Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36090025›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in molecular biosciences2022

Comparison of extraction methods for intracellular metabolomics of human tissues.

Carolin Andresen, Tobias Boch, Hagen M Gegner, Nils Mechtel, Andreas Narr, Emrullah Birgin, Erik Rasbach, Nuh Rahbari, Andreas Trumpp, Gernot Poschet and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in molecular biosciences, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing 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

22 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Anti-Tumor Effects of Statins in Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma Cells.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Applications of chromatographic methods in metabolomics: A review.Journal of chromatography. B, Analytical technologies in the biomedical and life sciences · 2024
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Antioxidants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    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

11 authors.

Carolin AndresenHeidelberg Institute for Stem Cell Technology and Experimental Medicine (HI-STEM gGmbH), Heidelberg, Germany.
Tobias BochHeidelberg Institute for Stem Cell Technology and Experimental Medicine (HI-STEM gGmbH), Heidelberg, Germany.
Hagen M GegnerCentre for Organismal Studies (COS), Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany.
Nils MechtelCentre for Organismal Studies (COS), Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany.
Andreas NarrHeidelberg Institute for Stem Cell Technology and Experimental Medicine (HI-STEM gGmbH), Heidelberg, Germany.
Emrullah BirginDepartment of Surgery, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Universitätsmedizin Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany.
Erik RasbachDepartment of Surgery, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Universitätsmedizin Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany.
Nuh RahbariDepartment of Surgery, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Universitätsmedizin Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany.
Andreas TrumppHeidelberg Institute for Stem Cell Technology and Experimental Medicine (HI-STEM gGmbH), Heidelberg, Germany.
Gernot PoschetCentre for Organismal Studies (COS), Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany.
Daniel HübschmannHeidelberg Institute for Stem Cell Technology and Experimental Medicine (HI-STEM gGmbH), Heidelberg, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Analyses of metabolic compounds inside cells or tissues provide high information content since they represent the endpoint of biological information flow and are a snapshot of the integration of many regulatory processes. However, quantification of the abundance of metabolites requires their careful extraction. We present a comprehensive study comparing ten extraction protocols in four human sample types (liver tissue, bone marrow, HL60, and HEK cells) aiming to detect and quantify up to 630 metabolites of different chemical classes. We show that the extraction efficiency and repeatability are highly variable across protocols, tissues, and chemical classes of metabolites. We used different quality metrics including the limit of detection and variability between replicates as well as the sum of concentrations as a global estimate of analytical repeatability of the extraction. The coverage of extracted metabolites depends on the used solvents, which has implications for the design of measurements of different sample types and metabolic compounds of interest. The benchmark dataset can be explored in an easy-to-use, interactive, and flexible online resource (R/shiny app MetaboExtract: http://www.metaboextract.shiny.dkfz.de) for context-specific selection of the optimal extraction method. Furthermore, data processing and conversion functionality underlying the shiny app are accessible as an R package: https://cran.r-project.org/package=MetAlyzer.

Indexed as

absolute quantificationextraction protocolintra-cellularmetabolismmetabolomics

Identifiers

PMID36090025
PMCPMC9461704

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.