ArticleMetabolites2024
Optimizing MS-Based Multi-Omics: Comparative Analysis of Protein, Metabolite, and Lipid Extraction Techniques.
Article in Metabolites, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Sequential Penta-Omic Extraction Method Using Single Biospecimens of Post-mortem Human Brain.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Advanced technologies of single-cell metabolomics unveiling cellular metabolic heterogeneity for biological and biomedical research.Journal of food and drug analysis · 2026Review
- Comparative proteomic analysis of gingival crevicular fluid and periodontal tissue: revealing clinical potential.Clinical proteomics · 2026Article
- Optimizing multiomics sample preparation: comparative evaluation of extraction protocols for HepG2 cells.Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry · 2026Article
- Cytological basis and key metabolite profiling of fresh tobacco leaves with different oiliness indices in Yunyan 87.Frontiers in plant science · 2026Article
- Integrative Omics and AI-Driven Systems Biology: Multilayer Networks DecodingJournal of proteome research · 2025Review
- Alginate oligosaccharides in the food industry: emerging functional roles, health benefits, and technological applications - Review.Food chemistry: X · 2025Review
- Applications and advances of multi-omics technologies in gastrointestinal tumors.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Review
- Quantitative Determination of a Series of Oxysterols by an Optimized LC-MS/MS Analysis in Different Tissue Types.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Article
- RNA nanotherapeutics with fibrosis overexpression and retention for MASH treatment.Nature communications · 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
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Multi-omics integrates diverse types of biological information from genomic, proteomic, and metabolomics experiments to achieve a comprehensive understanding of complex cellular mechanisms. However, this approach is also challenging due to technical issues such as limited sample quantities, the complexity of data pre-processing, and reproducibility concerns. Furthermore, existing studies have primarily focused on technical performance assessment and the presentation of modified protocols through quantitative comparisons of the identified protein counts. Nevertheless, the specific differences in these comparisons have been minimally investigated. Here, findings obtained from various omics approaches were profiled using various extraction methods (methanol extraction, the Folch method, and Matyash methods for metabolites and lipids) and two digestion methods (filter-aided sample preparation (FASP) and suspension traps (S-Trap)) for resuspended proteins. FASP was found to be more effective for the identification of membrane-related proteins, whereas S-Trap excelled in isolating nuclear-related and RNA-processing proteins. Thus, FASP may be suitable for investigating the immune response and bacterial infection pathways, whereas S-Trap may be more effective for studies focused on the mechanisms of neurodegenerative diseases. Moreover, regarding the choice of extraction method, the single-phase method identified organic compounds and compounds related to fatty acids, whereas the two-phase extraction method identified more hydrophilic compounds such as nucleotides. Lipids with strong hydrophobicity, such as ChE and TG, were identified in the two-phase extraction results. These findings highlight that significant differences among small molecules are primarily identified due to the varying polarities of extraction solvents. These results, obtained by considering variables such as human error and batch effects in the sample preparation step, offer comprehensive and detailed results not previously provided by existing studies, thereby aiding in the selection of the most suitable pre-processing approach.
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.