Tutorial: best practices and considerations for mass-spectrometry-based protein biomarker discovery and validation

Ernesto S. Nakayasu, Marina Gritsenko, Paul D. Piehowski, Yuqian Gao, Daniel J. Orton, Athena A. Schepmoes, Thomas L. Fillmore, Brigitte I. Frohnert, Marian Rewers, Jeffrey P. Krischer, Charles Ansong, Astrid M. Suchy-Dicey, Carmella Evans-Molina, Wei-Jun Qian, Bobbie-Jo M. Webb-Robertson, Thomas O. Metz

Published: 2021-07-08 DOI: 10.1038/s41596-021-00566-6

mass spectrometry

protein biomarkers

study design

data processing

statistical analysis

AI 解读

Generation of mouse–human chimeric embryos

Genome-wide quantification of transcription factor binding at single-DNA-molecule resolution using methyl-transferase footprinting

Generation of CRISPR–Cas9-mediated genetic knockout human intestinal tissue–derived enteroid lines by lentivirus transduction and single-cell cloning

A puromycin-dependent activity-based sensing probe for histochemical staining of hydrogen peroxide in cells and animal tissues

Decoding personal biotic and abiotic airborne exposome

A clinically relevant model of focal embolic cerebral ischemia by thrombus and thrombolysis in rhesus monkeys

Bioengineering human intestinal mucosal grafts using patient-derived organoids, fibroblasts and scaffolds

Biomimetic tail-to-head terpene cyclizations using the resorcin[4]arene capsule catalyst

Neuroscience robotics for controlled induction and real-time assessment of hallucinations

