Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27589945›Full record

ArticleThe Biochemical journal2016

Comparative proteomic assessment of matrisome enrichment methodologies.

Lukas Krasny, Angela Paul, Patty Wai, Beatrice A Howard, Rachael C Natrajan, Paul H Huang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Biochemical journal, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

33 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Proteomic analysis of liver fibrosis reveals EFEMP1 as a new modulator of focal adhesion and migration of hepatic stellate cells.FASEB journal : official publication of the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Clinical Implications and Molecular Features of Extracellular Matrix Networks in Soft Tissue Sarcomas.Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research · 2024
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
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

6 authors.

Lukas KrasnyDivision of Cancer Biology, The Institute of Cancer Research, 237 Fulham Road, London SW3 6JB, U.K.
Angela PaulProteomics Core Facility, The Institute of Cancer Research, London SW3 6JB, U.K.
Patty WaiThe Breast Cancer Now Toby Robins Research Centre, Division of Breast Cancer Research, The Institute of Cancer Research, London SW3 6JB, U.K. Division of Molecular Pathology, The Institute of Cancer Research, London SW3 6JB, U.K.
Beatrice A HowardThe Breast Cancer Now Toby Robins Research Centre, Division of Breast Cancer Research, The Institute of Cancer Research, London SW3 6JB, U.K.
Rachael C NatrajanThe Breast Cancer Now Toby Robins Research Centre, Division of Breast Cancer Research, The Institute of Cancer Research, London SW3 6JB, U.K. Division of Molecular Pathology, The Institute of Cancer Research, London SW3 6JB, U.K.
Paul H HuangDivision of Cancer Biology, The Institute of Cancer Research, 237 Fulham Road, London SW3 6JB, U.K.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The matrisome is a complex and heterogeneous collection of extracellular matrix (ECM) and ECM-associated proteins that play important roles in tissue development and homeostasis. While several strategies for matrisome enrichment have been developed, it is currently unknown how the performance of these different methodologies compares in the proteomic identification of matrisome components across multiple tissue types. In the present study, we perform a comparative proteomic assessment of two widely used decellularisation protocols and two extraction methods to characterise the matrisome in four murine organs (heart, mammary gland, lung and liver). We undertook a systematic evaluation of the performance of the individual methods on protein yield, matrisome enrichment capability and the ability to isolate core matrisome and matrisome-associated components. Our data find that sodium dodecyl sulphate (SDS) decellularisation leads to the highest matrisome enrichment efficiency, while the extraction protocol that comprises chemical and trypsin digestion of the ECM fraction consistently identifies the highest number of matrisomal proteins across all types of tissue examined. Matrisome enrichment had a clear benefit over non-enriched tissue for the comprehensive identification of matrisomal components in murine liver and heart. Strikingly, we find that all four matrisome enrichment methods led to significant losses in the soluble matrisome-associated proteins across all organs. Our findings highlight the multiple factors (including tissue type, matrisome class of interest and desired enrichment purity) that influence the choice of enrichment methodology, and we anticipate that these data will serve as a useful guide for the design of future proteomic studies of the matrisome.

Indexed as

AnimalsChromatography, LiquidElectrophoresis, Polyacrylamide GelExtracellular MatrixExtracellular Matrix ProteinsHumansProteomicsTandem Mass SpectrometryExtracellular Matrix Proteinsextracellular matrixmass spectrometrymatrisomeproteomicstissue extraction

Identifiers

PMID27589945
PMCPMC5095915

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.