4.7 Article

Establishment and validation of highly accurate formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded quantitative proteomics by heat-compatible pressure cycling technology using phase-transfer surfactant and SWATH-MS

Journal

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
Volume 10, Issue 1, Pages -

Publisher

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-68245-2

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Japanese Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS) [KAKENHI: 16H06218, KAKENHI: 17H04004, KAKENHI: 18KK0446, KAKENHI: 19K22590]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The purpose of this study was to establish a quantitative proteomic method able to accurately quantify pathological changes in the protein expression levels of not only non-membrane proteins, but also membrane proteins, using formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) samples. Protein extraction from FFPE sections of mouse liver was increased 3.33-fold by pressure cycling technology (PCT) and reached the same level as protein extraction from frozen sections. After PCT-assisted processing of FFPE liver samples followed by SWATH-MS-based comprehensive quantification, the peak areas of 88.4% of peptides agreed with those from matched fresh samples within a 1.5-fold range. For membrane proteins, this percentage was remarkably increased from 49.1 to 93.8% by PCT. Compared to the conventional method using urea buffer, the present method using phase-transfer surfactant (PTS) buffer at 95 degrees C showed better agreement of peptide peak areas between FFPE and fresh samples. When our method using PCT and PTS buffer at 95 degrees C was applied to a bile duct ligation (BDL) disease model, the BDL/control expression ratios for 80.0% of peptides agreed within a 1.2-fold range between FFPE and fresh samples. This heat-compatible FFPE-PCT-SWATH proteomics technology using PTS is suitable for quantitative studies of pathological molecular mechanisms and biomarker discovery utilizing widely available FFPE samples.

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