The Effect of Pre-Analytical Variability on the Measurement of MRM-MS-Based Mid- to High-Abundance Plasma Protein Biomarkers and a Panel of Cytokines
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Blood sample processing and handling can have a significant impact on the stability and levels of proteins measured in biomarker studies. Such pre-analytical variability needs to be well understood in the context of the different proteomics platforms available for biomarker discovery and validation. In the present study we evaluated different types of blood collection tubes including the BD P100 tube containing protease inhibitors as well as CTAD tubes, which prevent platelet activation. We studied the effect of different processing protocols as well as delays in tube processing on the levels of 55 mid and high abundance plasma proteins using novel multiple-reaction monitoring-mass spectrometry (MRM-MS) assays as well as 27 low abundance cytokines using a commercially available multiplexed bead-based immunoassay. The use of P100 tubes containing protease inhibitors only conferred proteolytic protection for 4 cytokines and only one MRM-MS-measured peptide. Mid and high abundance proteins measured by MRM are highly stable in plasma left unprocessed for up to six hours although platelet activation can also impact the levels of these proteins. The levels of cytokines were elevated when tubes were centrifuged at cold temperature, while low levels were detected when samples were collected in CTAD tubes. Delays in centrifugation also had an impact on the levels of cytokines measured depending on the type of collection tube used. Our findings can help in the development of guidelines for blood collection and processing for proteomic biomarker studies.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.022 | 0.034 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".