ArticleInternational journal of molecular sciences2023
Comparison of SPEED, S-Trap, and In-Solution-Based Sample Preparation Methods for Mass Spectrometry in Kidney Tissue and Plasma.
Article in International journal of molecular sciences, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Characterization of the Proteomic Response in SIM-A9 Murine Microglia Following Canonical NLRP3 Inflammasome Activation.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Article
- In Vivo Antihypertensive and Ex Vivo Vasodilatory Studies of Taxifolin.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Impact of Sample Preparation Strategies on the Quantitative Accuracy of Low-Abundance Serum Proteins in Shotgun Proteomics.Journal of proteome research · 2025Article
- High-resolution mass spectrometry measurement of N-terminal carbamylated hemoglobin as a potential marker for chronic diseases with elevated blood urea levels.Journal of mass spectrometry and advances in the clinical lab · 2025Article
- Development of a rapid and reliable method to simultaneously detect seven food allergens in processed foods using LC-MS/MS.Food chemistry: X · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Mass spectrometry is a powerful technique for investigating renal pathologies and identifying biomarkers, and efficient protein extraction from kidney tissue is essential for bottom-up proteomic analyses. Detergent-based strategies aid cell lysis and protein solubilization but are poorly compatible with downstream protein digestion and liquid chromatography-coupled mass spectrometry, requiring additional purification and buffer-exchange steps. This study compares two well-established detergent-based methods for protein extraction (in-solution sodium deoxycholate (SDC); suspension trapping (S-Trap)) with the recently developed sample preparation by easy extraction and digestion (SPEED) method, which uses strong acid for denaturation. We compared the quantitative performance of each method using label-free mass spectrometry in both sheep kidney cortical tissue and plasma. In kidney tissue, SPEED quantified the most unique proteins (SPEED 1250; S-Trap 1202; SDC 1197). In plasma, S-Trap produced the most unique protein quantifications (S-Trap 150; SDC 148; SPEED 137). Protein quantifications were reproducible across biological replicates in both tissue (R
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.