4.7 Article

Recognition of urinary N-linked glycopeptides in kidney cancer patients by hydrophilic carbohydrate functionalized magnetic metal organic framework combined with LC-MS/MS

期刊

MICROCHIMICA ACTA
卷 187, 期 11, 页码 -

出版社

SPRINGER WIEN
DOI: 10.1007/s00604-020-04595-y

关键词

Glycosylation; Post-translational modification; Human urine; Magnetic nanomaterials; Post-functionalization

资金

  1. National Key R&D Program of China [2018YFA0507501]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [21425518]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A hydrophilic carbohydrate functionalized magnetic metal organic framework (Mag Zr-MOF@G6P) was synthesized via a facile one-step modification strategy for selective glycopeptide capture in virtue of hydrophilic interaction chromatography technique. The inherently hydrophilic Zr-MOF layer not only provides selective size-sieving pore structures but also offers large specific surface area to afford abundant affinity sites. Hydroxyl-rich glucose-6-phosphate was immobilized onto the Zr-MOF via a straightforward coordination manner to regulate its surface property, for the purpose of enhancing its hydrophilicity. Benefitting from the merits of Zr-MOF and glucose-6-phosphate, the as-designed composite exhibits good selectivity (the mass ratio of HRP digests to BSA digests was up to1:200) and low limit of detection (0.1 fmol mu L-1) towards the recognition of glycopeptides from standard samples. More excitingly, glycopeptides in urine of healthy people and patients with kidney cancer were successfully enriched and identified by the combined liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry/mass spectrometry technology (LC-MS/MS). Further gene ontology analysis of molecular function and biological process revealed that 13 original glycoproteins of the identified glycopeptides from urine of patients significantly participate in diverse cancer-associated events, including collagen binding, immunoglobulin receptor binding, antigen binding, and complement activation process.

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