ArticleBiochemical and biophysical research communications2014
High abundant protein removal from rodent blood for biomarker discovery.
Article in Biochemical and biophysical research communications, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.
- Biomaterials for biomarker imaging and detection.Journal of advanced research · 2026Review
- Dilute to Enrich for Deeper Proteomics: A Yolk-Depleted Carrier for Limited Populations of Embryonic (Frog) Cells.Journal of proteome research · 2024Article
- Insight into the human pathodegradome of the V8 protease from Staphylococcus aureus.Cell reports · 2021Article
- The heparin-binding proteome in normal pancreas and murine experimental acute pancreatitis.PloS one · 2019Article
- Optimisation of a serum albumin removal protocol for use in a proteomic study to identify the protein biomarkers for silent gastric ulceration in horses.Journal of equine science · 2018Article
- Discovery and Longitudinal Evaluation of Candidate Biomarkers for Ischaemic Stroke by Mass Spectrometry-Based Proteomics.Biomarker insights · 2017Article
- Transition from identity to bioactivity-guided proteomics for biomarker discovery with focus on the PF2D platform.Proteomics. Clinical applications · 2016Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
In order to realize the goal of stratified and/or personalized medicine in the clinic, significant advances in the field of biomarker discovery are necessary. Adding to the abundance of nucleic acid biomarkers being characterized, additional protein biomarkers will be needed to satisfy diverse clinical needs. An appropriate source for finding these biomarkers is within blood, as it contains tissue leakage factors as well as additional proteins that reside in blood that can be linked to the presence of disease. Unfortunately, high abundant proteins and complexity of the blood proteome present significant challenges for the discovery of protein biomarkers from blood. Animal models often enable the discovery of biomarkers that can later be translated to humans. Therefore, determining appropriate sample preparation of proteomic samples in rodent models is an important research goal. Here, we examined both mouse and rat blood samples (including both serum and plasma), for appropriate high abundant protein removal techniques for subsequent gel-based proteomic experiments. We assessed four methods of albumin removal: antibody-based affinity chromatography (MARS), Cibacron® Blue-based affinity depletion (SwellGel® Blue Albumin Removal Kit), protein-based affinity depletion (ProteaPrep Albumin Depletion Kit) and TCA/acetone precipitation. Albumin removal was quantified for each method and SDS-PAGE and 2-DE gels were used to quantify the number of protein spots obtained following albumin removal. Our results suggest that while all four approaches can effectively remove high abundant proteins, antibody-based affinity chromatography is superior to the other three methods.
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.