ArticleJournal of proteome research2024
Multicenter Collaborative Study to Optimize Mass Spectrometry Workflows of Clinical Specimens.
Article in Journal of proteome research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- MALDI Mass Spectrometry Imaging in Alzheimer's Disease Lipidomics: Matrix Selection, Spatial Lipid Pathology and Emerging Analytical Strategies.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Blood Matrices and Sample Preparation Influence Blood Marker Discovery.Journal of proteome research · 2026Article
- Proteomics in Antitumor Drug Target Discovery, Toxicity, Resistance, and Precision Oncology.Drug design, development and therapy · 2026Review
- High-Performance Proteomics Using Nano-, Capillary-, and Microflow Chromatographic Separations.Journal of proteome research · 2025Article
- Multicenter evaluation of label-free quantification in human plasma on a high dynamic range benchmark set.Nature communications · 2025Article
- A standardized framework for circulating blood proteomics.Nature genetics · 2025Review
- Multicenter Longitudinal Quality Assessment of MS-Based Proteomics in Plasma and Serum.Journal of proteome research · 2025Article
- The 2024 Report on the Human Proteome from the HUPO Human Proteome Project.Journal of proteome research · 2024Review
- Deep Proteome Analysis of Cerebrospinal Fluid from Pediatric Patients with Central Nervous System Cancer.Journal of proteome research · 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
23 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The foundation for integrating mass spectrometry (MS)-based proteomics into systems medicine is the development of standardized start-to-finish and fit-for-purpose workflows for clinical specimens. An essential step in this pursuit is to highlight the common ground in a diverse landscape of different sample preparation techniques and liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry (LC-MS) setups. With the aim to benchmark and improve the current best practices among the proteomics MS laboratories of the CLINSPECT-M consortium, we performed two consecutive round-robin studies with full freedom to operate in terms of sample preparation and MS measurements. The six study partners were provided with two clinically relevant sample matrices: plasma and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF). In the first round, each laboratory applied their current best practice protocol for the respective matrix. Based on the achieved results and following a transparent exchange of all lab-specific protocols within the consortium, each laboratory could advance their methods before measuring the same samples in the second acquisition round. Both time points are compared with respect to identifications (IDs), data completeness, and precision, as well as reproducibility. As a result, the individual performances of participating study centers were improved in the second measurement, emphasizing the effect and importance of the expert-driven exchange of best practices for direct practical improvements.
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.