ArticleAnnals of clinical biochemistry2019
High-throughput quantification of carboxymethyl lysine in serum and plasma using high-resolution accurate mass Orbitrap mass spectrometry.
Article in Annals of clinical biochemistry, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- An immunosensor for the detection ofRSC advances · 2025Article
- Assessing metal-induced glycation in French fries.Metallomics : integrated biometal science · 2025Article
- UPLC-MS/MS method for quantitative determination of the advanced glycation endproductsAnalytical methods : advancing methods and applications · 2023Article
- Molecular Damage in Aging.Nature aging · 2021Review
- Comprehensive Quantification of Carboxymethyllysine-Modified Peptides in Human Plasma.Journal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry · 2021Article
- Development and Application of Mass Spectroscopy Assays for Nε-(1-Carboxymethyl)-L-Lysine and Pentosidine in Renal Failure and Diabetes.The journal of applied laboratory medicine · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCarboxymethyl lysine is an advanced glycation end product of interest as a potential biomarker of cardiovascular and other diseases. Available methods involve ELISA, with potential interference, or isotope dilution mass spectrometry (IDMS), with low-throughput sample preparation.
methodsA high-throughput sample preparation method based on 96-well plates was developed. Protein-bound carboxymethyl lysine and lysine were quantified by IDMS using reversed phase chromatography coupled to a high-resolution accurate mass Orbitrap Exactive mass spectrometer. The carboxymethyl lysine concentration (normalized to lysine concentration) was measured in 1714 plasma samples from the British Regional Heart Study (BRHS).
resultsFor carboxymethyl lysine, the lower limit of quantification (LLOQ) was estimated at 0.16 μM and the assay was linear between 0.25 and 10 μM. For lysine, the LLOQ was estimated at 3.79 mM, and the assay was linear between 2.5 and 100 mM. The intra-assay coefficient of variation was 17.2% for carboxymethyl lysine, 9.3% for lysine and 10.5% for normalized carboxymethyl lysine. The inter-assay coefficient of variation was 18.1% for carboxymethyl lysine, 14.8 for lysine and 16.2% for normalized carboxymethyl lysine. The median and inter-quartile range of all study samples in each batch were monitored. A mean carboxymethyl lysine concentration of 2.7 μM (IQR 2.0-3.2 μM, range 0.2-17.4 μM) and a mean normalized carboxymethyl lysine concentration of 69 μM/M lysine (IQR 54-76 μM/M, range 19-453 μM/M) were measured in the BRHS.
conclusionThis high-throughput sample preparation method makes it possible to analyse large cohorts required to determine the potential of carboxymethyl lysine as a biomarker.
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.