Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 207

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

CE‐MS analysis of the human urinary proteome for biomarker discovery and disease diagnostics

Open access
Coon, Joshua J., Zürbig, Petra, Dakna, Mohammed, Dominiczak, Anna F., Decramer, Stéphane, Fliser, Danilo, Frommberger, Moritz, Golovko, Igor, Good, David M., Herget‐Rosenthal, Stefan, Jankowski, Joachim, Julian, Bruce A., Kellmann, Markus, Kolch, Walter, Massy, Ziad, Novak, Jan, Rossing, Kasper, Schanstra, Joost P., Schiffer, Eric, Theodorescu, Dan, Vanholder, Raymond, Weissinger, Eva M., Mischak, Harald, Schmitt‐Kopplin, Philippe·2008·PROTEOMICS – Clinical Applications

Abstract

Owing to its availability, ease of collection, and correlation with pathophysiology of diseases, urine is an attractive source for clinical proteomics. However, many proteomic studies have had only limited clinical impact, due to factors such as modest numbers of subjects, absence of disease controls, small numbers of defined biomarkers, and diversity of analytical platforms. Therefore, it is difficult to merge biomarkers from different studies into a broadly applicable human urinary proteome database. Ideally, the methodology for defining the biomarkers should combine a reasonable analysis time with high resolution, thereby enabling the profiling of adequate samples and recognition of sufficient features to yield robust diagnostic panels. CE‐MS, which was used to analyze urine samples from healthy subjects and patients with various diseases, is a suitable approach for this task. The database of these datasets compiled from the urinary peptides enables the diagnosis, classification, and monitoring of a wide range of diseases. CE‐MS exhibits excellent performance for biomarker discovery and allows subsequent biomarker sequencing independent of the separation platform. This approach may elucidate the pathogenesis of many diseases, and better define especially renal and urological disorders at the molecular level.

Overview

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/prca.200800024

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 2 references

Cited by

See all 207

Metadata

Authors
Coon, J. J., Zürbig, P., Dakna, M., Dominiczak, A. F., Decramer, S., Fliser, D., Frommberger, M., Golovko, I., Good, D. M., Herget‐Rosenthal, S., Jankowski, J., Julian, B. A., Kellmann, M., Kolch, W., Massy, Z., Novak, J., Rossing, K., Schanstra, J. P., Schiffer, E., Theodorescu, D., Vanholder, R., Weissinger, E. M., Mischak, H., & Schmitt‐Kopplin, P.
Venue
PROTEOMICS – Clinical Applications
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2008-07
Volume
2
Issue
7-8
Pages
964-973
ISSN
  • 1862-8346 (ISSN-L)
  • 1862-8354
OpenAlex
W2035540717
Cited by
207
References
2
FWCI
10.05
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: CE‐MS analysis of the human urinary proteome for biomarker discovery and disease diagnostics. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/prca.200800024
The paper
Coon, J. J., Zürbig, P., Dakna, M., Dominiczak, A. F., Decramer, S., Fliser, D., Frommberger, M., Golovko, I., Good, D. M., Herget‐Rosenthal, S., Jankowski, J., Julian, B. A., Kellmann, M., Kolch, W., Massy, Z., Novak, J., Rossing, K., Schanstra, J. P., Schiffer, E., . . . Schmitt‐Kopplin, P. (2008). CE‐MS analysis of the human urinary proteome for biomarker discovery and disease diagnostics. PROTEOMICS – Clinical Applications. https://doi.org/10.1002/prca.200800024

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.