ArticleInternational journal of molecular sciences2021
A Novel UPLC-MS/MS Method Identifies Organ-Specific Dipeptide Profiles.
Article in International journal of molecular sciences, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Circulating Dipeptides in Cancer: Degradation Fragments or Functional Metabolites?International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Maternal amino acid metabolites during pregnancy and preterm birth: results from two prospective cohort studies.BMC medicine · 2026Article
- Article
- Mapping protein-metabolite interactions iniScience · 2025Article
- Article
- Machine learning-assisted analysis of serum metabolomics for identifying biomarkers in intrinsic and idiosyncratic drug-induced liver injury.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Article
- Dipeptides in CSF and plasma: diagnostic and therapeutic potential in neurological diseases.Amino acids · 2024Article
- Regional Brain Analysis of Modified Amino Acids and Dipeptides during the Sleep/Wake Cycle.Metabolites · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAmino acids have a central role in cell metabolism, and intracellular changes contribute to the pathogenesis of various diseases, while the role and specific organ distribution of dipeptides is largely unknown.
methodWe established a sensitive, rapid and reliable UPLC-MS/MS method for quantification of 36 dipeptides. Dipeptide patterns were analyzed in brown and white adipose tissues, brain, eye, heart, kidney, liver, lung, muscle, sciatic nerve, pancreas, spleen and thymus, serum and urine of C57BL/6N wildtype mice and related to the corresponding amino acid profiles.
resultsA total of 30 out of the 36 investigated dipeptides were detected with organ-specific distribution patterns. Carnosine and anserine were most abundant in all organs, with the highest concentrations in muscles. In liver, Asp-Gln and Ala-Gln concentrations were high, in the spleen and thymus, Glu-Ser and Gly-Asp. In serum, dipeptide concentrations were several magnitudes lower than in organ tissues. In all organs, dipeptides with C-terminal proline (Gly-Pro and Leu-Pro) were present at higher concentrations than dipeptides with N-terminal proline (Pro-Gly and Pro-Leu). Organ-specific amino acid profiles were related to the dipeptide profile with several amino acid concentrations being related to the isomeric form of the dipeptides. Aspartate, histidine, proline and serine tissue concentrations correlated with dipeptide concentrations, when the amino acids were present at the C- but not at the N-terminus.
conclusionOur multi-dipeptide quantification approach demonstrates organ-specific dipeptide distribution. This method allows us to understand more about the dipeptide metabolism in disease or in healthy state.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.