Browse
Submit Data
Databases
API
Help

Dataset Information

0 Views

0 Connections

0 Citations

0 Reanalyses

0 Downloads

Omics score: 0

Addressing the Protease Bias in Quantitative Proteomics.

ABSTRACT: Protein quantification strategies using multiple proteases have been shown to deliver poor interprotease accuracy in label-free mass spectrometry experiments. By utilizing six different proteases with different cleavage sites, this study explores the protease bias and its effect on accuracy and precision by using recombinant protein standards. We established 557 SRM assays, using a recombinant protein standard resource, toward 10 proteins in human plasma and determined their concentration with multiple proteases. The quantified peptides of these plasma proteins spanned 3 orders of magnitude (0.02-70 μM). In total, 60 peptides were used for absolute quantification and the majority of the peptides showed high robustness. The retained reproducibility was achieved by quantifying plasma proteins using spiked stable isotope standard recombinant proteins in a targeted proteomics workflow.

SUBMITTER: Woessmann J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9552229 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Json Xml

Publications

Addressing the Protease Bias in Quantitative Proteomics.

Woessmann Jakob J Kotol David D Hober Andreas A Uhlén Mathias M Edfors Fredrik F

Journal of proteome research 20220831 10

Protein quantification strategies using multiple proteases have been shown to deliver poor interprotease accuracy in label-free mass spectrometry experiments. By utilizing six different proteases with different cleavage sites, this study explores the protease bias and its effect on accuracy and precision by using recombinant protein standards. We established 557 SRM assays, using a recombinant protein standard resource, toward 10 proteins in human plasma and determined their concentration with m ...[more]

PMID: 36044728

Similar Datasets

Addressing the Protease Bias in Quantitative Proteomics

Project description:Protein quantification strategies using multiple proteases have been shown to deliver poor inter-protease accuracy in label-free mass spectrometry experiments. By utilizing six different proteases with different cleavage sites, this study explores the protease bias and its effect on accuracy and precision by using recombinant protein standards. We established 557 SRM assays, using a recombinant protein standard resource, towards ten proteins in human plasma and determined their concentration with multiple proteases. The quantified peptides of these plasma proteins spanned three orders of magnitude (0.02-70 µM). In total, 60 peptides were used for absolute quantification and the majority of the peptides showed high robustness. The retained reproducibility was achieved by quantifying plasma proteins using spiked stable isotope standard recombinant proteins in a targeted proteomics workflow.

2022-09-02 | PXD033574 | panorama

Addressing Measurement Error in Random Forests Using Quantitative Bias Analysis.

Project description:Although variables are often measured with error, the impact of measurement error on machine-learning predictions is seldom quantified. The purpose of this study was to assess the impact of measurement error on the performance of random-forest models and variable importance. First, we assessed the impact of misclassification (i.e., measurement error of categorical variables) of predictors on random-forest model performance (e.g., accuracy, sensitivity) and variable importance (mean decrease in accuracy) using data from the National Comorbidity Survey Replication (2001-2003). Second, we created simulated data sets in which we knew the true model performance and variable importance measures and could verify that quantitative bias analysis was recovering the truth in misclassified versions of the data sets. Our findings showed that measurement error in the data used to construct random forests can distort model performance and variable importance measures and that bias analysis can recover the correct results. This study highlights the utility of applying quantitative bias analysis in machine learning to quantify the impact of measurement error on study results.

| S-EPMC8408353 | biostudies-literature

A quantitative proteomics design for systematic identification of protease cleavage events.

Project description:We present here a novel proteomics design for systematic identification of protease cleavage events by quantitative N-terminal proteomics, circumventing the need for time-consuming manual validation. We bypass the singleton detection problem of protease-generated neo-N-terminal peptides by introducing differential isotopic proteome labeling such that these substrate reporter peptides are readily distinguished from all other N-terminal peptides. Our approach was validated using the canonical human caspase-3 protease and further applied to mouse cathepsin D and E substrate processing in a mouse dendritic cell proteome, identifying the largest set of protein protease substrates ever reported and gaining novel insight into substrate specificity differences of these cathepsins.

| S-EPMC2953924 | biostudies-literature

Cancer proteomics by quantitative shotgun proteomics.

