ArticleJournal of proteome research2025
Systematic Comparison of Bone Proteome Extraction Methods to Allow for Integrated Proteomics-Metabolomics Correlation.
Article in Journal of proteome research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Bone tissue poses significant challenges for proteomic analysis due to its dense, mineral-rich matrix and predominance of collagen, overshadowing low-abundance proteins critical for understanding bone physiology during LC-MS/MS-based proteomic analysis. In this study, we present a rapid sequential two-step extraction protocol designed to enhance proteome coverage, reduce collagen interference without using collagenase, and ensure robust quantification while enabling simultaneous metabolome analysis. We systematically compared it with two previously reported methods, which attempt to reduce collagen content through enzymatic collagen digestion or by employing four sequential extractions. Performance was evaluated based on reproducible protein quantification, variance, collagen content, processing, and instrument time. Our protocol reproducibly quantified 4,518 proteins across a dynamic range of 4 orders of magnitude. It demonstrated only marginally inferior quantification performance compared to the four-step protocol while reducing extraction and measurement time by half. Further, it significantly outperformed the collagenase-based method, which quantified only 2,689 proteins. Incorporating a chloroform-methanol metabolite extraction only led to a minimal reduction in quantifiable proteins, making the protocol suitable for multiomics applications. In conclusion, this protocol facilitates comprehensive coverage of proteins after metabolite extraction, enabling comprehensive multiomics analyses and aiding in the assessment of bone diseases and therapeutic developments.
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.