Scanorama: integrating large and diverse single-cell transcriptomic datasets

Single-cell RNA sequencing (scRNA-seq)（单细胞RNA测序）

Data integration（数据集成）

Heterogeneity（异质性）

查看全部

Sections

Figures

References

Mass-spectrometry-based proteomic analysis is a powerful approach for discovering new disease biomarkers. However, certain critical steps of study design such as cohort selection, evaluation of statistical power, sample blinding and randomization, and sam
Main
Phases of biomarker development
Subject selection
Power analysis
Sample handling, collection, storage and tracking
The importance of sample blinding
Considerations for discovery-phase experiments
Considerations for experiments of the verification and validation phases
Examples of successful biomarker studies
Concluding remarks
- References
References
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Valikangas, T., Suomi, T. & Elo, L. L. A systematic evaluation of normalization methods in quantitative label-free proteomics. Brief. Bioinform. 19, 1–11 (2018).
Rappaport, N. et al. MalaCards: an amalgamated human disease compendium with diverse clinical and genetic annotation and structured search. Nucleic Acids Res. 45, D877–D887 (2017).
Yi, L., Swensen, A. C. & Qian, W. J. Serum biomarkers for diagnosis and prediction of type 1 diabetes. Transl. Res. 201, 13–25 (2018).
Sims, E. K. et al. Teplizumab improves and stabilizes beta cell function in antibody-positive high-risk individuals. Sci. Transl. Med. http://doi.org/10.1126/scitranslmed.abc8980 (2021).
Sands, B. E. Biomarkers of inflammation in inflammatory bowel disease. Gastroenterology 149, 1275–1285 e1272 (2015).
Lindhardt, M. et al. Proteomic prediction and Renin angiotensin aldosterone system Inhibition prevention Of early diabetic nephRopathy in TYpe 2 diabetic patients with normoalbuminuria (PRIORITY): essential study design and rationale of a randomised clinical multicentre trial. BMJ Open 6, e010310 (2016).
McShane, L. M. In pursuit of greater reproducibility and credibility of early clinical biomarker research. Clin. Transl. Sci. 10, 58–60 (2017).
Scherer, A. Reproducibility in biomarker research and clinical development: a global challenge. Biomark. Med. 11, 309–312 (2017).
Maes, E., Cho, W. C. & Baggerman, G. Translating clinical proteomics: the importance of study design. Expert Rev. Proteom. 12, 217–219 (2015).
Mischak, H. et al. Implementation of proteomic biomarkers: making it work. Eur. J. Clin. Invest. 42, 1027–1036 (2012).
Frantzi, M., Bhat, A. & Latosinska, A. Clinical proteomic biomarkers: relevant issues on study design & technical considerations in biomarker development. Clin. Transl. Med. 3, 7 (2014).
He, T. Implementation of proteomics in clinical trials. Proteom. Clin. Appl. 13, e1800198 (2019).
Mischak, H. et al. Recommendations for biomarker identification and qualification in clinical proteomics. Sci. Transl. Med. 2, 46ps42 (2010).
Li, D. & Chan, D. W. Proteomic cancer biomarkers from discovery to approval: it’s worth the effort. Expert Rev. Proteom. 11, 135–136 (2014).
Wang, L., McShane, A. J., Castillo, M. J. & Yao, X. in Proteomic and Metabolomic Approaches to Biomarker Discovery 2nd edn (eds Issaq, H. J. & Veenstra, T. D.) 261–288 (Academic Press, 2020).
McNutt, M. Journals unite for reproducibility. Science 346, 679 (2014).
Checklists work to improve science. Nature 556, 273–274 (2018).
Baker, M. 1,500 scientists lift the lid on reproducibility. Nature 533, 452–454 (2016).
European Medicines Agency. Overview of comments received on draft guidance document on qualification of biomarkers. http://www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/regulatory-procedural-guideline/overview-comments-received-draft-guidance-document-qualification-biomarkers_en.pdf (2009).
US Food and Drug Administration. Biomarker qualification: evidentiary framework guidance for industry and FDA staff. http://www.fda.gov/media/119271/download (2018).
