Cross-Laboratory Standardization of Preclinical Lipidomics Using Differential Mobility Spectrometry and Multiple Reaction Monitoring
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Modern biomarker and translational research as well as personalized health care studies rely heavily on powerful omics' technologies, including metabolomics and lipidomics. However, to translate metabolomics and lipidomics discoveries into a high-throughput clinical setting, standardization is of utmost importance. Here, we compared and benchmarked a quantitative lipidomics platform. The employed Lipidyzer platform is based on lipid class separation by means of differential mobility spectrometry with subsequent multiple reaction monitoring. Quantitation is achieved by the use of 54 deuterated internal standards and an automated informatics approach. We investigated the platform performance across nine laboratories using NIST SRM 1950-Metabolites in Frozen Human Plasma, and three NIST Candidate Reference Materials 8231-Frozen Human Plasma Suite for Metabolomics (high triglyceride, diabetic, and African-American plasma). In addition, we comparatively analyzed 59 plasma samples from individuals with familial hypercholesterolemia from a clinical cohort study. We provide evidence that the more practical methyl-tert-butyl ether extraction outperforms the classic Bligh and Dyer approach and compare our results with two previously published ring trials. In summary, we present standardized lipidomics protocols, allowing for the highly reproducible analysis of several hundred human plasma lipids, and present detailed molecular information for potentially disease relevant and ethnicity-related materials.
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 | 0.021 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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".