Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38359605›Full record

ReviewCurrent opinion in biotechnology2024

What's new in single-cell proteomics.

Thy Truong, Ryan T Kelly

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Current opinion in biotechnology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing 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

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
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

2 authors.

Thy TruongDepartment of Chemistry and Biochemistry, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT 84602, United States.
Ryan T KellyDepartment of Chemistry and Biochemistry, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT 84602, United States. Electronic address: ryan.kelly@byu.edu.

Funding

Advanced Sample Preparation, Separation and Multiplexed Analysis for In-Depth Proteome Profiling of >1000 Single Cells Per DayR01CA279074 · NCI · BRIGHAM YOUNG UNIVERSITY · PI KELLY, RYAN T · 2023 to 2025
$1.6M
Fully automated and ultra-high-throughput platform for in-depth single-cell proteomicsR01GM138931 · NIGMS · BRIGHAM YOUNG UNIVERSITY · PI KELLY, RYAN T · 2020 to 2023
$1.6M
In-depth and label-free proteome profiling of hundreds of single cells per dayR21CA272326 · NCI · BRIGHAM YOUNG UNIVERSITY · PI KELLY, RYAN T · 2022 to 2024
$529k
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA279074NCI NIH HHS R21 CA272326NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM138931
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In recent years, single-cell proteomics (SCP) has advanced significantly, enabling the analysis of thousands of proteins within single mammalian cells. This progress is driven by advances in experimental design, with maturing label-free and multiplexed methods, optimized sample preparation, and innovations in separation techniques, including ultra-low-flow nanoLC. These factors collectively contribute to improved sensitivity, throughput, and reproducibility. Cutting-edge mass spectrometry platforms and data acquisition approaches continue to play a critical role in enhancing data quality. Furthermore, the exploration of spatial proteomics with single-cell resolution offers significant promise for understanding cellular interactions, giving rise to various phenotypes. SCP has far-reaching applications in cancer research, biomarker discovery, and developmental biology. Here, we provide a critical review of recent advances in the field of SCP.

Indexed as

ProteinsProteomicsAnimalsMammalsMass SpectrometryProteomeReproducibility of ResultsProteinsProteome

Identifiers

PMID38359605
PMCPMC11068367

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.