MacLean, E. et al. A systematic review of biomarkers to detect active tuberculosis. Nat. Microbiol. 4, 748–758 (2019).
Parker, C. E. & Borchers, C. H. Mass spectrometry based biomarker discovery, verification, and validation-quality assurance and control of protein biomarker assays. Mol. Oncol. 8, 840–858 (2014).
Pavlou, M. P. & Diamandis, E. P. in Genomic and Personalized Medicine 2nd edn (eds Ginsburg, G. S. & Huntington, F. W.) 263–271 (Academic Press, 2013).
Kraus, V. B. Biomarkers as drug development tools: discovery, validation, qualification and use. Nat. Rev. Rheumatol. 14, 354–362 (2018).
Masucci, G. V. et al. Validation of biomarkers to predict response to immunotherapy in cancer: volume I—pre-analytical and analytical validation. J. Immunother. Cancer 4, 76 (2016).
Keshishian, H. et al. Quantitative, multiplexed workflow for deep analysis of human blood plasma and biomarker discovery by mass spectrometry. Nat. Protoc. 12, 1683–1701 (2017).
Rifai, N., Gillette, M. A. & Carr, S. A. Protein biomarker discovery and validation: the long and uncertain path to clinical utility. Nat. Biotechnol. 24, 971–983 (2006).
Shi, T. et al. Antibody-free, targeted mass-spectrometric approach for quantification of proteins at low picogram per milliliter levels in human plasma/serum. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 109, 15395–15400 (2012).
Ma, M. H. Y. et al. A multi-biomarker disease activity score can predict sustained remission in rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Res. Ther. 22, 158 (2020).
Good, D. M. et al. Naturally occurring human urinary peptides for use in diagnosis of chronic kidney disease. Mol. Cell Proteom. 9, 2424–2437 (2010).
Banerjee, A. & Chaudhury, S. Statistics without tears: populations and samples. Ind. Psychiatry J. 19, 60–65 (2010).
Selvin, S. in Statistical Analysis of Epidemiologic Data. (ed. Selvin, S.) Ch. 4 (Oxford University Press., 2004).
Pearce, N. Analysis of matched case-control studies. BMJ 352, i969 (2016).
Rubin, D. B. Matching to remove bias in observational studies. Biometrics 29, 159–183 (1973).
Mahajan, A. Selection bias: selection of controls as a critical issue in the interpretation of results in a case control study. Indian J. Med. Res. 142, 768 (2015).
Morabia, A. Case-control studies in clinical research: mechanism and prevention of selection bias. Prev. Med. 26, 674–677 (1997).
Sutton-Tyrrell, K. Assessing bias in case-control studies. Proper selection of cases and controls. Stroke 22, 938–942 (1991).
Sheikh, K. Investigation of selection bias using inverse probability weighting. Eur. J. Epidemiol. 22, 349–350 (2007).
Alonso, A. et al. Predictors of follow-up and assessment of selection bias from dropouts using inverse probability weighting in a cohort of university graduates. Eur. J. Epidemiol. 21, 351–358 (2006).
Geneletti, S., Best, N., Toledano, M. B., Elliott, P. & Richardson, S. Uncovering selection bias in case-control studies using Bayesian post-stratification. Stat. Med. 32, 2555–2570 (2013).
VanderWeele, T. J. & Shpitser, I. On the definition of a confounder. Ann. Stat. 41, 196–220 (2013).
Fewell, Z., Davey Smith, G. & Sterne, J. A. The impact of residual and unmeasured confounding in epidemiologic studies: a simulation study. Am. J. Epidemiol. 166, 646–655 (2007).
Polley, M. C. Power estimation in biomarker studies where events are already observed. Clin. Trials 14, 621–628 (2017).
Lalouel, J. M. & Rohrwasser, A. Power and replication in case-control studies. Am. J. Hypertens. 15, 201–205 (2002).
Cai, J. & Zeng, D. Sample size/power calculation for case-cohort studies. Biometrics 60, 1015–1024 (2004).
Jones, S. R., Carley, S. & Harrison, M. An introduction to power and sample size estimation. Emerg. Med. J. 20, 453–458 (2003).
Furberg, C. D. & Friedman, L. M. Approaches to data analyses of clinical trials. Prog. Cardiovasc. Dis. 54, 330–334 (2012).
Levin, Y. The role of statistical power analysis in quantitative proteomics. Proteomics 11, 2565–2567 (2011).
