4.6 Review

Quality assurance procedures for mass spectrometry untargeted metabolomics. a review

Journal

JOURNAL OF PHARMACEUTICAL AND BIOMEDICAL ANALYSIS
Volume 147, Issue -, Pages 149-173

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpba.2017.07.044

Keywords

Quality control; Unwanted variation; Bias; Standard operating procedures (SOPS); Untargeted/non-targeted metabolomics; Uncertainty; Validation

Funding

  1. Spanish Ministry of Economy, Industry and Competitiveness [CTQ2014-55279-R]
  2. Spanish Ministry of Education, Culture and Sport [FPU 15/03032]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Untargeted metabolomics, as a global approach, has already proven its great potential and capabilities for the investigation of health and disease, as well as the wide applicability for other research areas. Although great progress has been made on the feasibility of metabolomics experiments, there are still some challenges that should be faced and that includes all sources of fluctuations and bias affecting every step involved in multiplatform untargeted metabolomics studies. The identification and reduction of the main sources of unwanted variation regarding the pre-analytical, analytical and post-analytical phase of metabolomics experiments is essential to ensure high data quality. Nowadays, there is still a lack of information regarding harmonized guidelines for quality assurance as those available for targeted analysis. In this review, sources of variations to be considered and minimized along with methodologies and strategies for monitoring and improvement the quality of the results are discussed. The given information is based on evidences from different groups among our own experiences and recommendations for each stage of the metabolomics workflow. The comprehensive overview with tools presented here might serve other researchers interested in monitoring, controlling and improving the reliability of their findings by implementation of good experimental quality practices in the untargeted metabolomics study. (C) 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available