ArticleMetabolomics : Official journal of the Metabolomic Society2019
Impact of sample preparation upon intracellular metabolite measurements in 3D cell culture systems.
Article in Metabolomics : Official journal of the Metabolomic Society, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Receptor-Mitochondria Crosstalk in the Kynurenine Metabolic Pathway: Integrating Metabolomics and Clinical Mass Spectrometry.Antioxidants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- The role of salivary metabolomics in chronic periodontitis: bridging oral and systemic diseases.Metabolomics : Official journal of the Metabolomic Society · 2025Review
- Elevated pentose phosphate pathway flux supports appendage regeneration.Cell reports · 2022Article
- Mitochondrial Inorganic Polyphosphate (polyP) Is a Potent Regulator of Mammalian Bioenergetics in SH-SY5Y Cells: A Proteomics and Metabolomics Study.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionInterest in cell culture metabolomics has increased greatly in recent years because of its many potential applications and advantages (e.g., in toxicology). The first critical step for exploring the cellular metabolome is sample preparation. For metabolomics studies, an ideal sample preparation would extract a maximum number of metabolites and would enable reproducible, accurate analysis of a large number of samples and replicates. In addition, it would provide consistent results across several studies over a relatively long time frame.
objectivesThis study was conducted to evaluate the impact of sample preparation strategies on monitoring intracellular metabolite responses, highlighting the potential critical step(s) in order to finally improve the quality of metabolomics studies.
methodsThe sample preparation strategies were evaluated by calculating the sample preparation effect, matrix factor, and process efficiency (PE) for 16 tobacco exposition-related metabolites, including nicotine, nicotine-derived nitrosamine ketone, their major metabolites, and glutathione, using isotopically-labelled internal standards. Samples were analyzed by liquid chromatography (LC) coupled to high-resolution mass spectrometry (HRMS).
resultsA sample drying step increased losses or variability for some selected metabolites. By avoiding evaporation, good sample preparation recovery was obtained for these compounds. For some metabolites, the cell or culture type impacted PE and matrix factor.
conclusionIn our sample preparation protocol, the drying-reconstitution step was identified as the main cause of metabolite losses or increased data variability during metabolomics analysis by LC-HRMS. Furthermore, PE was affected by the type of matrix. Isotopologue internal standards fully compensate losses or enhancements.
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.