Biology Reference
In-Depth Information
75. Geiger T, Cox J, Ostasiewicz P, et al. Super-SILAC mix
for quantitative proteomics of human tumor tissue.
Nat Methods
2010;
88. Fratantoni SA, Piersma SR, Jimenez CR. Comparison
of the performance of two af
nity depletion spin
:383
e
5.
76. Geiger T, Wisniewski JR, Cox J, et al. Use of stable
isotope labeling by amino acids in cell culture as
a spike-in standard in quantitative proteomics.
Nat
Protoc
2011;
filters for quantitative proteomics of CSF: evaluation
of sensitivity and reproducibility of CSF analysis using
GeLC-MS/MS and spectral counting.
Proteomics Clin-
ical Applications
2010;
7
:613
e
7.
89. Quintana LF, Campistol JM, Alcolea MP, et al.
Application of label-free quantitative peptidomics for
the identi
4
:147
e
57.
77. Wehr AY, Hwang WT, Blair IA, et al. Relative quan-
ti
6
cation of serum proteins from pancreatic ductal
adenocarcinoma patients by stable isotope dilution
liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry.
J Proteome
Res
2012;
cation of urinary biomarkers of kidney
chronic allograft dysfunction.
Mol Cell Proteomics
2009;
8
:1658
e
73.
90. Sigdel TK, Kaushal A, Gritsenko M, et al. Shotgun
proteomics identi
:1749
e
58.
78. Zhao T, Zeng X, Bateman NW, et al. Relative quanti-
tation of proteins in expressed prostatic secretion with
a stable isotope labeled secretome standard.
J Proteome
Res
2012;
11
c for acute renal
transplant rejection.
Proteomics Clinical Applications
2010;
es proteins speci
:32
e
47.
91. Hauck SM, Dietter J, Kramer RL, et al. Deciphering
membrane-associated molecular processes in target
tissue of autoimmune uveitis by label-free quantitative
mass spectrometry.
Mol Cell Proteomics
2010;
4
11
:1089
e
99.
79. Deeb SJ, D
'
Souza RC, Cox J, et al. Super-SILAC allows
classi
cation of diffuse
large B-cell
lymphoma
subtypes by their protein expression pro
les.
Mol Cell
:2292
e
305.
92. Baek J-H, Kim H, Shin B, et al. Multiple products
monitoring as a robust approach for peptide quanti-
9
:77
e
89.
80. Lund RR, Terp MG, Laenkholm AV, et al. Quantita-
tive proteomics of primary tumors with varying
metastatic capabilities using stable isotope-labeled
proteins of multiple histogenic origins.
Proteomics
2012;
Proteomics
2012;
11
:3625
e
32.
93. Wepf A, Glatter T, Schmidt A, et al. Quantitative
interaction proteomics using mass spectrometry.
Nat
Methods
2009;
fication.
J Proteome Res
2009;
8
:2139
e
48.
81. Link AJ, Eng J, Schieltz DM, et al. Direct analysis of
protein complexes using mass spectrometry.
Nat Bio-
technol
1999;
:203
e
5.
94. Mbeunkui F, Goshe MB. Investigation of solubiliza-
tion and digestion methods for microsomal membrane
proteome analysis using data-independent LC-MSE.
Proteomics
2011;
12
6
:676
e
82.
82. Collier TS, Sarkar P, Franck WL, et al. Direct
comparison of stable isotope labeling by amino acids
in cell culture and spectral counting for quantitative
proteomics.
Anal Chem
2010;
17
:898
e
911.
95. Ramya TN, Weerapana E, Liao L, et al. In situ trans
ligands of CD22 identi
11
ed by glycan-protein photo-
cross-linking-enabled proteomics.
Mol Cell Proteomics
2010;
:8696
e
702.
83. Bondarenko PV, Chelius D, Shaler TA. Identi
82
cation
and relative quantitation of protein mixtures by
enzymatic digestion followed by capillary reversed-
phase liquid chromatography-tandem mass spec-
trometry.
Anal Chem
2002;
:1339
e
51.
96. Paulo JA, Lee LS, Banks PA, et al. Proteomic analysis
of formalin-
9
n-embedded pancreatic tissue
using liquid chromatography tandem mass spec-
trometry.
Pancreas
2012;
xed paraf
:4741
e
9.
84. Chelius D, Bondarenko PV. Quantitative pro
:175
e
85.
97. Patel V, Hood BL, Molinolo AA, et al. Proteomic
analysis of laser-captured paraf
74
41
ling of
proteins in complex mixtures using liquid chroma-
tography and mass spectrometry.
J Proteome Res
2002;
1
n-embedded tissues:
a molecular portrait of head and neck cancer
progression.
Clin Cancer Res
2008;
:317
e
23.
85. Wolters DA, Washburn MP, Yates 3rd JR. An auto-
mated multidimensional protein identi
:1002
e
14.
98. Kam SY, Hennessy T, Chua SC, et al. Characterization
of the human gastric
14
cation tech-
nology for shotgun proteomics.
Anal Chem
2001;
fluid proteome reveals distinct
pH-dependent protein pro
73
:
les:
implications
for
5683
e
90.
86. Wong JWH, Cagney G. An overview of label-free
quantitation methods in proteomics by mass spec-
trometry.
Methods Mol Biol
2010;
:4535
e
46.
99. Hoskins ER, Hood BL, Sun M, et al. Proteomic anal-
ysis of ovarian cancer proximal
biomarker studies.
J Proteome Res
2011;
10
fluids: validation of
elevated peroxiredoxin 1 in patient peripheral circu-
lation.
PLoS One
2011;
:273
e
83.
87. Hawkridge AM, Wysocky RB, Petitte JN, et al.
Measuring the intra-individual variability of the
plasma proteome in the chicken model of spontaneous
ovarian adenocarcinoma.
Anal Bioanal Chem
2010;
604
:e25056.
100. Haslene-Hox H, Oveland E, Berg KC, et al. A new
method for isolation of interstitial
6
fluid from human
solid tumors applied to proteomic analysis of ovarian
carcinoma tissue.
PLoS One
2011;
398
:
737
e
49.
:e19217.
6
Search WWH ::
Custom Search