The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Head-to-Head Comparison of Serum Fractionation Techniques
Abstract
Multiple approaches for simplifying the serum proteome have been described. These techniques are generally developed across different laboratories, samples, mass spectrometry platforms, and analysis tools. Hence, comparing the available schemes is impossible from the existing literature because of confounding variables. We describe a head-to-head comparison of several serum fractionation schemes, including N-linked glycopeptide enrichment, cysteinyl-peptide enrichment, magnetic bead separation (C3, C8, and WCX), size fractionation, protein A/G depletion, and immunoaffinity column depletion of abundant serum proteins. Each technique was compared to results obtained from unfractionated human serum. The results show immunoaffinity subtraction is the most effective means for simplifying the serum proteome while maintaining reasonable sample throughput. The reported dataset is publicly available and provides a standard against which emergent technologies can be compared and evaluated for their contribution to serum-based biomarker discovery.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Anderson, N. L., & Anderson, N. G. (2002) · Molecular & Cellular Proteomics · doi:10.1074/mcp.r200007-mcp200 · Cited by 4,414
Krokhin, O. V., Craig, R., Spicer, V., Ens, W., Standing, K. G., Beavis, R. C., & Wilkins, J. A. (2004) · Molecular & Cellular Proteomics · doi:10.1074/mcp.m400031-mcp200 · Cited by 284
Cited by
Addona, T. A., Abbatiello, S. E., Schilling, B., Skates, S. J., Mani, D. R., Bunk, D. M., Spiegelman, C. H., Zimmerman, L. J., Ham, A.-J. L., Keshishian, H., et al. (2009) · Nature Biotechnology · doi:10.1038/nbt.1546 · Cited by 1,037
Self-citationStrategies for discovering novel cancer biomarkers through utilization of emerging technologies
Kulasingam, V., & Diamandis, E. P. (2008) · Nature Clinical Practice Oncology · doi:10.1038/ncponc1187 · Cited by 771
A High-Confidence Human Plasma Proteome Reference Set with Estimated Concentrations in PeptideAtlas
Farrah, T., Deutsch, E. W., Omenn, G. S., Campbell, D. S., Sun, Z., Bletz, J. A., Mallick, P., Katz, J. E., Malmström, J., Ossola, R., et al. (2011) · Molecular & Cellular Proteomics · doi:10.1074/mcp.m110.006353 · Cited by 451
Self-citationComparative Human Salivary and Plasma Proteomes
Loo, J. A., Yan, W., Ramachandran, P., & Wong, D. T. (2010) · Journal of Dental Research · doi:10.1177/0022034510380414 · Cited by 444
Depletion of Abundant Plasma Proteins and Limitations of Plasma Proteomics
Tu, C., Rudnick, P. A., Martinez, M. Y., Cheek, K. L., Stein, S. E., Slebos, R. J. C., & Liebler, D. C. (2010) · Journal of Proteome Research · doi:10.1021/pr100646w · Cited by 390
Selected reaction monitoring applied to proteomics
Gallien, S., Duriez, E., & Domon, B. (2011) · Journal of Mass Spectrometry · doi:10.1002/jms.1895 · Cited by 286
Metadata
- Authors
- Whiteaker, J. R., Zhang, H., Eng, J. K., Fang, R., Piening, B. D., Feng, L.-C., Lorentzen, T. D., Schoenherr, R. M., Keane, J. F., Holzman, T., Fitzgibbon, M., Lin, Zhang, H., Cooke, K., Liu, T., Camp, D. G., Anderson, L., Watts, J., Smith, R. D., McIntosh, M. W., & Paulovich, A. G.
- Venue
- Journal of Proteome Research
- Publisher
- American Chemical Society (ACS)
- Published
- 2006-12-22
- Volume
- 6
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 828-836
- ISSN
- 1535-3893 (ISSN-L)
- 1535-3907
- OpenAlex
- W2052266313
- Cited by
- 165
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 8.43
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
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.
