4.1 Article

Proteomic analysis of formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded renal tissue samples by label-free MS: Assessment of overall technical variability and the impact of block age

Journal

PROTEOMICS CLINICAL APPLICATIONS
Volume 7, Issue 3-4, Pages 273-282

Publisher

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1002/prca.201200065

Keywords

FFPE; Kidney; Label-free MS; Pre-analytical; RCC

Funding

  1. Cancer Research UK
  2. Medical Research Council [G0802416]
  3. Medical Research Council [G0802416] Funding Source: researchfish
  4. MRC [G0802416] Funding Source: UKRI

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose: Protein profiling of formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tissues has enormous potential for the discovery and validation of disease biomarkers. The aim of this study was to systematically characterize the effect of length of time of storage of such tissue blocks in pathology archives on the quality of data produced using label-free MS. Experimental design: Normal kidney and clear cell renal cell carcinoma tissues routinely collected up to 10 years prior to analysis were profiled using LC-MS/MS and the data analyzed using MaxQuant. Protein identities and quantification data were analyzed to examine differences between tissue blocks of different ages and assess the impact of technical and biological variability. Results: An average of over 2000 proteins was seen in each sample with good reproducibility in terms of proteins identified and quantification for normal kidney tissue, with no significant effect of block age. Greater biological variability was apparent in the renal cell carcinoma tissue, possibly reflecting disease heterogeneity, but again there was good correlation between technical replicates and no significant effect of block age. Conclusions and clinical relevance: These results indicate that archival storage time does not have a detrimental effect on protein profiling of FFPE tissues, supporting the use of such tissues in biomarker discovery studies.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available