» Articles » PMID: 22594965

Comparison of 4-plex to 8-plex ITRAQ Quantitative Measurements of Proteins in Human Plasma Samples

Overview
Journal J Proteome Res
Specialty Biochemistry
Date 2012 May 19
PMID 22594965
Citations 32
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Methods for isobaric tagging of peptides, iTRAQ or TMT, are commonly used platforms in mass spectrometry based quantitative proteomics. These two methods are very often used to quantitate proteins in complex samples, e.g., serum/plasma or CSF supporting biomarker discovery studies. The success of these studies depends on multiple factors, including the accuracy of ratios of reporter ions reflecting quantitative changes of proteins. Because reporter ions are generated during peptide fragmentation, the differences of chemical structure of iTRAQ balance groups may have an effect on how efficiently these groups are fragmented and thus how differences in protein expression will be measured. Because 4-plex and 8-plex iTRAQ reagents do have different structures of balanced groups, it has been postulated that indeed differences in protein identification and quantitation exist between these two reagents. In this study we controlled the ratios of tagged samples and compared quantitation of proteins using 4-plex versus 8-plex reagents in the context of a highly complex sample of human plasma using ABSciex 4800 MALDI-TOF/TOF mass spectrometer and ProteinPilot 4.0 software. We observed that 8-plex tagging provides more consistent ratios than 4-plex without compromising protein identification, thus allowing investigation of eight experimental conditions in one analytical experiment.

Citing Articles

Identify of blood glucose metabolism regulation pathways and related proteins in the db/db mouse model through iTRAQ quantitative mass spectrometry.

Yue Y, Dong S, Wu Z, Dong Y, Chen Q, Wang H Acta Diabetol. 2025; .

PMID: 39932544 DOI: 10.1007/s00592-025-02465-8.


Comprehensive Overview of Bottom-Up Proteomics Using Mass Spectrometry.

Jiang Y, Rex D, Schuster D, Neely B, Rosano G, Volkmar N ACS Meas Sci Au. 2024; 4(4):338-417.

PMID: 39193565 PMC: 11348894. DOI: 10.1021/acsmeasuresciau.3c00068.


Comprehensive Overview of Bottom-Up Proteomics using Mass Spectrometry.

Jiang Y, Rex D, Schuster D, Neely B, Rosano G, Volkmar N ArXiv. 2023; .

PMID: 38013887 PMC: 10680866.


Oncogenic Proteomics Approaches for Translational Research and HIV-Associated Malignancy Mechanisms.

Alvarez-Rivera E, Ortiz-Hernandez E, Lugo E, Lozada-Reyes L, Boukli N Proteomes. 2023; 11(3).

PMID: 37489388 PMC: 10366845. DOI: 10.3390/proteomes11030022.


iTRAQ-Based Quantitative Proteomics Unveils Protein Dynamics in the Root of L. under Waterlogging Stress Conditions.

Yang X, Jiang Z, He J, Shen L Life (Basel). 2023; 13(6).

PMID: 37374181 PMC: 10302559. DOI: 10.3390/life13061399.


References
1.
Karp N, Huber W, Sadowski P, Charles P, Hester S, Lilley K . Addressing accuracy and precision issues in iTRAQ quantitation. Mol Cell Proteomics. 2010; 9(9):1885-97. PMC: 2938101. DOI: 10.1074/mcp.M900628-MCP200. View

2.
Ly L, Barnett M, Zheng Y, Gulati T, Prineas J, Crossett B . Comprehensive tissue processing strategy for quantitative proteomics of formalin-fixed multiple sclerosis lesions. J Proteome Res. 2011; 10(10):4855-68. DOI: 10.1021/pr200672n. View

3.
Rozek W, Ricardo-Dukelow M, Holloway S, Gendelman H, Wojna V, Melendez L . Cerebrospinal fluid proteomic profiling of HIV-1-infected patients with cognitive impairment. J Proteome Res. 2007; 6(11):4189-99. DOI: 10.1021/pr070220c. View

4.
Wu W, Wang G, Baek S, Shen R . Comparative study of three proteomic quantitative methods, DIGE, cICAT, and iTRAQ, using 2D gel- or LC-MALDI TOF/TOF. J Proteome Res. 2006; 5(3):651-8. DOI: 10.1021/pr050405o. View

5.
Chao J, Papavinasasundaram K, Zheng X, Chavez-Steenbock A, Wang X, Lee G . Convergence of Ser/Thr and two-component signaling to coordinate expression of the dormancy regulon in Mycobacterium tuberculosis. J Biol Chem. 2010; 285(38):29239-46. PMC: 2937955. DOI: 10.1074/jbc.M110.132894. View