Dicker, L., Lin, X. & Ivanov, A. R. Increased power for the analysis of label-free LC-MS/MS proteomics data by combining spectral counts and peptide peak attributes. Mol. Cell Proteom. 9, 2704–2718 (2010).
Skates, S. J. et al. Statistical design for biospecimen cohort size in proteomics-based biomarker discovery and verification studies. J. Proteome Res. 12, 5383–5394 (2013).
Webb-Robertson, B. M. et al. Statistically driven metabolite and lipid profiling of patients from the undiagnosed diseases network. Anal. Chem. 92, 1796–1803 (2020).
Nakayasu, E. S. et al. Comprehensive proteomics analysis of stressed human islets identifies GDF15 as a target for type 1 diabetes intervention. Cell Metab. 31, 363–374 e366 (2020).
Ocaña, G. J. et al. Analysis of serum Hsp90 as a potential biomarker of β cell autoimmunity in type 1 diabetes. PLoS ONE 14, e0208456 (2019).
Sims, E. K. et al. Elevations in the fasting serum proinsulin-to-C-peptide ratio precede the onset of type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Care 39, 1519–1526 (2016).
Townsend, M. K. et al. Impact of pre-analytic blood sample collection factors on metabolomics. Cancer Epidemiol. Biomark. Prev. 25, 823–829 (2016).
Cemin, R. & Daves, M. Pre-analytic variability in cardiovascular biomarker testing. J. Thorac. Dis. 7, E395–E401 (2015).
Pasic, M. D. et al. Influence of fasting and sample collection time on 38 biochemical markers in healthy children: a CALIPER substudy. Clin. Biochem. 45, 1125–1130 (2012).
Narayanan, S. The preanalytic phase. An important component of laboratory medicine. Am. J. Clin. Pathol. 113, 429–452 (2000).
Stewart, T. et al. Impact of pre-analytical differences on biomarkers in the ADNI and PPMI studies: implications in the era of classifying disease based on biomarkers. J. Alzheimers Dis. 69, 263–276 (2019).
Speake, C. et al. Circulating unmethylated insulin DNA as a biomarker of human beta cell death: a multi-laboratory assay comparison. J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab. http://doi.org/10.1210/clinem/dgaa008 (2020).
Holst, J. J. & Wewer Albrechtsen, N. J. Methods and guidelines for measurement of glucagon in plasma. Int. J. Mol. Sci. http://doi.org/10.3390/ijms20215416 (2019).
Steiner, C. et al. Applications of mass spectrometry for quantitative protein analysis in formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissues. Proteomics 14, 441–451 (2014).
Giusti, L., Angeloni, C. & Lucacchini, A. Update on proteomic studies of formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissues. Expert Rev. Proteom. 16, 513–520 (2019).
Piehowski, P. D. et al. Residual tissue repositories as a resource for population-based cancer proteomic studies. Clin. Proteom. 15, 26 (2018).
Thompson, S. M. et al. Impact of pre-analytical factors on the proteomic analysis of formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissue. Proteom. Clin. Appl. 7, 241–251 (2013).
Pellis, L. et al. Plasma metabolomics and proteomics profiling after a postprandial challenge reveal subtle diet effects on human metabolic status. Metabolomics 8, 347–359 (2012).
Johansen, P., Andersen, J. D., Børsting, C. & Morling, N. Evaluation of the iPLEX® Sample ID Plus Panel designed for the Sequenom MassARRAY® system. A SNP typing assay developed for human identification and sample tracking based on the SNPforID panel. Forensic Sci. Int. Genet. 7, 482–487 (2013).
Hoofnagle, A. N. et al. Recommendations for the generation, quantification, storage, and handling of peptides used for mass spectrometry-based assays. Clin. Chem. 62, 48–69 (2016).
Sims, E. K. et al. Proinsulin secretion is a persistent feature of type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Care 42, 258–264 (2019).
Schulz, K. F. & Grimes, D. A. Blinding in randomised trials: hiding who got what. Lancet 359, 696–700 (2002).
Karanicolas, P. J., Farrokhyar, F. & Bhandari, M. Practical tips for surgical research: blinding: who, what, when, why, how? Can. J. Surg. 53, 345–348 (2010).
