Suppr超能文献

生物样品的脂质组学分析:液相色谱法、超临界流体色谱法和直接进样质谱法的比较

Lipidomic analysis of biological samples: Comparison of liquid chromatography, supercritical fluid chromatography and direct infusion mass spectrometry methods.

作者信息

Lísa Miroslav, Cífková Eva, Khalikova Maria, Ovčačíková Magdaléna, Holčapek Michal

机构信息

Department of Analytical Chemistry, Faculty of Chemical Technology, University of Pardubice, Studentská 573, 53210 Pardubice, Czech Republic.

Department of Analytical Chemistry, Faculty of Chemical Technology, University of Pardubice, Studentská 573, 53210 Pardubice, Czech Republic.

出版信息

J Chromatogr A. 2017 Nov 24;1525:96-108. doi: 10.1016/j.chroma.2017.10.022. Epub 2017 Oct 8.

Abstract

Lipidomic analysis of biological samples in a clinical research represents challenging task for analytical methods given by the large number of samples and their extreme complexity. In this work, we compare direct infusion (DI) and chromatography - mass spectrometry (MS) lipidomic approaches represented by three analytical methods in terms of comprehensiveness, sample throughput, and validation results for the lipidomic analysis of biological samples represented by tumor tissue, surrounding normal tissue, plasma, and erythrocytes of kidney cancer patients. Methods are compared in one laboratory using the identical analytical protocol to ensure comparable conditions. Ultrahigh-performance liquid chromatography/MS (UHPLC/MS) method in hydrophilic interaction liquid chromatography mode and DI-MS method are used for this comparison as the most widely used methods for the lipidomic analysis together with ultrahigh-performance supercritical fluid chromatography/MS (UHPSFC/MS) method showing promising results in metabolomics analyses. The nontargeted analysis of pooled samples is performed using all tested methods and 610 lipid species within 23 lipid classes are identified. DI method provides the most comprehensive results due to identification of some polar lipid classes, which are not identified by UHPLC and UHPSFC methods. On the other hand, UHPSFC method provides an excellent sensitivity for less polar lipid classes and the highest sample throughput within 10min method time. The sample consumption of DI method is 125 times higher than for other methods, while only 40μL of organic solvent is used for one sample analysis compared to 3.5mL and 4.9mL in case of UHPLC and UHPSFC methods, respectively. Methods are validated for the quantitative lipidomic analysis of plasma samples with one internal standard for each lipid class. Results show applicability of all tested methods for the lipidomic analysis of biological samples depending on the analysis requirements.

摘要

临床研究中生物样品的脂质组学分析对分析方法而言是一项具有挑战性的任务,因为样品数量众多且极其复杂。在本研究中,我们比较了以三种分析方法为代表的直接进样(DI)和色谱 - 质谱(MS)脂质组学方法,涉及肾癌患者的肿瘤组织、周围正常组织、血浆和红细胞所代表的生物样品脂质组学分析的全面性、样品通量和验证结果。在一个实验室中使用相同的分析方案对方法进行比较,以确保条件可比。亲水相互作用液相色谱模式下的超高效液相色谱/质谱(UHPLC/MS)方法和DI - MS方法作为脂质组学分析中使用最广泛的方法,与在代谢组学分析中显示出良好结果的超高效超临界流体色谱/质谱(UHPSFC/MS)方法一起用于此次比较。使用所有测试方法对混合样品进行非靶向分析,并鉴定了23个脂质类别中的610种脂质。DI方法由于鉴定出了一些UHPLC和UHPSFC方法未鉴定出的极性脂质类别,提供了最全面的结果。另一方面,UHPSFC方法对极性较小的脂质类别具有出色的灵敏度,并且在10分钟的方法时间内具有最高的样品通量。DI方法的样品消耗量比其他方法高125倍,而每个样品分析仅使用40μL有机溶剂,相比之下,UHPLC和UHPSFC方法分别使用3.5mL和4.9mL。使用每种脂质类别一个内标对血浆样品的定量脂质组学分析方法进行了验证。结果表明,根据分析要求,所有测试方法都适用于生物样品的脂质组学分析。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验