Quantitative Comparison of Deparaffinization, Rehydration, and Extraction Methods for FFPE Tissue Proteomics and Phosphoproteomics

被引:1
|
作者
Humphries, Erin M. [1 ]
Loudon, Clare [1 ]
Craft, George E. [1 ]
Hains, Peter G. [1 ]
Robinson, Phillip J. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Sydney, Childrens Med Res Inst, Fac Med & Hlth, ProCan, Westmead, NSW 2145, Australia
基金
英国医学研究理事会; 澳大利亚国家健康与医学研究理事会;
关键词
PARAFFIN-EMBEDDED TISSUE; DATA-INDEPENDENT ACQUISITION; PROTEIN EXTRACTION; MASS-SPECTROMETRY; SAMPLE PREPARATION; RECOVERY; PHOSPHORYLATION; SHOTGUN; IDENTIFICATION; UNIVERSAL;
D O I
10.1021/acs.analchem.3c04479
中图分类号
O65 [分析化学];
学科分类号
070302 ; 081704 ;
摘要
Formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tissues are suitable for proteomic and phosphoproteomic biomarker studies by data-independent acquisition mass spectrometry. The choice of the sample preparation method influences the number, intensity, and reproducibility of identifications. By comparing four deparaffinization and rehydration methods, including heptane, histolene, SubX, and xylene, we found that heptane and methanol produced the lowest coefficients of variation (CVs). Using this, five extraction methods from the literature were modified and evaluated for their performance using kidney, leg muscle, lung, and testicular rat organs. All methods performed well, except for SP3 due to insufficient tissue lysis. Heat n' Beat was the fastest and most reproducible method with the highest digestion efficiency and lowest CVs. S-Trap produced the highest peptide yield, while TFE produced the best phosphopeptide enrichment efficiency. The quantitation of FFPE-derived peptides remains an ongoing challenge with bias in UV and fluorescence assays across methods, most notably in SPEED. Functional enrichment analysis demonstrated that each method favored extracting some gene ontology cellular components over others including chromosome, cytoplasmic, cytoskeleton, endoplasmic reticulum, membrane, mitochondrion, and nucleoplasm protein groups. The outcome is a set of recommendations for choosing the most appropriate method for different settings.
引用
收藏
页码:13358 / 13370
页数:13
相关论文
共 15 条
  • [1] A Non-Hazardous Deparaffinization Protocol Enables Quantitative Proteomics of Core Needle Biopsy-Sized Formalin-Fixed and Paraffin-Embedded (FFPE) Tissue Specimens
    Mitsa, Georgia
    Guo, Qianyu
    Goncalves, Christophe
    Preston, Samuel E. J.
    Lacasse, Vincent
    Aguilar-Mahecha, Adriana
    Benlimame, Naciba
    Basik, Mark
    Spatz, Alan
    Batist, Gerald
    Miller, Wilson H., Jr.
    del Rincon, Sonia, V
    Zahedi, Rene P.
    Borchers, Christoph H.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MOLECULAR SCIENCES, 2022, 23 (08)
  • [2] Comparison of different digestion methods for proteomic analysis of isolated cells and FFPE tissue samples
    Pirog, Artur
    Faktor, Jakub
    Urban-Wojciuk, Zuzanna
    Kote, Sachin
    Chrusciel, Elzbieta
    Arcimowicz, Lukasz
    Marek-Trzonkowska, Natalia
    Vojtesek, Borek
    Hupp, Ted R.
    Al Shboul, Sofian
    Brennan, Paul M.
    Smolenski, Ryszard Tomasz
    Goodlett, David R.
    Dapic, Irena
    TALANTA, 2021, 233
  • [3] A novel xylene-free deparaffinization method for the extraction of proteins from human derived formalin-fixed paraffin embedded (FFPE) archival tissue blocks
    Mansour, Anthony
    Chatila, Rajaa
    Bejjani, Noha
    Dagher, Carole
    Faour, Wissam H.
    METHODSX, 2014, 1 : 90 - 95
  • [4] Comparison of extraction methods for peptidomics analysis of mouse brain tissue
    Van Dijck, Annemie
    Hayakawa, Eisuke
    Landuyt, Bart
    Baggerman, Geert
    Van Dam, Debby
    Luyten, Walter
    Schoofs, Liliane
    De Deyn, Peter Paul
    JOURNAL OF NEUROSCIENCE METHODS, 2011, 197 (02) : 231 - 237
  • [5] Time for Multiple Extraction Methods in Proteomics? A Comparison of Three Protein Extraction Methods in the Eustigmatophyte Alga Microchloropsis gaditana CCMP526
    Karthikaichamy, Anbarasu
    Deore, Pranali
    Rai, Vineeta
    Bulach, Dieter
    Beardall, John
    Noronha, Santosh
    Srivastava, Sanjeeva
    OMICS-A JOURNAL OF INTEGRATIVE BIOLOGY, 2017, 21 (11) : 678 - 683
  • [6] Comparison of two FFPE preparation methods using label-free shotgun proteomics: Application to tissues of diverticulitis patients
    Quesada-Calvo, Florence
    Bertrand, Virginie
    Longuespee, Remi
    Delga, Agnes
    Mazzucchelli, Gabriel
    Smargiasso, Nicolas
    Baiwir, Dominique
    Delvenne, Philippe
    Malaise, Michel
    De Pauw-Gillet, Marie-Claire
    De Pauw, Edwin
    Louis, Edouard
    Meuwis, Marie-Alice
    JOURNAL OF PROTEOMICS, 2015, 112 : 250 - 261
  • [7] Reproducible Tissue Homogenization and Protein Extraction for Quantitative Proteomics Using MicroPestle-Assisted Pressure-Cycling Technology
    Shao, Shiying
    Guo, Tiannan
    Gross, Vera
    Lazarev, Alexander
    Koh, Ching Chiek
    Gillessen, Silke
    Joerger, Markus
    Jochum, Wolfram
    Aebersold, Ruedi
    JOURNAL OF PROTEOME RESEARCH, 2016, 15 (06) : 1821 - 1829
  • [8] Comparison of different tissue sampling methods for protein extraction from formalin-fixed and paraffin-embedded tissue specimens
    Graentzdoerffer, Ilona
    Yumlu, Saniye
    Gioeva, Zarina
    von Wasielewski, Reinhard
    Ebert, Matthias P. A.
    Roecken, Christoph
    EXPERIMENTAL AND MOLECULAR PATHOLOGY, 2010, 88 (01) : 190 - 196
  • [9] On-Tissue Hydrogel-Mediated Nondestructive Proteomic Characterization: Application to fr/fr and FFPE Tissues and Insights for Quantitative Proteomics Using a Case of Cardiac Myxoma
    Taverna, Domenico
    Mignogna, Chiara
    Santise, Gianluca
    Gaspari, Marco
    Cuda, Giovanni
    PROTEOMICS CLINICAL APPLICATIONS, 2019, 13 (01)
  • [10] Management and dissemination of MS proteomic data with PROTICdb: Example of a quantitative comparison between methods of protein extraction
    Langella, Olivier
    Valot, Benoit
    Jacob, Daniel
    Balliau, Thierry
    Flores, Raphael
    Hoogland, Christine
    Joets, Johann
    Zivy, Michel
    PROTEOMICS, 2013, 13 (09) : 1457 - 1466