Zhang, Z. et al. Three biomarkers identified from serum proteomic analysis for the detection of early stage ovarian cancer. Cancer Res. 64, 5882–5890 (2004).
Zhang, Z. & Chan, D. W. The road from discovery to clinical diagnostics: lessons learned from the first FDA-cleared in vitro diagnostic multivariate index assay of proteomic biomarkers. Cancer Epidemiol. Biomark. Prev. 19, 2995–2999 (2010).
Anderson, N. L. & Anderson, N. G. The human plasma proteome: history, character, and diagnostic prospects. Mol. Cell Proteom. 1, 845–867 (2002).
Liu, H., Sadygov, R. G. & Yates, J. R. 3rd A model for random sampling and estimation of relative protein abundance in shotgun proteomics. Anal. Chem. 76, 4193–4201 (2004).
Qian, W. J. et al. Enhanced detection of low abundance human plasma proteins using a tandem IgY12-SuperMix immunoaffinity separation strategy. Mol. Cell Proteom. 7, 1963–1973 (2008).
Liu, T. et al. Evaluation of multiprotein immunoaffinity subtraction for plasma proteomics and candidate biomarker discovery using mass spectrometry. Mol. Cell Proteom. 5, 2167–2174 (2006).
Yadav, A. K. et al. A systematic analysis of eluted fraction of plasma post immunoaffinity depletion: implications in biomarker discovery. PLoS ONE 6, e24442 (2011).
Garay-Baquero, D. J. et al. Comprehensive plasma proteomic profiling reveals biomarkers for active tuberculosis. JCI Insight http://doi.org/10.1172/jci.insight.137427 (2020).
Piehowski, P. D. et al. Sources of technical variability in quantitative LC-MS proteomics: human brain tissue sample analysis. J. Proteome Res. 12, 2128–2137 (2013).
Wisniewski, J. R., Ostasiewicz, P. & Mann, M. High recovery FASP applied to the proteomic analysis of microdissected formalin fixed paraffin embedded cancer tissues retrieves known colon cancer markers. J. Proteome Res. 10, 3040–3049 (2011).
Quesada-Calvo, F. et al. Comparison of two FFPE preparation methods using label-free shotgun proteomics: application to tissues of diverticulitis patients. J. Proteom. 112, 250–261 (2015).
Kawashima, Y., Kodera, Y., Singh, A., Matsumoto, M. & Matsumoto, H. Efficient extraction of proteins from formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissues requires higher concentration of tris(hydroxymethyl)aminomethane. Clin. Proteom. 11, 4 (2014).
Kulevich, S. E., Frey, B. L., Kreitinger, G. & Smith, L. M. Alkylating tryptic peptides to enhance electrospray ionization mass spectrometry analysis. Anal. Chem. 82, 10135–10142 (2010).
Walmsley, S. J. et al. Comprehensive analysis of protein digestion using six trypsins reveals the origin of trypsin as a significant source of variability in proteomics. J. Proteome Res. 12, 5666–5680 (2013).
Herraiz, T. & Casal, V. Evaluation of solid-phase extraction procedures in peptide analysis. J. Chromatogr. A 708, 209–221 (1995).
Muntel, J. et al. Comparison of protein quantification in a complex background by DIA and TMT workflows with fixed instrument time. J. Proteome Res. 18, 1340–1351 (2019).
Ow, S. Y. et al. iTRAQ underestimation in simple and complex mixtures: “the good, the bad and the ugly”. J. Proteome Res. 8, 5347–5355 (2009).
Liu, Y. et al. Quantitative variability of 342 plasma proteins in a human twin population. Mol. Syst. Biol. 11, 786 (2015).
Geyer, P. E. et al. Proteomics reveals the effects of sustained weight loss on the human plasma proteome. Mol. Syst. Biol. 12, 901 (2016).
Bekker-Jensen, D. B. et al. A compact quadrupole-orbitrap mass spectrometer with FAIMS interface improves proteome coverage in short LC gradients. Mol. Cell Proteom. 19, 716–729 (2020).
Xuan, Y. et al. Standardization and harmonization of distributed multi-center proteotype analysis supporting precision medicine studies. Nat. Commun. 11, 5248 (2020).
Shen, Y. et al. Discovery of potential plasma biomarkers for tuberculosis in HIV-infected patients by data-independent acquisition-based quantitative proteomics. Infect. Drug Resist. 13, 1185–1196 (2020).
Fang, X. et al. Urinary proteomics of Henoch-Schonlein purpura nephritis in children using liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. Clin. Proteom. 17, 10 (2020).
