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