Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20548103›Full record

ReviewMolecular & cellular proteomics : MCP2011

Overcoming key technological challenges in using mass spectrometry for mapping cell surfaces in tissues.

Noelle M Griffin, Jan E Schnitzer

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Molecular & cellular proteomics : MCP, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed, 56 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Proximity Labeling of Cell Surface Proteins via Cell Surface Remodeling.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2025
    Article
  4. Protein Digestion for 2D-DIGE Analysis.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2023
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Mass spectrometry accelerates membrane protein analysis.Trends in biochemical sciences · 2011
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Noelle M GriffinProteogenomics Research Institute for Systems Medicine, San Diego, California 92121, USA.
Jan E Schnitzer
Proteogenomics Research Institute for Systems Medicine · US

Funding

Mapping Vascular Proteome for Organ Targeting in VivoR01HL074063 · NHLBI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO · PI TALAMINI, MARK A · 2005 to 2009
$3.8M
Nanotechnology Platform for Targeting Solid TumorsR01CA119378 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO · PI TALAMINI, MARK A · 2005 to 2009
$3.6M
Technology/Map Endothelial Targets/Human Renal TumorsR33CA118602 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO · PI TALAMINI, MARK A · 2006 to 2008
$2.1M
NCI NIH HHS P01CA164898NCI NIH HHS R01 CA119378NCI NIH HHS R01CA119378NCI NIH HHS R33 CA118602NCI NIH HHS R33CA118602NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL074063NHLBI NIH HHS R01HL074063
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Plasma membranes form a critical biological interface between the inside of every cell and its external environment. Their roles in multiple key cellular functions make them important drug targets. However the protein composition of plasma membranes in general is poorly defined as the inherent properties of lipid embedded proteins, such as their hydrophobicity, low abundance, poor solubility and resistance to digestion and extraction makes them difficult to isolate, solubilize, and identify on a large scale by traditional mass spectrometry methods. Here we describe some of the significant advances that have occurred over the past ten years to address these challenges including: i) the development of new and improved membrane isolation techniques via either subfractionation or direct labeling and isolation of plasma membranes from cells and tissues; ii) modification of mass spectrometry methods to adapt to the hydrophobic nature of membrane proteins and peptides; iii) improvements to digestion protocols to compensate for the shortage of trypsin cleavage sites in lipid-embedded proteins, particularly multi-spanning proteins, and iv) the development of numerous bioinformatics tools which allow not only the identification and quantification of proteins, but also the prediction of membrane protein topology, membrane post-translational modifications and subcellular localization. This review emphasis the importance and difficulty of defining cells in proper patho- and physiological context to maintain the in vivo reality. We focus on how key technological challenges associated with the isolation and identification of cell surface proteins in tissues using mass spectrometry are being addressed in order to identify and quantify a comprehensive plasma membrane for drug and target discovery efforts.

Indexed as

AnimalsCell MembraneChromatography, LiquidComputational BiologyEndothelial CellsHumansHydrophobic and Hydrophilic InteractionsLipidsMass SpectrometryProtein Processing, Post-TranslationalProteomicsSolubilitySubcellular FractionsTrypsinLipidsTrypsin

Identifiers

PMID20548103
PMCPMC3033688
OpenAlexW2164228728

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.