Carnielli, C. M. et al. Combining discovery and targeted proteomics reveals a prognostic signature in oral cancer. Nat. Commun. 9, 3598 (2018).
Bekker-Jensen, D. B. et al. An optimized shotgun strategy for the rapid generation of comprehensive human proteomes. Cell Syst. 4, 587–599 e584 (2017).
Ow, S. Y., Salim, M., Noirel, J., Evans, C. & Wright, P. C. Minimising iTRAQ ratio compression through understanding LC-MS elution dependence and high-resolution HILIC fractionation. Proteomics 11, 2341–2346 (2011).
Manadas, B., Mendes, V. M., English, J. & Dunn, M. J. Peptide fractionation in proteomics approaches. Expert Rev. Proteom. 7, 655–663 (2010).
Schoenmakers, P. J., van Molle, S., Hayes, C. M. G. & Uunk, L. G. M. Effects of pH in reversed-phase liquid chromatography. Anal. Chim. Acta 250, 1–19 (1991).
Amidan, B. G. et al. Signatures for mass spectrometry data quality. J. Proteome Res. 13, 2215–2222 (2014).
Zhang, T. et al. Block design with common reference samples enables robust large-scale label-free quantitative proteome profiling. J. Proteome Res. http://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jproteome.0c00310 (2020).
Burger, B., Vaudel, M. & Barsnes, H. Importance of block randomization when designing proteomics experiments. J. Proteome Res. http://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jproteome.0c00536 (2020).
Stanfill, B. A. et al. Quality control analysis in real-time (QC-ART): a tool for real-time quality control assessment of mass spectrometry-based proteomics data. Mol. Cell Proteom. 17, 1824–1836 (2018).
Matzke, M. M. et al. Improved quality control processing of peptide-centric LC-MS proteomics data. Bioinformatics 27, 2866–2872 (2011).
Bittremieux, W., Valkenborg, D., Martens, L. & Laukens, K. Computational quality control tools for mass spectrometry proteomics. Proteomics http://doi.org/10.1002/pmic.201600159 (2017).
Devabhaktuni, A. et al. TagGraph reveals vast protein modification landscapes from large tandem mass spectrometry datasets. Nat. Biotechnol. 37, 469–479 (2019).
Cox, J. et al. Andromeda: a peptide search engine integrated into the MaxQuant environment. J. Proteome Res. 10, 1794–1805 (2011).
Kim, S. & Pevzner, P. A. MS-GF+ makes progress towards a universal database search tool for proteomics. Nat. Commun. 5, 5277 (2014).
Kong, A. T., Leprevost, F. V., Avtonomov, D. M., Mellacheruvu, D. & Nesvizhskii, A. I. MSFragger: ultrafast and comprehensive peptide identification in mass spectrometry-based proteomics. Nat. Methods 14, 513–520 (2017).
Elias, J. E. & Gygi, S. P. Target-decoy search strategy for increased confidence in large-scale protein identifications by mass spectrometry. Nat. Methods 4, 207–214 (2007).
Gan, N. et al. Regulation of phosphoribosyl ubiquitination by a calmodulin-dependent glutamylase. Nature 572, 387–391 (2019).
Callister, S. J. et al. Normalization approaches for removing systematic biases associated with mass spectrometry and label-free proteomics. J. Proteome Res. 5, 277–286 (2006).
Kultima, K. et al. Development and evaluation of normalization methods for label-free relative quantification of endogenous peptides. Mol. Cell Proteom. 8, 2285–2295 (2009).
Webb-Robertson, B. J., Matzke, M. M., Jacobs, J. M., Pounds, J. G. & Waters, K. M. A statistical selection strategy for normalization procedures in LC-MS proteomics experiments through dataset-dependent ranking of normalization scaling factors. Proteomics 11, 4736–4741 (2011).
Karpievitch, Y. V., Dabney, A. R. & Smith, R. D. Normalization and missing value imputation for label-free LC-MS analysis. BMC Bioinformatics 13, S5 (2012).
Liebal, U. W., Phan, A. N. T., Sudhakar, M., Raman, K. & Blank, L. M. Machine learning applications for mass spectrometry-based metabolomics. Metabolites http://doi.org/10.3390/metabo10060243 (2020).
Kim, M., Rai, N., Zorraquino, V. & Tagkopoulos, I. Multi-omics integration accurately predicts cellular state in unexplored conditions for Escherichia coli. Nat. Commun. 7, 13090 (2016).
