ArticleJournal of proteome research2026
Improved Protein Identification in Shotgun Proteomics with a Group-Level Extension of the LPGF Model.
Article in Journal of proteome research, 2026. 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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Shotgun proteomics relies on robust statistical methods to increase the confidence of the protein identifications. Previously, we introduced LPGF, a protein probability model based on unique peptides. In this study, we extend LPGF to protein groups that share peptides by considering only peptides that are unique to each group. This strategy preserves the principle of unique evidence while enabling the probability estimation at the protein-group level. Applying our method to three tissues from the Human Proteome Map (HPM), we evaluated the gain in protein identifications obtained with group-unique peptides compared to those obtained using only protein-unique peptides and different scores. The accuracy of false discovery rate (FDR) estimation was further validated using a standard data set for protein inference based on human Protein Epitope Signature Tags (PrESTs), as well as through an entrapment experiment using the substantially larger HPM data set. To facilitate adoption, we developed an R package (b10prot) that integrates the full workflow, including protein-level and group-level LPGF score computation and protein grouping via an R port of our previous tool PAnalyzer. Our results demonstrate that extending LPGF to protein groups increases sensitivity while maintaining robust FDR control, thus providing the proteomics community with a practical framework for more comprehensive protein identification.
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.