A streamlined mass spectrometry–based proteomics workflow for large-scale FFPE tissue analysis
Open accessPublished version of a preprint
Abstract
Formalin fixation and paraffin-embedding (FFPE) is the most common method to preserve human tissue for clinical diagnosis, and FFPE archives represent an invaluable resource for biomedical research. Proteins in FFPE material are stable over decades but their efficient extraction and streamlined analysis by mass spectrometry (MS)-based proteomics has so far proven challenging. Herein we describe a MS-based proteomic workflow for quantitative profiling of large FFPE tissue cohorts directly from histopathology glass slides. We demonstrate broad applicability of the workflow to clinical pathology specimens and variable sample amounts, including low-input cancer tissue isolated by laser microdissection. Using state-of-the-art data dependent acquisition (DDA) and data independent acquisition (DIA) MS workflows, we consistently quantify a large part of the proteome in 100 min single-run analyses. In an adenoma cohort comprising more than 100 samples, total workup took less than a day. We observed a moderate trend towards lower protein identification in long-term stored samples (>15 years), but clustering into distinct proteomic subtypes was independent of archival time. Our results underscore the great promise of FFPE tissues for patient phenotyping using unbiased proteomics and they prove the feasibility of analyzing large tissue cohorts in a robust, timely, and streamlined manner. © 2020 The Authors. The Journal of Pathology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Pathological Society of Great Britain and Ireland.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
A streamlined MS-based proteomics workflow for large-scale analysis of FFPE tissues was developed and further optimized for quantitative proteome and post-translational modification analysis in clinical FFPE samples.
“For example, a streamlined MS-based proteomics workflow for large-scale analysis of FFPE tissues was recently developed [38], and further optimized for quantitative proteome and post-translational modification analysis in clinical FFPE samples [37].”
From A perspective on integrating digital pathology, proteomics, clinical data and AI analytics in cancer research (2025) · cites this paper as [38]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 59 · Cited by 200
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- Tyanova S, Albrechtsen R, Kronqvist P, et al. ARTICLE Proteomic maps of breast cancer subtypes. Nat Commun 2016; 7: 1-11 14
- Authors
- Coscia, F., Doll, S., Bech, J. M., Schweizer, L., Mund, A., Lengyel, E., Lindebjerg, J., Madsen, G. I., Moreira, J. M., & Mann, M.
- Affiliations
- University of Copenhagen (DK)
- Max Planck Institute of Biochemistry (DE)
- University of Chicago (US)
- Vejle Sygehus (DK)
- Odense University Hospital (DK)
- Corresponding author
- Mann, Matthias
- ORCID
- Venue
- The Journal of Pathology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2020-04-29
- Volume
- 251
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 100-112
- ISSN
- 0022-3417 (ISSN-L)
- 1096-9896
- OpenAlex
- W3011578907
- Cited by
- 200
- References
- 59
- Citations by year
- 2026: 32 · 2025: 32 · 2024: 38 · 2023: 25 · 2022: 29 · 2021: 34 · 2020: 10
- FWCI
- 9.35
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- The Journal of Pathology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Research at the University of Copenhagen (University of Copenhagen) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- MDC Repository (Max-Delbrueck-Center for Molecular Medicine) (acceptedVersion)
- MPG.PuRe (Max Planck Society) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- University of Southern Denmark Research Portal (University of Southern Denmark) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Funders
- H2020 Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions (846795)
- Horizon 2020 Framework Programme (686547)
- Max-Planck-Gesellschaft
- Novo Nordisk UK Research Foundation (NNF14CC0001, NNF15CC0001)
- Pritzker School of Medicine (P30CA014599)
- University of Chicago
- European Commission
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Chemistry › Spectroscopy › Advanced Proteomics Techniques and Applications
- Physical Sciences › Chemistry › Spectroscopy › Mass Spectrometry Techniques and Applications
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Metabolomics and Mass Spectrometry Studies
- Keywords
- formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissue, proteomics workflow, protein extraction, laser microdissection, data-independent acquisition, data-dependent acquisition, proteomic subtypes, adenoma, patient phenotyping
- MeSH terms
- Chromatography, Liquid, Humans, Neoplasms, Cohort Studies, Paraffin Embedding, Tissue Fixation, Proteome, Proteomics, Tandem Mass Spectrometry
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review