Sedgwick, P. Multiple hypothesis testing and Bonferroni’s correction. BMJ 349, g6284 (2014).
Artigaud, S., Gauthier, O. & Pichereau, V. Identifying differentially expressed proteins in two-dimensional electrophoresis experiments: inputs from transcriptomics statistical tools. Bioinformatics 29, 2729–2734 (2013).
Strimmer, K. A unified approach to false discovery rate estimation. BMC Bioinformatics 9, 303 (2008).
Frohnert, B. I. et al. Predictive modeling of type 1 diabetes stages using disparate data sources. Diabetes 69, 238–248 (2020).
Sonsare, P. M. & Gunavathi, C. Investigation of machine learning techniques on proteomics: a comprehensive survey. Prog. Biophys. Mol. Biol. 149, 54–69 (2019).
Palivec, V. [Minutiae, the first Czech medical prints]. Cas. Lek. Cesk 128, 1530 (1989).
Colby, S. M., McClure, R. S., Overall, C. C., Renslow, R. S. & McDermott, J. E. Improving network inference algorithms using resampling methods. BMC Bioinformatics 19, 376 (2018).
Schiess, R., Wollscheid, B. & Aebersold, R. Targeted proteomic strategy for clinical biomarker discovery. Mol. Oncol. 3, 33–44 (2009).
Surinova, S. et al. On the development of plasma protein biomarkers. J. Proteome Res. 10, 5–16 (2011).
Burgess, M. W., Keshishian, H., Mani, D. R., Gillette, M. A. & Carr, S. A. Simplified and efficient quantification of low-abundance proteins at very high multiplex via targeted mass spectrometry. Mol. Cell Proteom. 13, 1137–1149 (2014).
Kennedy, J. J. et al. Demonstrating the feasibility of large-scale development of standardized assays to quantify human proteins. Nat. Methods 11, 149–155 (2014).
Kim, Y. et al. Targeted proteomics identifies liquid-biopsy signatures for extracapsular prostate cancer. Nat. Commun. 7, 11906 (2016).
Paulovich, A. G., Whiteaker, J. R., Hoofnagle, A. N. & Wang, P. The interface between biomarker discovery and clinical validation: the tar pit of the protein biomarker pipeline. Proteom. Clin. Appl. 2, 1386–1402 (2008).
Kawahara, R. et al. Integrative analysis to select cancer candidate biomarkers to targeted validation. Oncotarget 6, 43635–43652 (2015).
Toth, R. et al. Random forest-based modelling to detect biomarkers for prostate cancer progression. Clin. Epigenetics 11, 148 (2019).
Olivier, M., Asmis, R., Hawkins, G. A., Howard, T. D. & Cox, L. A. the need for multi-omics biomarker signatures in precision medicine. Int. J. Mol. Sci. http://doi.org/10.3390/ijms20194781 (2019).
Lange, V., Picotti, P., Domon, B. & Aebersold, R. Selected reaction monitoring for quantitative proteomics: a tutorial. Mol. Syst. Biol. 4, 222 (2008).
Tarasova, I. A., Masselon, C. D., Gorshkov, A. V. & Gorshkov, M. V. Predictive chromatography of peptides and proteins as a complementary tool for proteomics. Analyst 141, 4816–4832 (2016).
Rost, H., Malmstrom, L. & Aebersold, R. A computational tool to detect and avoid redundancy in selected reaction monitoring. Mol. Cell Proteom. 11, 540–549 (2012).
Mueller, L. K., Baumruck, A. C., Zhdanova, H. & Tietze, A. A. Challenges and perspectives in chemical synthesis of highly hydrophobic peptides. Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol. 8, 162 (2020).
Wu, C. et al. Expediting SRM assay development for large-scale targeted proteomics experiments. J. Proteome Res. 13, 4479–4487 (2014).
MacLean, B. et al. Skyline: an open source document editor for creating and analyzing targeted proteomics experiments. Bioinformatics 26, 966–968 (2010).
Pino, L. K. et al. Matrix-matched calibration curves for assessing analytical figures of merit in quantitative proteomics. J. Proteome Res. 19, 1147–1153 (2020).
Whiteaker, J. R. et al. CPTAC Assay Portal: a repository of targeted proteomic assays. Nat. Methods 11, 703–704 (2014).
Yu, L. et al. Targeted brain proteomics uncover multiple pathways to Alzheimer’s dementia. Ann. Neurol. 84, 78–88 (2018).
