ArticleInternational journal of molecular sciences2025
Peptide Mapping for Sequence Confirmation of Therapeutic Proteins and Recombinant Vaccine Antigens by High-Resolution Mass Spectrometry: Software Limitations, Pitfalls, and Lessons Learned.
Article in International journal of molecular sciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Peptide mapping is a well-established method for confirming the identity of therapeutic proteins as part of batch release testing and product characterization for regulatory filings. Traditionally based on enzymatic digestion followed by reversed-phase liquid chromatography and UV detection, the method has evolved with technological advancements to incorporate mass spectrometry (MS), enabling more detailed structural insights. Residue-level confirmation of amino acid sequences requires MS/MS fragmentation, which produces large amounts of data that must be processed using specialized software. In regulated environments, the use of academic algorithms is often limited by validation requirements, making it necessary to rely on commercially approved tools, although their built-in scoring systems have limitations that can affect sequence assignment accuracy. Here, we present representative examples of incorrect peptide assignments generated by commercial software. In antibody sequence analysis, misidentifications resulted from isobaric and near-isobaric dipeptides (e.g., SA vs. GT). Additional examples from the analysis of SARS-CoV-2 spike protein variants revealed software-induced artifacts, including artificial succinylation of aspartic acid residues to compensate for sequence mismatches, and incorrect deamidation site assignments due to misinterpretation of isotopic peaks. These findings underscore the necessity for expert manual review of MS/MS data, even when using validated commercial platforms, and highlight the molecular challenges in distinguishing true sequence variants from software-driven artifacts.
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.