Tsikas Dimitrios
Centre of Pharmacology and Toxicology, Core Unit Proteomics, Hannover Medical School, Carl Neuberg-Strasse 1, 30625, Hannover, Germany.
J Chromatogr B Analyt Technol Biomed Life Sci. 2017 Jul 15;1058:68-72. doi: 10.1016/j.jchromb.2017.05.012. Epub 2017 May 13.
Tyrosine and tyrosine residues in proteins are attacked by the reactive oxygen and nitrogen species peroxynitrite (O=N-OO) to generate 3-nitrotyrosine (3-NT) and 3-nitrotyrosine-proteins (3-NTProt), respectively. 3-NT and 3-NTProt are widely accepted as biomarkers of nitr(os)ative stress. Over the years many different analytical methods have been reported for 3-NT and 3-NTProt. Reported concentrations often differ by more than three orders of magnitude, indicative of serious analytical problems. Strategies to overcome pre-analytical and analytical shortcomings and pitfalls have been proposed. The present review investigated whether recently published work on the quantitative measurement of biological 3-nitrotyrosine did adequately consider the analytical past of this biomolecule. 3-Nitrotyrosine was taken as a representative of biomolecules that occur in biological samples in the pM-to-nM concentration range. This examination revealed that in many cases the main protagonists involved in the publication of scientific work, i.e., authors, reviewers and editors, failed to do so. Learning from the analytical history of 3-nitrotyrosine means advancing analytical and biological science and implies the following key issues. (1) Choosing the most reliable analytical approach in terms of sensitivity and accuracy; presently this is best feasible by stable-isotope dilution tandem mass spectrometry coupled with gas chromatography (GC-MS/MS) or liquid chromatography (LC-MS/MS). (2) Minimizing artificial formation of 3-nitrotyrosine during sample work up, a major pitfall in 3-nitrotyrosine analysis. (3) Validating adequately the final method in the intendent biological matrix and the established concentration range. (4) Inviting experts in the field for critical evaluation of the novelty and reliability of the proposed analytical method, placing special emphasis on the compliance of the analytical outcome with 3-nitrotyrosine concentrations obtained by validated GC-MS/MS and LC-MS/MS methods.
蛋白质中的酪氨酸及酪氨酸残基会受到活性氧和氮类物质过氧亚硝酸根(O=N-OO)的攻击,分别生成3-硝基酪氨酸(3-NT)和3-硝基酪氨酸修饰的蛋白质(3-NTProt)。3-NT和3-NTProt被广泛认为是氮(氧)化应激的生物标志物。多年来,已报道了许多针对3-NT和3-NTProt的不同分析方法。报道的浓度常常相差三个数量级以上,这表明存在严重的分析问题。已有人提出克服分析前及分析过程中的缺点和陷阱的策略。本综述研究了最近发表的关于生物3-硝基酪氨酸定量测量的工作是否充分考虑了这种生物分子的分析历史。3-硝基酪氨酸被视为在生物样品中浓度范围为皮摩尔至纳摩尔的生物分子的代表。此次审查发现,在许多情况下,参与科学工作发表的主要相关方,即作者、审稿人和编辑,都未能做到这一点。从3-硝基酪氨酸的分析历史中吸取教训意味着推动分析科学和生物科学的发展,并涉及以下关键问题。(1)在灵敏度和准确性方面选择最可靠的分析方法;目前,通过稳定同位素稀释串联质谱结合气相色谱(GC-MS/MS)或液相色谱(LC-MS/MS)能最好地实现这一点。(2)在样品处理过程中尽量减少3-硝基酪氨酸的人工生成,这是3-硝基酪氨酸分析中的一个主要陷阱。(3)在目标生物基质和既定浓度范围内充分验证最终方法。(4)邀请该领域的专家对所提出分析方法的新颖性和可靠性进行批判性评估,特别强调分析结果与通过经过验证的GC-MS/MS和LC-MS/MS方法获得的3-硝基酪氨酸浓度的一致性。