Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31171813›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2019

Systematic assessment of antibody selectivity in plasma based on a resource of enrichment profiles.

Claudia Fredolini, Sanna Byström, Laura Sanchez-Rivera, Marina Ioannou, Davide Tamburro, Fredrik Pontén, Rui M Branca, Peter Nilsson, Janne Lehtiö, Jochen M Schwenk

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
3.1field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 37 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Proteomics in thrombosis research.Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis · 2022
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Bead-Based Assays for Validating Proteomic Profiles in Body Fluids.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2021
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
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

10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Claudia FredoliniDivision of Affinity Proteomics, Science for Life Laboratory, Department of Protein Science, KTH - Royal Institute of Technology, 171 21, Solna, Sweden.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7674-2014
Sanna ByströmDivision of Affinity Proteomics, Science for Life Laboratory, Department of Protein Science, KTH - Royal Institute of Technology, 171 21, Solna, Sweden.
Laura Sanchez-RiveraDivision of Affinity Proteomics, Science for Life Laboratory, Department of Protein Science, KTH - Royal Institute of Technology, 171 21, Solna, Sweden.
Marina IoannouDivision of Affinity Proteomics, Science for Life Laboratory, Department of Protein Science, KTH - Royal Institute of Technology, 171 21, Solna, Sweden.
Davide TamburroCancer Proteomics, Department of Oncology-Pathology, Science for Life Laboratory, Karolinska Institute, 171 21, Solna, Sweden.
Fredrik PonténDepartment of Immunology, Genetics and Pathology, Science for Life Laboratory, Rudbeck Laboratory, Uppsala University, 751 85, Uppsala, Sweden.
Rui M BrancaCancer Proteomics, Department of Oncology-Pathology, Science for Life Laboratory, Karolinska Institute, 171 21, Solna, Sweden.
Peter NilssonDivision of Affinity Proteomics, Science for Life Laboratory, Department of Protein Science, KTH - Royal Institute of Technology, 171 21, Solna, Sweden.
Janne LehtiöCancer Proteomics, Department of Oncology-Pathology, Science for Life Laboratory, Karolinska Institute, 171 21, Solna, Sweden.
Jochen M SchwenkDivision of Affinity Proteomics, Science for Life Laboratory, Department of Protein Science, KTH - Royal Institute of Technology, 171 21, Solna, Sweden. jochen.schwenk@scilifelab.se.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8141-8449
Science for Life Laboratory · SEUppsala University · SE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There is a strong need for procedures that enable context and application dependent validation of antibodies. Here, we applied a magnetic bead assisted workflow and immunoprecipitation mass spectrometry (IP-MS/MS) to assess antibody selectivity for the detection of proteins in human plasma. A resource was built on 414 IP experiments using 157 antibodies (targeting 120 unique proteins) in assays with heat-treated or untreated EDTA plasma. For each protein we determined their antibody related degrees of enrichment using z-scores and their frequencies of identification across all IP assays. Out of 1,313 unique endogenous proteins, 426 proteins (33%) were detected in >20% of IPs, and these background components were mainly comprised of proteins from the complement system. For 45% (70/157) of the tested antibodies, the expected target proteins were enriched (z-score ≥ 3). Among these 70 antibodies, 59 (84%) co-enriched other proteins beside the intended target and mainly due to sequence homology or protein abundance. We also detected protein interactions in plasma, and for IGFBP2 confirmed these using several antibodies and sandwich immunoassays. The protein enrichment data with plasma provide a very useful and yet lacking resource for the assessment of antibody selectivity. Our insights will contribute to a more informed use of affinity reagents for plasma proteomics assays.

Indexed as

AnimalsAntibodiesAntibodies, MonoclonalBlood ProteinsCHO CellsChromatography, LiquidComplement System ProteinsCricetinaeCricetulusEdetic AcidFemaleHot TemperatureHumansImmunoassayImmunomagnetic SeparationMaleAntibodiesAntibodies, MonoclonalBlood ProteinsComplement System ProteinsEdetic AcidProteomeRecombinant Proteins

Identifiers

PMID31171813
PMCPMC6554399
OpenAlexW2948596339

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.