Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33363672›Full record

ArticleBeilstein journal of organic chemistry2020

Semiautomated glycoproteomics data analysis workflow for maximized glycopeptide identification and reliable quantification.

Steffen Lippold, Arnoud H de Ru, Jan Nouta, Peter A van Veelen, Magnus Palmblad, Manfred Wuhrer, Noortje de Haan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Beilstein journal of organic chemistry, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. The Role of Clinical Glyco(proteo)mics in Precision Medicine.Molecular & cellular proteomics : MCP · 2023
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. GlycoBioinformatics.Beilstein journal of organic chemistry · 2021
    Article
  6. Bioinformatics in Immunoglobulin Glycosylation Analysis.Experientia supplementum (2012) · 2021
    Article
  7. 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

7 authors.

Steffen LippoldCenter for Proteomics and Metabolomics, Leiden University Medical Center, Albinusdreef 2, 2333 ZA Leiden, Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1032-5808
Arnoud H de RuCenter for Proteomics and Metabolomics, Leiden University Medical Center, Albinusdreef 2, 2333 ZA Leiden, Netherlands.
Jan NoutaCenter for Proteomics and Metabolomics, Leiden University Medical Center, Albinusdreef 2, 2333 ZA Leiden, Netherlands.
Peter A van VeelenCenter for Proteomics and Metabolomics, Leiden University Medical Center, Albinusdreef 2, 2333 ZA Leiden, Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7898-9408
Magnus PalmbladCenter for Proteomics and Metabolomics, Leiden University Medical Center, Albinusdreef 2, 2333 ZA Leiden, Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5865-8994
Manfred WuhrerCenter for Proteomics and Metabolomics, Leiden University Medical Center, Albinusdreef 2, 2333 ZA Leiden, Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0814-4995
Noortje de HaanCenter for Proteomics and Metabolomics, Leiden University Medical Center, Albinusdreef 2, 2333 ZA Leiden, Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7026-6750

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Glycoproteomic data are often very complex, reflecting the high structural diversity of peptide and glycan portions. The use of glycopeptide-centered glycoproteomics by mass spectrometry is rapidly evolving in many research areas, leading to a demand in reliable data analysis tools. In recent years, several bioinformatic tools were developed to facilitate and improve both the identification and quantification of glycopeptides. Here, a selection of these tools was combined and evaluated with the aim of establishing a robust glycopeptide detection and quantification workflow targeting enriched glycoproteins. For this purpose, a tryptic digest from affinity-purified immunoglobulins G and A was analyzed on a nano-reversed-phase liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry platform with a high-resolution mass analyzer and higher-energy collisional dissociation fragmentation. Initial glycopeptide identification based on MS/MS data was aided by the Byonic software. Additional MS1-based glycopeptide identification relying on accurate mass and retention time differences using GlycopeptideGraphMS considerably expanded the set of confidently annotated glycopeptides. For glycopeptide quantification, the performance of LaCyTools was compared to Skyline, and GlycopeptideGraphMS. All quantification packages resulted in comparable glycosylation profiles but featured differences in terms of robustness and data quality control. Partial cysteine oxidation was identified as an unexpectedly abundant peptide modification and impaired the automated processing of several IgA glycopeptides. Finally, this study presents a semiautomated workflow for reliable glycoproteomic data analysis by the combination of software packages for MS/MS- and MS1-based glycopeptide identification as well as the integration of analyte quality control and quantification.

Indexed as

bioinformaticscysteine oxidationglycoproteomicsimmunoglobulinsmass spectrometry

Identifiers

PMID33363672
PMCPMC7736696

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.