ArticleInternational journal of proteomics2010
Assigning significance in label-free quantitative proteomics to include single-peptide-hit proteins with low replicates.
Article in International journal of proteomics, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparative analysis of neuronal proteolytic pathways reveals neuron-specific and sub-compartmental-specific capacities with aging.Cellular and molecular life sciences : CMLS · 2026Article
- Quantitative Comparison of Tandem Mass Spectra Obtained on Various Instruments.Journal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry · 2016Article
- Label-free proteomics and systems biology analysis of mycobacterial phagosomes in dendritic cells and macrophages.Journal of proteome research · 2011Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
Selecting differentially regulated proteins with an assignment of statistical significance remains difficult for proteins with a single-peptide hit or a small fold-change when sample replicates are limited. This study presents a label-free quantitative proteomics scheme that was used to select differentially regulated proteins with single-peptide hits and with <2-fold change at a 5% false discovery rate. The scheme incorporated a labeled internal control into two unlabeled samples to facilitate error modeling when there were no replicates for the unlabeled samples. The results showed that, while both a power law global error model with a signal-to-noise ratio statistic (PLGEM-STN) and a constant fold-change threshold could be used, neither of them alone was stringent enough to select differentially regulated proteins at a 5% false discovery rate. Thus, the rule of minimum number of permuted significant pairings (MPSP) was introduced to reduce false discovery rates in combination with PLGEM-STN or a fold-change threshold. MPSP played a critical role in extending the selection of differentially regulated proteins to those with single-peptide hits or with lower fold-changes. Although the approaches were demonstrated for limited sample replicates, they should also be applicable to the situation where more sample replicates are available.
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.