4.5 Article

Quantitative measurements of N-linked glycoproteins in human plasma by SWATH-MS

期刊

PROTEOMICS
卷 13, 期 8, 页码 1247-1256

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/pmic.201200417

关键词

Biomarker discovery and validation; N-linked glycoproteins; Plasma; SWATH-MS; Quantification; Technology

资金

  1. Swiss National Science Foundation [3100A0-107679]
  2. European Research Council [ERC-2008-AdG 233226]
  3. National Institutes of Health [U01CA152813]
  4. EU project PrimeXS [262067]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

SWATH-MS is a data-independent acquisition method that generates, in a single measurement, a complete recording of the fragment ion spectra of all the analytes in a biological sample for which the precursor ions are within a predetermined m/z versus retention time window. To assess the performance and suitability of SWATH-MS-based protein quantification for clinical use, we compared SWATH-MS and SRM-MS-based quantification of N-linked glycoproteins in human plasma, a commonly used sample for biomarker discovery. Using dilution series of isotopically labeled heavy peptides representing biomarker candidates, the LOQ of SWATH-MS was determined to reach 0.0456 fmol at peptide level by targeted data analysis, which corresponds to a concentration of 510 ng protein/mL in plasma, while SRM reached a peptide LOQ of 0.0152 fmol. Moreover, the quantification of endogenous glycoproteins using SWATH-MS showed a high degree of reproducibility, with the mean CV of 14.90%, correlating well with SRM results (R2 = 0.9784). Overall, SWATH-MS measurements showed a slightly lower sensitivity and a comparable reproducibility to state-of-the-art SRM measurements for targeted quantification of the N-glycosites in human blood. However, a significantly larger number of peptides can be quantified per analysis. We suggest that SWATH-MS analysis combined with N-glycoproteome enrichment in plasma samples is a promising integrative proteomic approach for biomarker discovery and verification.

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

4.5
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