ArticleAnalytical chemistry2024
Reducing Cathodic Drift during Isoelectric Focusing Using Microscale Immobilized pH Gradient Gels.
Article in Analytical chemistry, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Microfluidic analytical tools play an important role in miniaturizing targeted proteomic assays for improved detection sensitivity, throughput, and automation. Microfluidic isoelectric focusing (IEF) can resolve proteoforms in lysate from low-to-single cell numbers. However, IEF assays often use carrier ampholytes (CAs) to establish a pH gradient for protein separation, presenting limitations like pH instability in the form of cathodic drift (migration of focused proteins toward the cathode). Immobilized pH gradient (IPG) gels reduce cathodic drift by covalently immobilizing the pH buffering components to a matrix. To our knowledge, efforts to implement IPG gels at the microscale have been limited to glass microdevices. To adapt IEF using IPGs to widely used microfluidic device materials, we introduce a polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS)-based microfluidic device and compare the microscale pH gradient stability of IEF established with IPGs, CAs, and a hybrid formulation of IPG gels and CAs (mixed-bed IEF). The PDMS-based IPG microfluidic device (μIPG) resolved analytes differing by 0.1 isoelectric point within a 3.5 mm separation lane over a 20 min focusing duration. During the 20 min duration, we observed markedly different cathodic drift velocities among the three formulations: 60.1 μm/min in CA-IEF, 2.5 μm/min in IPG-IEF (∼24-fold reduction versus CA-IEF), and 1.4 μm/min in mixed-bed IEF (∼43-fold reduction versus CA-IEF). Lastly, mixed-bed IEF in a PDMS device resolved green fluorescent protein (GFP) proteoforms from GFP-expressing human breast cancer cell lysate, thus establishing stability in lysate from complex biospecimens. μIPG is a promising and stable technique for studying proteoforms from small volumes.
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.