4.5 Article

Multiplexed MRM-based quantitation of candidate cancer biomarker proteins in undepleted and non-enriched human plasma

期刊

PROTEOMICS
卷 13, 期 14, 页码 2202-2215

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/pmic.201200316

关键词

Biomedicine; Cancer biomarkers; MRM; MS; Plasma; Quantitative analysis

资金

  1. Genome Canada
  2. Genome BC
  3. Western Economic Diversification of Canada

向作者/读者索取更多资源

An emerging approach for multiplexed targeted proteomics involves bottom-up LC-MRM-MS, with stable isotope-labeled internal standard peptides, to accurately quantitate panels of putative disease biomarkers in biofluids. In this paper, we used this approach to quantitate 27 candidate cancer-biomarker proteins in human plasma that had not been treated by immunoaffinity depletion or enrichment techniques. These proteins have been reported as biomarkers for a variety of human cancers, from laryngeal to ovarian, with breast cancer having the highest correlation. We implemented measures to minimize the analytical variability, improve the quantitative accuracy, and increase the feasibility and applicability of this MRM-based method. We have demonstrated excellent retention time reproducibility (median interday CV: 0.08%) and signal stability (median interday CV: 4.5% for the analytical platform and 6.1% for the bottom-up workflow) for the 27 biomarker proteins (represented by 57 interference-free peptides). The linear dynamic range for the MRM assays spanned four orders-of-magnitude, with 25 assays covering a 10(3)-10(4) range in protein concentration. The lowest abundance quantifiable protein in our biomarker panel was insulin-like growth factor 1 (calculated concentration: 127 ng/mL). Overall, the analytical performance of this assay demonstrates high robustness and sensitivity, and provides the necessary throughput and multiplexing capabilities required to verify and validate cancer-associated protein biomarker panels in human plasma, prior to clinical use.

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