4.8 Article

High-Throughput Phospholipidic Fingerprinting by Online Desorption of Dried Spots and Quadrupole-Linear Ion Trap Mass Spectrometry: Evaluation of Atherosclerosis Biomarkers in Mouse Plasma

期刊

ANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY
卷 82, 期 15, 页码 6687-6694

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/ac101421b

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This work presents a strategy for the evaluation of differences in plasma phospholipid content between atherosclerotic and healthy mice from micro volumes (2 mu L) spotted on filter paper. Dried plasma spots (DPS) were directly desorbed into a triple quadrupole linear ion trap mass spectrometer using a homemade prototype, ensuring high-throughput analysis of dried spots without any sample pretreatment Multiple positive and negative neutral loss and precursor ion scans were simultaneously acquired in a single loop, allowing oriented fingerprinting until 2700 potential species including phosphatidic acid (PA), phosphatidylcholine (PC), phosphatidylethanolamine (PE), phosphatidylglycerol (PG), phosphatidylinositol (PI), phosphatidylserine (PS), and sphingomyelin (SM) classes. The phospholipidic variations between 15 healthy and 15 atherosclerotic mice were evaluated using t tests, matrix reduction and merging, and principal component analysis (PCA) as a chemometric statistical approach. The discriminating ions in PCA analysis were qualitatively identified in an information dependent acquisition (IDA) manner using enhanced resolution and enhanced product ion scans. PCA demonstrates a clear clustering between healthy and diseased mice. Regarding the most relevant variables identified, this procedure has confirmed the role of SM and PS classes in atherosclerosis and has established potential biomarkers shown to be significantly up- or down-regulated with the disease. The results presented in this work demonstrate the sample processing and analysis potential of the developed strategy to evaluate new biomarkers and the state of a disease.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据