Cited by 1,230Advanced Proteomics Techniques and ApplicationsMass Spectrometry Techniques and ApplicationsMetabolomics and Mass Spectrometry Studies

Quantitative mass spectrometric multiple reaction monitoring assays for major plasma proteins

Open access
Anderson, Leigh, Hunter, Christie L.·2006·Molecular & Cellular Proteomics

Abstract

Quantitative LC-MS/MS assays were designed for tryptic peptides representing 53 high and medium abundance proteins in human plasma using a multiplexed multiple reaction monitoring (MRM) approach. Of these, 47 produced acceptable quantitative data, demonstrating within-run coefficients of variation (CVs) (n = 10) of 2-22% (78% of assays had CV <10%). A number of peptides gave CVs in the range 2-7% in five experiments (10 replicate runs each) continuously measuring 137 MRMs, demonstrating the precision achievable in complex digests. Depletion of six high abundance proteins by immunosubtraction significantly improved CVs compared with whole plasma, but analytes could be detected in both sample types. Replicate digest and depletion/digest runs yielded correlation coefficients (R(2)) of 0.995 and 0.989, respectively. Absolute analyte specificity for each peptide was demonstrated using MRM-triggered MS/MS scans. Reliable detection of L-selectin (measured at 0.67 microg/ml) indicates that proteins down to the microg/ml level can be quantitated in plasma with minimal sample preparation, yielding a dynamic range of 4.5 orders of magnitude in a single experiment. Peptide MRM measurements in plasma digests thus provide a rapid and specific assay platform for biomarker validation, one that can be extended to lower abundance proteins by enrichment of specific target peptides (stable isotope standards and capture by anti-peptide antibodies (SISCAPA)).

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1074/mcp.m500331-mcp200

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Anderson, L., & Hunter, C. L.
Corresponding author
Anderson, Leigh
Venue
Molecular & Cellular Proteomics
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2006-04
Volume
5
Issue
4
Pages
573-588
ISSN
1535-9476 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2056467018
Cited by
1,230
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 19 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 28 · 2018: 41 · 2017: 57 · 2016: 63 · 2015: 70 · 2014: 93 · 2013: 124 · 2012: 139
FWCI
25.04
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Molecular & Cellular Proteomics (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
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
plasma proteins, multiple reaction monitoring, quantitative proteomics, high-abundance protein depletion, L-selectin, tryptic peptides, biomarker validation, peptide enrichment, LC-MS/MS method development
MeSH terms
Amino Acid Sequence, Blood Proteins, Chromatography, Liquid, Humans, Molecular Sequence Data, Peptide Mapping, Reference Standards, Sensitivity and Specificity, Reproducibility of Results, Spectrometry, Mass, Electrospray Ionization

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