4.5 Article

Large-scale quantitative clinical proteomics by label-free liquid chromatography and mass spectrometry

Journal

CANCER SCIENCE
Volume 100, Issue 3, Pages 514-519

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1349-7006.2008.01055.x

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. Ministry of Health, Labor, and Welfare of Japan
  2. Naito Foundation
  3. Princess Takamatsu Cancer Research Fund
  4. Foundation for the Promotion of Cancer Research

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We previously reported the development of an integrated proteome platform, namely 2-Dimensional Image Converted Analysis of Liquid chromatography and mass spectrometry (2DICAL), for quantitative comparison of large peptide datasets generated by nano-flow liquid chromatography (LC) and mass spectrometry (MS). The key technology of 2DICAL was the precise adjustment of the retention time of LC by dynamic programming. In order to apply 2DICAL to clinical studies that require comparison of a large number of patient samples we further refined the calculation algorithm and increased the accuracy and speed of the peptide peak alignment using a greedy algorithm, which had been used for fast DNA sequence alignment. The peptide peaks of each sample with the same m/z were extracted every 1 m/z and displayed with along the horizontal axis. Here we report a precise comparison of more than 150 000 typtic peptide ion peaks derived from 70 serum samples (40 patients with uterine endometrial cancer and 30 controls). The levels of 49 MS peaks were found to differ significantly between cancer patients and controls (P < 0.01, Welch's t-test and interquartile range [IQR] of > 40), and the differential expression and identification of selected three proteins was validated by immunoblotting. 2DICAL was is highly advantageous for large-scale clinical proteomics because of its simple procedure, high throughput, and quantification accuracy. (Cancer Sci 2009; 100: 514-519).

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available