Absolute Quantification of Potential Cancer Markers in Clinical Tissue Homogenates Using Multiple Reaction Monitoring on a Hybrid Triple Quadrupole/Linear Ion Trap Tandem Mass Spectrometer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Multidimensional liquid chromatography with tandem mass spectrometry with iTRAQ-labeling typically used for differential expression analysis in biomarker discovery does not always detect peptides from these biomarkers in all samples analyzed. Herein we describe the results of targeted analyses using multiple reaction monitoring (MRM) on a hybrid triple quadrupole/linear ion-trap tandem mass spectrometer. The MRM approach when combined with the newly released mTRAQ reagent, a non-isobaric variant of the iTRAQ tag available in two versions, enables absolute quantification of peptides and proteins via isotope-dilution mass spectrometry. This approach was applied to clinical endometrial tissue homogenates in an effort to quantify two endometrial cancer biomarkers, pyruvate kinase (PK) and polymeric immunoglobulin receptor (PIGR). We successfully demonstrated the feasibility of this approach on 20 individual samples and further verified the differential expressions of these two biomarkers in endometrial carcinoma. PK was determined to be present at an average concentration of 58.33 pmol/mg of total proteins and in the range of 9.13-87.66 pmol/mg in the soluble fraction of the normal proliferative endometrium homogenates. By contrast, the average concentration of PK in the cancer sample homogenates was 237.2 pmol/mg of total proteins and in the range of 66.10-570.9 pmol/mg. PIGR was found to be expressed at an average concentration of 8.85 pmol/mg of total proteins with a range of 1.02-49.61 pmol/mg in the normal proliferative control samples, and an average concentration of 200.2 pmol/mg with a range of 7.63-810.4 pmol/mg in the cancer samples. This study confirmed qualitatively the differential expressions previously observed but also showed that the actual relative differential expressions in these samples were much higher than those reported in the discovery study. These results validated earlier observations of dynamic-range compression in iTRAQ-labeling with hybrid quadrupole/time-of-flight mass spectrometry (DeSouza, L.V. et al. J. Proteome Res. 2008, 7, 3525-3534).
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".