Cited by 183Advanced Proteomics Techniques and ApplicationsMass Spectrometry Techniques and ApplicationsMetabolomics and Mass Spectrometry Studies

Performance Metrics for Liquid Chromatography-Tandem Mass Spectrometry Systems in Proteomics Analyses

Open access
Rudnick, Paul A., Clauser, Karl R., Kilpatrick, Lisa E., Tchekhovskoi, Dmitrii V., Neta, Pedatsur, Blonder, Nikša, Billheimer, Dean D., Blackman, Ronald K. +26 more·2010·Molecular & Cellular Proteomics

Abstract

A major unmet need in LC-MS/MS-based proteomics analyses is a set of tools for quantitative assessment of system performance and evaluation of technical variability. Here we describe 46 system performance metrics for monitoring chromatographic performance, electrospray source stability, MS1 and MS2 signals, dynamic sampling of ions for MS/MS, and peptide identification. Applied to data sets from replicate LC-MS/MS analyses, these metrics displayed consistent, reasonable responses to controlled perturbations. The metrics typically displayed variations less than 10% and thus can reveal even subtle differences in performance of system components. Analyses of data from interlaboratory studies conducted under a common standard operating procedure identified outlier data and provided clues to specific causes. Moreover, interlaboratory variation reflected by the metrics indicates which system components vary the most between laboratories. Application of these metrics enables rational, quantitative quality assessment for proteomics and other LC-MS/MS analytical applications.

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 · 10.1074/mcp.m900223-mcp200

Cites

28 of 28 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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Rudnick, P. A., Clauser, K. R., Kilpatrick, L. E., Tchekhovskoi, D. V., Neta, P., Blonder, N., Billheimer, D. D., Blackman, R. K., Bunk, D. M., Cardasis, H. L., Ham, A.-J. L., Jaffe, J. D., Kinsinger, C. R., Mesri, M., Neubert, T. A., Schilling, B., Tabb, D. L., Tegeler, T. J., Vega-Montoto, L., Variyath, A. M., Wang, M., Wang, P., Whiteaker, J. R., Zimmerman, L. J., Carr, S. A., Fisher, S. J., Gibson, B. W., Paulovich, A. G., Regnier, F. E., Rodriguez, H., Spiegelman, C., Tempst, P., Liebler, D. C., & Stein, S. E.
Affiliations
  • National Institute of Standards and Technology (US)
  • Broad Institute (US)
  • University of Arizona (US)
  • New York University (US)
  • Vanderbilt University (US)
  • National Institutes of Health (US)
  • Buck Institute for Research on Aging (US)
  • Texas A&M University (US)
  • Fred Hutch Cancer Center (US)
  • University of California, San Francisco (US)
  • Purdue University West Lafayette (US)
  • Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (US)
Corresponding author
  • Liebler, Daniel C.
  • Stein, Stephen E.
Venue
Molecular & Cellular Proteomics
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2010-02
Volume
9
Issue
2
Pages
225-241
ISSN
1535-9476 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2012913476
Cited by
183
References
28
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 13 · 2014: 20 · 2013: 17 · 2012: 18
FWCI
7.72
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Molecular & Cellular Proteomics (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Massachusetts General Hospital
  • Purdue University
  • Vanderbilt University
  • Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center
  • University of Washington
  • University of Arizona
  • Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis
  • University of Victoria
  • Broad Institute
  • Buck Institute for Research on Aging
  • York University
  • University of British Columbia
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Institute of Standards and Technology
  • School of Medicine, Vanderbilt University
  • University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
  • University of California, San Francisco
  • National Cancer Institute (U24CA126480, U24CA126485, U24CA126477, U24CA126479, U24CA126476)
  • Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
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
quality assessment, technical variability, chromatographic performance, peptide identification, inter-laboratory variability, outlier detection, proteomics
MeSH terms
Animals, Chickens, Chromatography, Liquid, Egg Proteins, Laboratories, Saccharomyces cerevisiae, Software, Reproducibility of Results, Proteome, Saccharomyces cerevisiae Proteins, 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