Cited by 800Advanced Proteomics Techniques and ApplicationsBioinformatics and Genomic NetworksBiotin and Related Studies

SAINT: probabilistic scoring of affinity purification–mass spectrometry data

Open access
Choi, Hyungwon, Larsen, Brett, Lin, Zhen-Yuan, Breitkreutz, Ashton, Mellacheruvu, Dattatreya, Fermin, Damian, Qin, Zhaohui S, Tyers, Mike +2 more·2011·Nature Methods

Abstract

We present 'significance analysis of interactome' (SAINT), a computational tool that assigns confidence scores to protein-protein interaction data generated using affinity purification-mass spectrometry (AP-MS). The method uses label-free quantitative data and constructs separate distributions for true and false interactions to derive the probability of a bona fide protein-protein interaction. We show that SAINT is applicable to data of different scales and protein connectivity and allows transparent analysis of AP-MS data.

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 · 10.1038/nmeth.1541

Cites

17 of 17 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

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

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?

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [9]Muller P Parmigiani G Rice K Bernardo JM Bayesian Statistics 8 Oxford Univ. Press 2007
  2. [12]Turner B Database (Oxford) 2010 baq023 2010

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Choi, H., Larsen, B., Lin, Z.-Y., Breitkreutz, A., Mellacheruvu, D., Fermin, D., Qin, Z. S., Tyers, M., Gingras, A.-C., & Nesvizhskii, A. I.
Affiliations
  • University of Michigan (US)
  • Lunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research Institute (CA)
  • University of Toronto (CA)
Corresponding author
  • Gingras, Anne-Claude
  • Nesvizhskii, Alexey I
Venue
Nature Methods
Published
2010-12-05
Volume
8
Issue
1
Pages
70-73
ISSN
  • 1548-7091 (ISSN-L)
  • 1548-7105
OpenAlex
W2047077861
Cited by
800
References
17
Citations by year
2026: 37 · 2025: 54 · 2024: 56 · 2023: 59 · 2022: 62 · 2021: 68 · 2020: 66 · 2019: 64 · 2018: 50 · 2017: 59 · 2016: 47 · 2015: 57 · 2014: 43 · 2013: 34 · 2012: 29
FWCI
11.46
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nature Methods (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • Canadian Institutes of Health Research (MOP 84314, MOP-12246)
  • National Cancer Institute (R01CA126239)
  • National Institute of General Medical Sciences (R01GM094231)
  • National Center for Research Resources (R01RR024031)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Chemistry › Spectroscopy › Advanced Proteomics Techniques and Applications
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Bioinformatics and Genomic Networks
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cell Biology › Biotin and Related Studies
Keywords
saints, protein-protein interaction, affinity purification mass spectrometry, confidence scores, significance assessment, interactome analysis, probabilistic scoring
MeSH terms
Chromatography, Affinity, Computer Simulation, Probability, Protein Binding, Proteins, Mass Spectrometry, Computational Biology, Protein Interaction Mapping

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