Jantos-Siwy Justyna, Schiffer Eric, Brand Korbinian, Schumann Gerhard, Rossing Kasper, Delles Christian, Mischak Harald, Metzger Jochen
Mosaiques Diagnostics & Therapeutics, Hannover, Germany.
J Proteome Res. 2009 Jan;8(1):268-81. doi: 10.1021/pr800401m.
A limitation of proteomic methods with respect to their clinical applicability is the lack of possibilities to directly deduce the amount of a protein or peptide from a particular mass spectrometry (MS) spectrum. For quantification of chronic kidney disease (CKD)-specific urinary polypeptides in capillary electrophoresis coupled with mass spectrometry (CE-MS), we compared signal intensity calibration methods based on either urinary creatinine or stable isotope labeled synthetic marker analogues (absolute quantification) with those based on ion counting using highly abundant collagen fragments as nonmarker references (relative quantification). Our results indicate that relative quantification of biomarker excretion based on ion counts in reference to endogenous "housekeeping" peptides is sufficient for the determination of urinary polypeptide levels. The calculation of absolute concentrations via exogenous stable isotope-labeled peptide standards is of no additional benefit.
蛋白质组学方法在临床应用方面的一个局限性是,无法直接从特定的质谱(MS)谱图中推断出蛋白质或肽的含量。为了对毛细管电泳-质谱联用(CE-MS)中的慢性肾病(CKD)特异性尿多肽进行定量分析,我们将基于尿肌酐或稳定同位素标记的合成标记类似物的信号强度校准方法(绝对定量)与基于使用高丰度胶原片段作为非标记参考的离子计数方法(相对定量)进行了比较。我们的结果表明,基于相对于内源性“管家”肽的离子计数对生物标志物排泄进行相对定量,足以测定尿多肽水平。通过外源性稳定同位素标记肽标准计算绝对浓度并无额外益处。