Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28302922›Full record

ArticleMolecular & cellular proteomics : MCP2017

Covariation of Peptide Abundances Accurately Reflects Protein Concentration Differences.

Bo Zhang, Mohammad Pirmoradian, Roman Zubarev, Lukas Käll

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Molecular & cellular proteomics : MCP, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing 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

36 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. LC-MS profiling ofbioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Ultra-fast proteomics with Scanning SWATH.Nature biotechnology · 2021
    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

4 authors.

Bo ZhangFrom the ‡Department of Medical Biochemistry and Biophysics, Karolinska Institutet, Scheeles väg 2, SE-17177 Solna, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0001-8890-8416
Mohammad PirmoradianFrom the ‡Department of Medical Biochemistry and Biophysics, Karolinska Institutet, Scheeles väg 2, SE-17177 Solna, Sweden.
Roman ZubarevFrom the ‡Department of Medical Biochemistry and Biophysics, Karolinska Institutet, Scheeles väg 2, SE-17177 Solna, Sweden; lukas.kall@scilifelab.se roman.zubarev@ki.se.ORCID 0000-0001-9839-2089
Lukas Käll¶Science for Life Laboratory, School of Biotechnology, Royal Institute of Technology-KTH, SE-17165 Solna, Sweden lukas.kall@scilifelab.se roman.zubarev@ki.se.ORCID 0000-0001-5689-9797

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Most implementations of mass spectrometry-based proteomics involve enzymatic digestion of proteins, expanding the analysis to multiple proteolytic peptides for each protein. Currently, there is no consensus of how to summarize peptides' abundances to protein concentrations, and such efforts are complicated by the fact that error control normally is applied to the identification process, and do not directly control errors linking peptide abundance measures to protein concentration. Peptides resulting from suboptimal digestion or being partially modified are not representative of the protein concentration. Without a mechanism to remove such unrepresentative peptides, their abundance adversely impacts the estimation of their protein's concentration. Here, we present a relative quantification approach, Diffacto, that applies factor analysis to extract the covariation of peptides' abundances. The method enables a weighted geometrical average summarization and automatic elimination of incoherent peptides. We demonstrate, based on a set of controlled label-free experiments using standard mixtures of proteins, that the covariation structure extracted by the factor analysis accurately reflects protein concentrations. In the 1% peptide-spectrum match-level FDR data set, as many as 11% of the peptides have abundance differences incoherent with the other peptides attributed to the same protein. If not controlled, such contradicting peptide abundance have a severe impact on protein quantifications. When adding the quantities of each protein's three most abundant peptides, we note as many as 14% of the proteins being estimated as having a negative correlation with their actual concentration differences between samples. Diffacto reduced the amount of such obviously incorrectly quantified proteins to 1.6%. Furthermore, by analyzing clinical data sets from two breast cancer studies, our method revealed the persistent proteomic signatures linked to three subtypes of breast cancer. We conclude that Diffacto can facilitate the interpretation and enhance the utility of most types of proteomics data.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsFemaleHumansPeptidesProteinsProteomicsSaccharomyces cerevisiaeSequence Analysis, ProteinSignal-To-Noise RatioSoftwarePeptidesProteins

Identifiers

PMID28302922
PMCPMC5417831

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.