4.7 Article

LC-MS/MS Quantitation of Esophagus Disease Blood Serum Glycoproteins by Enrichment with Hydrazide Chemistry and Lectin Affinity Chromatography

Journal

JOURNAL OF PROTEOME RESEARCH
Volume 13, Issue 11, Pages 4808-4820

Publisher

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/pr500570m

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Office of the Vice President for Research at Texas Tech University
  2. NIH [1R01GM093322-04]
  3. Cancer Prevention Institute of Texas (CPRIT) [RP130624]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Changes in glycosylation have been shown to have a profound correlation with development/malignancy in many cancer types. Currently, two major enrichment techniques have been widely applied in glycoproteomics, namely, lectin affinity chromatography (LAC)-based and hydrazide chemistry (HC)-based enrichments. Here we report the LCMS/MS quantitative analyses of human blood serum glycoproteins and glycopeptides associated with esophageal diseases by LAC- and HC-based enrichment. The separate and complementary qualitative and quantitative data analyses of protein glycosylation were performed using both enrichment techniques. Chemometric and statistical evaluations, PCA plots, or ANOVA test, respectively, were employed to determine and confirm candidate cancer-associated glycoprotein/glycopeptide biomarkers. Out of 139, 59 common glycoproteins (42% overlap) were observed in both enrichment techniques. This overlap is very similar to previously published studies. The quantitation and evaluation of significantly changed glycoproteins/glycopeptides are complementary between LAC and HC enrichments. LCESIMS/MS analyses indicated that 7 glycoproteins enriched by LAC and 11 glycoproteins enriched by HC showed significantly different abundances between disease-free and disease cohorts. Multiple reaction monitoring quantitation resulted in 13 glycopeptides by LAC enrichment and 10 glycosylation sites by HC enrichment to be statistically different among disease cohorts.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available