ReviewAnalytical and bioanalytical chemistry2021
Potential impact of tissue molecular heterogeneity on ambient mass spectrometry profiles: a note of caution in choosing the right disease model.
Review in Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry, 2021. 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.
- A Workflow for Meaningful Interpretation of Classification Results from Handheld Ambient Mass Spectrometry Analysis Probes.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Review
- Lipidome Analysis of Oropharyngeal Tumor Tissues Using Nanosecond Infrared Laser (NIRL) Tissue Sampling and Subsequent Mass Spectrometry.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Article
- Ultrahigh resolution lipid mass spectrometry imaging of high-grade serous ovarian cancer mouse models.Frontiers in chemistry · 2023Article
- Lipid Profiling in Cancer Diagnosis with Hand-Held Ambient Mass Spectrometry Probes: Addressing the Late-Stage Performance Concerns.Metabolites · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This review provides a summary of known molecular alterations in commonly used cancer models and strives to stipulate how they may affect ambient mass spectrometry profiles. Immortalized cell lines are known to accumulate mutations, and xenografts derived from cell lines are known to contain tumour microenvironment elements from the host animal. While the use of human specimens for mass spectrometry profiling studies is highly encouraged, patient-derived xenografts with low passage numbers could provide an alternative means of amplifying material for ambient MS research when needed. Similarly, genetic preservation of patient tissue seen in some organoid models, further verified by qualitative proteomic and transcriptomic analyses, may argue in favor of organoid suitability for certain ambient profiling studies. However, to choose the appropriate model, pre-evaluation of the model's molecular characteristics in the context of the research question(s) being asked will likely provide the most appropriate strategy to move research forward. This can be achieved by performing comparative ambient MS analysis of the disease model of choice against a small amount of patient tissue to verify concordance. Disease models, however, will continue to be useful tools to orthogonally validate metabolic states of patient tissues through controlled genetic alterations that are not possible with patient specimens.
Indexed as
Identifiers
33247337What 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.