ArticleProteomics2013
Identification of additional proteins in differential proteomics using protein interaction networks.
Article in Proteomics, 2013. 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, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Assessing network-based methods in the context of system toxicology.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2023Article
- Candidate prioritization for low-abundant differentially expressed proteins in 2D-DIGE datasets.BMC bioinformatics · 2015Article
- Functional module search in protein networks based on semantic similarity improves the analysis of proteomics data.Molecular & cellular proteomics : MCP · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 7 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
In this study, we developed a novel computational approach based on protein-protein interaction networks to identify a list of proteins that might have remained undetected in differential proteomic profiling experiments. We tested our computational approach on two sets of human smooth muscle cell protein extracts that were affected differently by DNase I treatment. Differential proteomic analysis by saturation DIGE resulted in the identification of 41 human proteins. The application of our approach to these 41 input proteins consisted of four steps: (i) Compilation of a human protein-protein interaction network from public databases; (ii) calculation of interaction scores based on functional similarity; (iii) determination of a set of candidate proteins that are needed to efficiently and confidently connect the 41 input proteins; and (iv) ranking of the resulting 25 candidate proteins. Two of the three highest-ranked proteins, beta-arrestin 1, and beta-arrestin 2, were experimentally tested, revealing that their abundance levels in human smooth muscle cell samples were indeed affected by DNase I treatment. These proteins had not been detected during the experimental proteomic analysis. Our study suggests that our computational approach may represent a simple, universal, and cost-effective means to identify additional proteins that remain elusive for current 2D gel-based proteomic profiling techniques.
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.