The Human Plasma Proteome Draft of 2017: Building on the Human Plasma PeptideAtlas from Mass Spectrometry and Complementary Assays
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Human blood plasma provides a highly accessible window to the proteome of any individual in health and disease. Since its inception in 2002, the Human Proteome Organization's Human Plasma Proteome Project (HPPP) has been promoting advances in the study and understanding of the full protein complement of human plasma and on determining the abundance and modifications of its components. In 2017, we review the history of the HPPP and the advances of human plasma proteomics in general, including several recent achievements. We then present the latest 2017-04 build of Human Plasma PeptideAtlas, which yields ∼43 million peptide-spectrum matches and 122,730 distinct peptide sequences from 178 individual experiments at a 1% protein-level FDR globally across all experiments. Applying the latest Human Proteome Project Data Interpretation Guidelines, we catalog 3509 proteins that have at least two non-nested uniquely mapping peptides of nine amino acids or more and >1300 additional proteins with ambiguous evidence. We apply the same two-peptide guideline to historical PeptideAtlas builds going back to 2006 and examine the progress made in the past ten years in plasma proteome coverage. We also compare the distribution of proteins in historical PeptideAtlas builds in various RNA abundance and cellular localization categories. We then discuss advances in plasma proteomics based on targeted mass spectrometry as well as affinity assays, which during early 2017 target ∼2000 proteins. Finally, we describe considerations about sample handling and study design, concluding with an outlook for future advances in deciphering the human plasma proteome.
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 | 0.019 | 0.034 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.019 | 0.038 |
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".