ArticleCells2021
Phosphoproteomics Sample Preparation Impacts Biological Interpretation of Phosphorylation Signaling Outcomes.
Article in Cells, 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.
- Cell cycle arrest enhances CD8Nature immunology · 2026Article
- Taxifolin attenuates liver fibrosis by regulating the phosphorylation of NDRG1 at Thr328Acta pharmaceutica Sinica. B · 2025Article
- The comprehensive SARS-CoV-2 'hijackome' knowledge base.Cell discovery · 2024Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The influence of phosphoproteomics sample preparation methods on the biological interpretation of signaling outcome is unclear. Here, we demonstrate a strong bias in phosphorylation signaling targets uncovered by comparing the phosphoproteomes generated by two commonly used methods-strong cation exchange chromatography-based phosphoproteomics (SCXPhos) and single-run high-throughput phosphoproteomics (HighPhos). Phosphoproteomes of embryonic stem cells exposed to ionizing radiation (IR) profiled by both methods achieved equivalent coverage (around 20,000 phosphosites), whereas a combined dataset significantly increased the depth (>30,000 phosphosites). While both methods reproducibly quantified a subset of shared IR-responsive phosphosites that represent DNA damage and cell-cycle-related signaling events, most IR-responsive phosphoproteins (>82%) and phosphosites (>96%) were method-specific. Both methods uncovered unique insights into phospho-signaling mediated by single (SCXPhos) versus double/multi-site (HighPhos) phosphorylation events; particularly, each method identified a distinct set of previously unreported IR-responsive kinome/phosphatome (95% disparate) directly impacting the uncovered biology.
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.