:58-69.
121. Anderson NL, Anderson NG, Haines LR, et al. Mass spectrometric quantitation of peptides and proteins using stable isotope standards and capture by anti-peptide antibodies (SISCAPA). J Proteome Res. 2004;3(2):235-244., The first description of stable isotope standards and capture by antipeptide antibodies (SISCAPA) for quantification of peptides in complex digestions with comparison of the measurements by selected ion monitoring (SIM) and SRM
122. Whiteaker JR, Paulovich AG. Peptide immunoaffinity enrichment coupled with mass spectrometry for peptide and protein quantification. Clin Lab Med. 2011;31(3):385-396.
123. Whiteaker JR, Zhao L, Abbatiello SE, et al. Evaluation of large scale quantitative proteomic assay development using peptide affinity-based mass spectrometry. Mol Cell Proteomics. 2011;10(4):1-10.
124. Kuhn E, Whiteaker JR, Mani DR, et al. Interlaboratory evaluation of automated, multiplexed peptide immunoaffinity enrichment coupled to multiple reaction monitoring mass spectrometry for quantifying proteins in plasma. Mol Cell Proteomics. 2012;11(6):1-14.
125. Whiteaker JR, Zhao L, Lin C, et al. Sequential multiplexed analyte quantification using peptide immunoaffinity enrichment coupled to mass spectrometry. Mol Cell Proteomics. 2012;11(6):1-10.
126. Schoenherr RM, Saul RG, Whiteaker JR, et al. Anti-peptide monoclonal antibodies generated for immuno-multiple reaction monitoring-mass spectrometry assays have a high probability of supporting Western Blot and ELISA. Mol Cell Proteomics. 2015;14(2):382-398.
127. Keshishian H, Addona T, Burgess M, et al. Quantitative, multiplexed assays for low abundance proteins in plasma by targeted mass spectrometry and stable isotope dilution. Mol Cell Proteomics. 2007;6(12):2212-2229.
128. Halvey PJ, Zhang B, Coffey RJ, et al. Proteomic consequences of a single gene mutation in a colorectal cancer model. J Proteome Res. 2012;11(2):1184-1195.
129. Shi T, Gao Y, Gaffrey MJ, et al. Sensitive targeted quantification of ERK phosphorylation dynamics and stoichiometry in human cells without affinity enrichment. Anal Chem. 2015;87(2):1103-1110.
130. Shi T, Qian W-J. Antibody-free PRISM-SRM for multiplexed protein quantification: is this the new competition for immunoassays in bioanalysis? Bioanalysis. 2013;5(3):267-269.
131. Shukla HD, Vaitiekunas P, Cotter RJ. Advances in membrane proteomics and cancer biomarker discovery: current status and future perspective. Proteomics. 2012;12(19-20):3085-3104.
132. Blume-Jensen P, Hunter T. Oncogenic kinase signalling. Nature. 2001;411(6835):355-365.
133. Narumi R, Murakami T, Kuga T, et al. A strategy for large-scale phosphoproteomics and SRM-based validation of human breast cancer tissue samples. J Proteome Res. 2012;11(11):5311-5322.
134. Domanski D, Murphy LC, Borchers CH. Assay development for the determination of phosphorylation stoichiometry using multiple reaction monitoring methods with and without phosphatase treatment: application to breast cancer signaling pathways. Anal Chem. 2010;82(13):5610-5620.
135. Tao S, Huang Y, Boyes BE, et al. Liquid chromatography-selected reaction monitoring (LC-SRM) approach for the separation and quantitation of sialylated N-glycans linkage isomers. Anal Chem. 2014;86(21):10584-10590.
136. Yin H-R, Zhang L, L-Q X, 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(9):3912-3919.
137. Reker D, Malmstroem L. Bioinformatic challenges in targeted proteomics. J Proteome Res. 2012;11(9):4393-4402.
138. Colangelo CM, Chung L, Bruce C, et al. Review of software tools for design and analysis of large scale MRM proteomic datasets. Methods. 2013;61(3):287-298.
139. Teleman J, Karlsson C, Waldemarson S, et al. Automated selected reaction monitoring software for accurate label-free protein quantification. J Proteome Res. 2012;11(7):3766-3773.
140. Surinova S, Huettenhain R, Chang C-Y, et al. Automated selected reaction monitoring data analysis workflow for large-scale targeted proteomic studies. Nat Protoc. 2013;8(8):1602-1619.
141. Qeli E, Omasits U, Goetze S, et al. Improved prediction of peptide detectability for targeted proteomics using a rank-based algorithm and organism-specific data. J Proteomics. 2014;108:269-283.
142. Wu C, Shi T, Brown JN, et al. Expediting SRM assay development for large-scale targeted proteomics experiments. J Proteome Res. 2014;13(10):4479-4487.
143. Huettenhain R, Surinova S, Ossola R, et al. N-glycoprotein SRMAtlas a resource of mass spectrometric assays for N-glycosites enabling consistent and multiplexed protein quantification for clinical applications. Mol Cell Proteomics. 2013;12(4):1005-1016.
144. Sjostrom M, Ossola R, Breslin T, et al. A combined shotgun and targeted mass spectrometry strategy for breast cancer biomarker discovery. J Proteome Res. 2015;14(7):2807-2818.
145. Steiner C, Tille J-C, Lamerz J, et al. Quantification of HER2 by targeted mass spectrometry in formalin-fixed paraffinembedded (FFPE) breast cancer tissues. Mol Cell Proteomics. 2015;14(10):2786-2799.
146. Guo T, Kouvonen P, Koh CC, et al. Rapid mass spectrometric conversion of tissue biopsy samples into permanent quantitative digital proteome maps. Nat Med. 2015;21(4):407-413.
147. Krisp C, Yang H, Van Soest R, et al. Online peptide fractionation using a multiphasic microfluidic liquid chromatography chip improves reproducibility and detection limits for quantitation in discovery and targeted proteomics. Mol Cell Proteomics. 2015;14(6):1708-1719.
148. Aebersold R, Burlingame AL, Bradshaw RA. Western blots versus selected reaction monitoring assays: time to turn the tables? Mol Cell Proteomics. 2013;12(9):2381-2382.