Article

Isobaric tagging approaches in quantitative proteomics: the ups and downs.

Cambridge Centre for Proteomics, Cambridge Systems Biology Centre, Department of Biochemistry, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry (Impact Factor: 3.66). 05/2012; 404(4):1029-37. DOI:10.1007/s00216-012-6012-9
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Isobaric tagging has proven to be a popular quantitative proteomics tool and has been rapidly adopted to study a wide range of biological questions in the few years since its commercialization. While the flexibility and multiplexing capacity afforded by this technology are clear attractions, it is not without its shortcomings. As the speed and sensitivity of mass spectrometers have improved and the application of isobaric tags to all manner of biological systems has increased, significant issues with quantitative accuracy and precision have come to light. Here we review the issues associated with the use of isobaric tagging methods and discuss the possible solutions which have been proposed to improve their precision and accuracy to approach the levels required within quantitative proteomics.

0 0
 · 
0 Bookmarks
 · 
90 Views
  • [show abstract] [hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Detection and quantitation of protein-ligand binding interactions is important in many areas of biological research. Stability of proteins from rates of oxidation (SPROX) is an energetics-based technique for identifying the proteins targets of ligands in complex biological mixtures. Knowing the false-positive rate of protein target discovery in proteome-wide SPROX experiments is important for the correct interpretation of results. Reported here are the results of a control SPROX experiment in which chemical denaturation data is obtained on the proteins in two samples that originated from the same yeast lysate, as would be done in a typical SPROX experiment except that one sample would be spiked with the test ligand. False-positive rates of 1.2-2.2 % and <0.8 % are calculated for SPROX experiments using Q-TOF and Orbitrap mass spectrometer systems, respectively. Our results indicate that the false-positive rate is largely determined by random errors associated with the mass spectral analysis of the isobaric mass tag (e.g., iTRAQ®) reporter ions used for peptide quantitation. Our results also suggest that technical replicates can be used to effectively eliminate such false positives that result from this random error, as is demonstrated in a SPROX experiment to identify yeast protein targets of the drug, manassantin A. The impact of ion purity in the tandem mass spectral analyses and of background oxidation on the false-positive rate of protein target discovery using SPROX is also discussed.
    Journal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry 10/2013; · 3.59 Impact Factor
  • [show abstract] [hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Simple protein separation by one dimensional (1D) gel electrophoresis is a widely used method to reduce sample complexity and to prepare proteins for mass spectrometric identification via in-gel digestion. While several automated solutions are available for in-gel digestion particularly of small cylindric gel plugs derived from 2D gels, the processing of larger 1D gel-derived gel bands with liquid handling work stations is less well established in the field. Here, we introduce a digestion device tailored to this purpose and validate its performance in comparison to manual in-gel digestion. For relative quantification purposes, we extend the in-gel digestion procedure by iTRAQ labeling of the tryptic peptides and show that automation of the entire workflow results in robust quantification of proteins from samples of different complexity and dynamic range. We conclude that automation improves accuracy and reproducibility of our iTRAQ workflow as it minimizes the variability in both, digestion and labeling efficiency, the two major causes of irreproducible results in chemical labeling approaches.
    Proteomics 03/2013; · 4.43 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [show abstract] [hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Both isobaric tags for relative and absolute quantitation (iTRAQ) and label-free methods are widely used for quantitative proteomics. Here, we provide a detailed evaluation of these proteomics approaches based on large datasets from biological samples. iTRAQ-label-based and label-free quantitations were compared using protein lysate samples from noninfected human lung epithelial A549 cells and from cells infected for 24 h with human adenovirus type 3 or type 5. Either iTRAQ-label-based or label-free methods were used, and the resulting samples were analyzed by liquid chromatography (LC) and tandem mass spectrometry (MS/MS). To reduce a possible bias from quantitation software, we applied several software packages for each procedure. ProteinPilot and Scaffold Q+ software were used for iTRAQ-labeled samples, while Progenesis LC-MS and ProgenesisF-T2PQ/T3PQ were employed for label-free analyses. R (2) correlation coefficients correlated well between two software packages applied to the same datasets with values between 0.48 and 0.78 for iTRAQ-label-based quantitations and 0.5 and 0.86 for label-free quantitations. Analyses of label-free samples showed higher levels of protein up- or downregulation in comparison to iTRAQ-labeled samples. The concentration differences were further evaluated by Western blotting for four downregulated proteins. These data suggested that the label-free method was more accurate than the iTRAQ method.
    International journal of proteomics. 01/2013; 2013:581862.

Andy Christoforou