Project description:A major scientific challenge at the present time for cancer research is the determination of the underlying biological basis for cancer development. It is further complicated by the heterogeneity of cancer's origin. Understanding the molecular basis of cancer requires studying the dynamic and spatial interactions among proteins in cells, signaling events among cancer cells, and interactions between the cancer cells and the tumor microenvironment. Recently, it has been proposed that large-scale protein expression analysis of cancer cell proteomes promises to be valuable for investigating mechanisms of cancer transformation. Advances in mass spectrometry technologies and bioinformatics tools provide a tremendous opportunity to qualitatively and quantitatively interrogate dynamic protein-protein interactions and differential regulation of cellular signaling pathways associated with tumor development. In this review, progress in shotgun proteomics technologies for examining the molecular basis of cancer development will be presented and discussed.

| S-EPMC2352161 | biostudies-other

Identification of Protease Specificity by Combining Proteome-Derived Peptide Libraries and Quantitative Proteomics.

Project description:We present protease specificity profiling based on quantitative proteomics in combination with proteome-derived peptide libraries. Peptide libraries are generated by endoproteolytic digestion of proteomes without chemical modification of primary amines before exposure to a protease under investigation. After incubation with a test protease, treated and control libraries are differentially isotope-labeled using cost-effective reductive dimethylation. Upon analysis by liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry, cleavage products of the test protease appear as semi-specific peptides that are enriched for the corresponding isotope label. We validate our workflow with two proteases with well-characterized specificity profiles: trypsin and caspase-3. We provide the first specificity profile of a protease encoded by a human endogenous retrovirus and for chlamydial protease-like activity factor (CPAF). For CPAF, we also highlight the structural basis of negative subsite cooperativity between subsites S1 and S2'. For A disintegrin and metalloproteinase with thrombospondin motifs (ADAMTS) -4, -5, and -15, we show a canonical preference profile, including glutamate in P1 and glycine in P3'. In total, we report nearly 4000 cleavage sites for seven proteases. Our protocol is fast, avoids enrichment or synthesis steps, and enables probing for lysine selectivity as well as subsite cooperativity. Due to its simplicity, we anticipate usability by most proteomic laboratories.

| S-EPMC4937521 | biostudies-literature

Addressing discretization-induced bias in demographic prediction.

Project description:Racial and other demographic imputation is necessary for many applications, especially in auditing disparities and outreach targeting in political campaigns. The canonical approach is to construct continuous predictions-e.g. based on name and geography-and then to often discretize the predictions by selecting the most likely class (argmax), potentially with a minimum threshold (thresholding). We study how this practice produces discretization bias. For example, we show that argmax labeling, as used by a prominent commercial voter file vendor to impute race/ethnicity, results in a substantial under-count of Black voters, e.g. by 28.2% points in North Carolina. This bias can have substantial implications in downstream tasks that use such labels. We then introduce a joint optimization approach-and a tractable data-driven threshold heuristic-that can eliminate this bias, with negligible individual-level accuracy loss. Finally, we theoretically analyze discretization bias, show that calibrated continuous models are insufficient to eliminate it, and that an approach such as ours is necessary. Broadly, we warn researchers and practitioners against discretizing continuous demographic predictions without considering downstream consequences.

| S-EPMC11803427 | biostudies-literature

Addressing weight bias among pediatric healthcare clinical staff.

Project description:BackgroundChildren with obesity may experience weight-based discrimination as a result of weight bias and stigma, which can have deleterious effects on their health and wellbeing, including increased risk of dysregulated, maladaptive, and disordered eating such as restriction, purging, and binging. Prior work has shown that weight bias occurs from healthcare workers caring for adults, but less is known about the prevalence of weight bias in the pediatric healthcare setting.MethodsWe aimed to determine what proportion of pediatric healthcare professionals had attitudes of weight bias at our own institution by constructing a survey with questions from validated weight bias survey tools. Results revealed nearly half of all respondents had witnessed another healthcare professional make negative remarks about a patient with obesity, and many shared that they lacked the proper education/training and equipment to properly care for patients with obesity. Based on survey results, we created an electronic-based training module to educate healthcare professionals on weight bias and discrimination and how they may negatively affect care provided to children and families with obesity at our institution. Engagement with hospital leadership was a key strategy to ensure participation from medical and nursing/allied health staff in the survey, although only nursing/allied health leadership required the online training module resulting in limited physician engagement.ResultsFeedback received regarding the training module was overwhelmingly positive.ConclusionsOur efforts illustrate that weight bias and discrimination exist in pediatric institutions, and that participation in a tailored electronic-based training module may be viewed as a helpful tool to raise awareness of how weight-based discrimination and bias can negatively affect patient care.

| S-EPMC11523801 | biostudies-literature

Addressing bias in bagging and boosting regression models.

