ArticleJournal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry2004
Analysis of proteins copurifying with the CD4/lck complex using one-dimensional polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis and mass spectrometry: comparison with affinity-tag based protein detection and evaluation of different solubilization methods.
Article in Journal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry, 2004. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- DDX5 (p68) and UbE2T as emerging superior cancer therapeutic targets: dual molecular glue target degradation by FL118 for conquering difficult-to-treat cancers.Journal of experimental & clinical cancer research : CR · 2026Review
- Proteomic-based identification of CD4-interacting proteins in human primary macrophages.PloS one · 2011Article
- Identification of T1D susceptibility genes within the MHC region by combining protein interaction networks and SNP genotyping data.Diabetes, obesity & metabolism · 2009Article
- Identification of c-Src tyrosine kinase substrates using mass spectrometry and peptide microarrays.Journal of proteome research · 2008Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Mass spectrometry-based identification of the components of affinity purified protein complexes after polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (PAGE) and in-gel digest has become very popular for the detection of novel protein interactions. As an alternative, the entire protein complex can be subjected to proteolytic cleavage followed by chromatographic separation of the peptides. Based on our earlier report of a method using affinity tag-mediated purification of cysteine-containing peptides to analyse proteins present in an affinity purification of the CD4/lck receptor complex, we here evaluated the use of one-dimensional polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis for analysis of the same receptor complex purification. Using electrospray and tandem mass spectrometry analyses of tryptic peptides from in-gel digested proteins we identified the components of the CD4 receptor complex along with 23 other proteins that were all likely to be non-specifically binding proteins and mainly different from the proteins detected in our previous study. We compare the alternative strategy with the affinity tag-based method that we described earlier and show that the PAGE-based method enables more proteins to be identified. We also evaluated the use of a more stringent lysis buffer for the CD4 purification to minimise non-specific binding and identified 52 proteins along with CD4 in three independent experiments suggesting that the choice of lysis buffer had no significant effect on the extent of non-specific binding. Non-specific binding was inconsistent and involved various types of proteins underlining the importance of reproducibility and control experiments in proteomic studies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.