ArticleJournal of proteome research2025
High-Performance Proteomics Using Nano-, Capillary-, and Microflow Chromatographic Separations.
Article in Journal of proteome research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Recent Developments and Applications of Capillary and Microchip Electrophoresis in Proteomics and Peptidomics (2023-2025).Journal of separation science · 2026Review
- High-Throughput Label-free Single-Cell Proteomics Enabled by Multicolumn NanoLC with a 5-min Cycle Time.Research square · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Current applications of mass-spectrometry-based proteomics range from single-cell to body fluid analysis, each presenting very different demands regarding sensitivity or sample throughput. Additionally, the vast molecular complexity of proteomes and the massive dynamic range of protein concentrations in these biological systems require highly performant chromatographic separations in tandem with the high speed and sensitivity afforded by modern mass spectrometers. In this study, we focused on the chromatographic aspect and, more specifically, systematically evaluated proteome analysis performance across a wide range of chromatographic flow rates (0.3-50 μL/min) and associated column diameters using a Vanquish Neo HPLC coupled online to a Q Exactive HF-X mass spectrometer. Serial dilutions of HeLa cell line digests were used for benchmarking, and the total analysis time from injection to injection was intentionally fixed at 60 min (24 samples per day). The three key messages of the study are that (i) all chromatographic flow rates are suitable for high-quality proteome analysis, (ii) capLC (1.5 μL/min) is a very robust, sensitive, and quantitative alternative to nLC for many applications, and (iii) showcased proteome, phosphoproteome, and drug proteome data provide sound empirical guidance for laboratories in selecting appropriate chromatographic flow rates and column diameters for their specific applications.
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.