4.7 Review

Toward a Platform for Comprehensive Glycan Sequencing

期刊

MOLECULAR & CELLULAR PROTEOMICS
卷 12, 期 4, 页码 866-873

出版社

AMER SOC BIOCHEMISTRY MOLECULAR BIOLOGY INC
DOI: 10.1074/mcp.R112.026823

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [P01 HL107146-01, RO1A1090866]
  2. Glycan Connections, LLC

向作者/读者索取更多资源

From a series of recently published reports, an analytical platform has been proposed for a quantitative and qualitative measure of N- and O-glycosylation, complete with peptide-glycan connectivity and detailed structural understanding. As distant as this may appear, a best methods approach will appear that must move us beyond the cartoon stage of structural understanding. Thus, with this unifying goal in mind, we summarize a series of individually promising first phase protocols of sample preparation (release, purification, and quantification) that remain congruent with a concluding phase (methylation and MSn) for documented structural detail. Sequential enzymatic N-glycan and chemical O-glycan release from glycopeptides with intervening solid phase extraction and derivatization will provide for a comparative quantification measure of glycosylation. The O-glycan release will be nonreductive and coupled with Michael addition to a pyrazolone analog (1-phenyl-3-methyl-5-pyrazolone) with both the peptide and glycan labeled. The product glycans are stable to methylation and appropriate for sequential disassembly (MSn). An application using human serum and cancer samples has been detailed characterizing sLe(x) and comparable valence epitopes. This integrated platform will provide opportunities at variable points to contrast, share, and advance alternative protocols in a collaborative effort that is greatly needed. This integrated platform provides end point opportunities to confirm structural details compiled from synthetic standards and well characterized biologics by MSn. Molecular & Cellular Proteomics 12: 10.1074/mcp.R112.026823, 866-873, 2013.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据