4.6 Review

Proteomics of Eosinophil Activation

Journal

FRONTIERS IN MEDICINE
Volume 4, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2017.00159

Keywords

eosinophils; mass spectrometry-based proteomics; phosphorylation sites; interleukin-5; STAT3; integrins; immunoproteasome

Funding

  1. National Institutes of Health [P01 HL088594, R01 AI125390]
  2. [T32 HL007899]
  3. NATIONAL HEART, LUNG, AND BLOOD INSTITUTE [P01HL088594, T32HL007899] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER
  4. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ALLERGY AND INFECTIOUS DISEASES [R01AI125390] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER
  5. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF GENERAL MEDICAL SCIENCES [R35GM118110] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We recently identified and quantified > 7,000 proteins in non-activated human peripheral blood eosinophils using liquid chromatography coupled to tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) and described phosphoproteomic changes that accompany acute activation of eosinophils by interleukin-5 (IL5) (1). These data comprise a treasure trove of information about eosinophils. We illustrate the power of label-free LC-MS/MS quantification by considering four examples: complexity of eosinophil STATs, contribution of immunoproteasome subunits to eosinophil proteasomes, complement of integrin subunits, and contribution of platelet proteins originating from platelet-eosinophil complexes to the overall proteome. We describe how isobaric labeling enables robust sample-to-sample comparisons and relate the 220 phosphosites that changed significantly upon treatment with IL5 to previous studies of eosinophil activation. Finally, we review previous attempts to leverage the power of mass spectrometry to discern differences between eosinophils of healthy subjects and those with eosinophil-associated conditions and point out features of label-free quantification and isobaric labeling that are important in planning future mass spectrometric 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

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available