Project description:As artificial intelligence (AI) becomes widespread, there is increasing attention on investigating bias in machine learning (ML) models. Previous research concentrated on classification problems, with little emphasis on regression models. This paper presents an easy-to-apply and effective methodology for mitigating bias in bagging and boosting regression models, that is also applicable to any model trained through minimizing a differentiable loss function. Our methodology measures bias rigorously and extends the ML model's loss function with a regularization term to penalize high correlations between model errors and protected attributes. We applied our approach to three popular tree-based ensemble models: a random forest model (RF), a gradient-boosted model (GBT), and an extreme gradient boosting model (XGBoost). We implemented our methodology on a case study for predicting road-level traffic volume, where RF, GBT, and XGBoost models were shown to have high accuracy. Despite high accuracy, the ML models were shown to perform poorly on roads in minority-populated areas. Our bias mitigation approach reduced minority-related bias by over 50%.

| S-EPMC11310502 | biostudies-literature

Identifying and Addressing Confounding Bias in Violence Prevention Research.

Project description:Purpose of reviewViolence prevention research has enhanced our understanding of individual and community risk and protective factors for aggression and violence. However, our knowledge of risk and protective factors for violence is highly dependent on observational studies, since there are few randomized trials of risk and protective factors for violence. Observational studies are susceptible to systematic errors, specifically confounding, and may lack internal validity.Recent findingsMany violence prevention studies utilize methods that do not correctly identify the set of covariates needed for statistical adjustment. This results in unwarranted matching and restriction leading to further confounding or selection bias. Covariate adjustment based on purely statistical criteria generates inconsistent results and uncertain conclusions.SummaryConventional methods used to identify confounding in violence prevention research are often inadequate. Causal diagrams have potential to improve the understanding and identification of potential confounding biases in observational violence prevention studies, and methods like sensitivity analysis using quantitative bias analysis can help to address unmeasured confounding. Violence research studies should make more use of these methods.

| S-EPMC7176054 | biostudies-literature

Author Guide for Addressing Animal Methods Bias in Publishing.

Project description:There is growing recognition that animal methods bias, a preference for animal-based methods where they are not necessary or where nonanimal-based methods may already be suitable, can impact the likelihood or timeliness of a manuscript being accepted for publication. Following April 2022 workshop about animal methods bias in scientific publishing, a coalition of scientists and advocates formed a Coalition to Illuminate and Address Animal Methods Bias (COLAAB). The COLAAB has developed this guide to be used by authors who use nonanimal methods to avoid and respond to animal methods bias from manuscript reviewers. It contains information that researchers may use during 1) study design, including how to find and select appropriate nonanimal methods and preregister a research plan, 2) manuscript preparation and submission, including tips for discussing methods and choosing journals and reviewers that may be more receptive to nonanimal methods, and 3) the peer review process, providing suggested language and literature to aid authors in responding to biased reviews. The author's guide for addressing animal methods bias in publishing is a living resource also available online at animalmethodsbias.org, which aims to help ensure fair dissemination of research that uses nonanimal methods and prevent unnecessary experiments on animals.

| S-EPMC10602554 | biostudies-literature

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

OmicsDI is an Elixir interoperability service. Learn more ›

Tweets

OmicsDI Databases

PRIDE
PeptideAtlas
MassIVE
JPOST Repository
Physiome Model Repository

EGA
EVA
ENA
LINCS
PAXDB
Cell Collective

MetaboLights
Metabolomics Workbench
MetabolomeExpress
GNPS
BioModels
FAIRDOMHub

ArrayExpress
dbGaP
ExpressionAtlas
GEO
NODE

Information

Databases
Help
API
Contact us
Code on GitHub
Terms of use
Submit Data