Whiteaker, J. R. et al. Peptide immunoaffinity enrichment with targeted mass spectrometry: application to quantification of ATM kinase phospho-signaling. Methods Mol. Biol. 1599, 197–213 (2017).
Zhu, Y. et al. Immunoaffinity microflow liquid chromatography/tandem mass spectrometry for the quantitation of PD1 and PD-L1 in human tumor tissues. Rapid Commun. Mass Spectrom. 34, e8896 (2020).
Schneck, N. A., Phinney, K. W., Lee, S. B. & Lowenthal, M. S. Quantification of cardiac troponin I in human plasma by immunoaffinity enrichment and targeted mass spectrometry. Anal. Bioanal. Chem. 410, 2805–2813 (2018).
Sall, A. et al. Advancing the immunoaffinity platform AFFIRM to targeted measurements of proteins in serum in the pg/ml range. PLoS ONE 13, e0189116 (2018).
Jung, S. et al. Quantification of ATP7B protein in dried blood spots by peptide immuno-SRM as a potential screen for Wilson’s disease. J. Proteome Res. 16, 862–871 (2017).
Schoenherr, R. M. et al. Multiplexed quantification of estrogen receptor and HER2/Neu in tissue and cell lysates by peptide immunoaffinity enrichment mass spectrometry. Proteomics 12, 1253–1260 (2012).
Gibbons, B. C. et al. Rapidly assessing the quality of targeted proteomics experiments through monitoring stable-isotope labeled standards. J. Proteome Res. 18, 694–699 (2019).
Carr, S. A. et al. Targeted peptide measurements in biology and medicine: best practices for mass spectrometry-based assay development using a fit-for-purpose approach. Mol. Cell Proteom. 13, 907–917 (2014).
Grant, R. P. & Hoofnagle, A. N. From lost in translation to paradise found: enabling protein biomarker method transfer by mass spectrometry. Clin. Chem. 60, 941–944 (2014).
Chen, Z. et al. Quantitative insulin analysis using liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry in a high-throughput clinical laboratory. Clin. Chem. 59, 1349–1356 (2013).
Zhang, Q. et al. Serum proteomics reveals systemic dysregulation of innate immunity in type 1 diabetes. J. Exp. Med. 210, 191–203 (2013).
Almangush, A. et al. A simple novel prognostic model for early stage oral tongue cancer. Int. J. Oral. Maxillofac. Surg. 44, 143–150 (2015).
Tofte, N. et al. Early detection of diabetic kidney disease by urinary proteomics and subsequent intervention with spironolactone to delay progression (PRIORITY): a prospective observational study and embedded randomised placebo-controlled trial. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 8, 301–312 (2020).
Issaq, H. J., Veenstra, T. D., Conrads, T. P. & Felschow, D. The SELDI-TOF MS approach to proteomics: protein profiling and biomarker identification. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 292, 587–592 (2002).
Fung, E. T. A recipe for proteomics diagnostic test development: the OVA1 test, from biomarker discovery to FDA clearance. Clin. Chem. 56, 327–329 (2010).
Carvalho, V. P. et al. The contribution and perspectives of proteomics to uncover ovarian cancer tumor markers. Transl. Res. 206, 71–90 (2019).
Belczacka, I. et al. Proteomics biomarkers for solid tumors: current status and future prospects. Mass Spectrom. Rev. 38, 49–78 (2019).
Ma, J. & Kilby, G. W. Sensitive, rapid, robust, and reproducible workflow for host cell protein profiling in biopharmaceutical process development. J. Proteome Res. http://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jproteome.0c00252 (2020).
Couvillion, S. P. et al. New mass spectrometry technologies contributing towards comprehensive and high throughput omics analyses of single cells. Analyst 144, 794–807 (2019).
Li, J. et al. TMTpro reagents: a set of isobaric labeling mass tags enables simultaneous proteome-wide measurements across 16 samples. Nat. Methods 17, 399–404 (2020).
Beausoleil, S. A., Villen, J., Gerber, S. A., Rush, J. & Gygi, S. P. A probability-based approach for high-throughput protein phosphorylation analysis and site localization. Nat. Biotechnol. 24, 1285–1292 (2006).

Tutorial: best practices and considerations for mass-spectrometry-based protein biomarker discovery and validation

推荐阅读