University of Victoria-Genome BC Proteomics Centre, Victoria, BC, Canada.
J Proteome Res. 2010 Oct 1;9(10):5422-37. doi: 10.1021/pr100656u.
Plasma biomarkers studies are based on the differential expression of proteins between different treatment groups or between diseased and control populations. Most mass spectrometry-based methods of protein quantitation, however, are based on the detection and quantitation of peptides, not intact proteins. For peptide-based protein quantitation to be accurate, the digestion protocols used in proteomic analyses must be both efficient and reproducible. There have been very few studies, however, where plasma denaturation/digestion protocols have been compared using absolute quantitation methods. In this paper, 14 combinations of heat, solvent [acetonitrile, methanol, trifluoroethanol], chaotropic agents [guanidine hydrochloride, urea], and surfactants [sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS) and sodium deoxycholate (DOC)] were compared with respect to their effectiveness in improving subsequent tryptic digestion. These digestion protocols were evaluated by quantitating the production of proteotypic tryptic peptides from 45 moderate- to high-abundance plasma proteins, using tandem mass spectrometry in multiple reaction monitoring mode, with a mixture of stable-isotope labeled analogues of these proteotypic peptides as internal standards. When the digestion efficiencies of these 14 methods were compared, we found that both of the surfactants (SDS and DOC) produced an increase in the overall yield of tryptic peptides from these 45 proteins, when compared to the more commonly used urea protocol. SDS, however, can be a serious interference for subsequent mass spectrometry. DOC, on the other hand, can be easily removed from the samples by acid precipitation. Examining the results of a reproducibility study, done with 5 replicate digestions, DOC and SDS with a 9 h digestion time produced the highest average digestion efficiencies (∼80%), with the highest average reproducibility (<5% error, defined as the relative deviation from the mean value). However, because of potential interferences resulting from the use of SDS, we recommend DOC with a 9 h digestion procedure as the optimum protocol.
血浆生物标志物研究基于不同治疗组或疾病与对照人群之间蛋白质的差异表达。然而,大多数基于质谱的蛋白质定量方法都是基于肽的检测和定量,而不是完整蛋白质。为了使基于肽的蛋白质定量准确,蛋白质组学分析中使用的消化方案必须既高效又可重复。然而,很少有研究使用绝对定量方法比较血浆变性/消化方案。在本文中,我们比较了 14 种热、溶剂[乙腈、甲醇、三氟乙醇]、变性剂[盐酸胍、尿素]和表面活性剂[十二烷基硫酸钠(SDS)和脱氧胆酸钠(DOC)]组合,以确定它们在提高随后胰蛋白酶消化方面的有效性。这些消化方案通过使用串联质谱在多重反应监测模式下定量分析 45 种中等到高丰度血浆蛋白的特征性胰蛋白酶肽的产量来评估,使用这些特征性肽的稳定同位素标记类似物的混合物作为内标。当比较这 14 种方法的消化效率时,我们发现与更常用的尿素方案相比,两种表面活性剂(SDS 和 DOC)都增加了这 45 种蛋白质的胰蛋白酶肽的总体产率。然而,SDS 可能会对后续质谱产生严重干扰。另一方面,DOC 可以通过酸沉淀从样品中轻松去除。检查重复性研究的结果,使用 5 个重复消化进行,DOC 和 SDS 消化 9 小时产生了最高的平均消化效率(约 80%),平均重现性最高(<5%误差,定义为与平均值的相对偏差)。然而,由于 SDS 使用产生的潜在干扰,我们建议使用 DOC 进行 9 小时消化程序作为最佳方案。