4.7 Article

Novel Automated Biomarker Discovery Work Flow for Urinary Peptidomics

期刊

CLINICAL CHEMISTRY
卷 55, 期 1, 页码 117-125

出版社

AMER ASSOC CLINICAL CHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.1373/clinchem.2008.108795

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

BACKGROUND: Urine is potentially a rich source of peptide biomarkers, but reproducible, high-throughput peptidomic analysis is often hampered by the inherent variability in factors such as pH and salt concentration. Our goal was to develop a generally applicable, rapid, and robust method for screening large numbers of urine samples, resulting in a broad spectrum of native peptides, as a tool to be used for biomarker discovery. METHODS: Peptide samples were trapped, desalted, pH-normalized, and fractionated on a miniaturized automatic reverse-phase strong cation exchange (RP-SCX) cartridge system. We analyzed eluted peptides using MALDI-TOF, Fourier transform ion cyclotron resonance, and liquid chromatography-iontrap mass spectrometry. We determined qualitative and quantitative reproducibility of the system and robustness of the method using BSA digests and urine samples, and we used a selected set of urine samples from Schistosoma haematobium-infected individuals to evaluate clinical applicability. RESULTS: The automated RP-SCX sample cleanup and fractionation system exhibits a high qualitative and quantitative reproducibility, with both BSA standards and urine samples. Because of the relatively high cartridge binding capacity (1-2 mL urine), eluted peptides can be measured with high sensitivity using multiple mass spectrometric techniques. As proof of principle, hemoglobin-derived peptides were identified in urine samples from S. haematobium-infected individuals, even when the microhematuria test was negative. CONCLUSIONS: We present a practical, step-by-step method for screening and identification of urinary peptides. Alongside the analytical method evaluation on standard samples, we demonstrate its feasibility with actual clinical material. (C) 2008 American Association for Clinical Chemistry

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