4.8 Article

Quantitative Analysis of Blood Plasma Metabolites Using Isotope Enhanced NMR Methods

期刊

ANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY
卷 82, 期 21, 页码 8983-8990

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/ac101938w

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [1 R01GM085291-01, 3R01GM085291-02S1]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

NMR spectroscopy is a powerful analytical tool for both qualitative and quantitative analysis. However, accurate quantitative analysis in complex fluids such as human blood plasma is challenging, and analysis using one-dimensional NMR is limited by signal overlap. It is impractical to use heteronuclear experiments involving natural abundance C-13 on a routine basis due to low sensitivity, despite their improved resolution. Focusing on circumventing such bottlenecks, this study demonstrates the utility of a combination of isotope enhanced NMR experiments to analyze metabolites in human blood plasma. H-1-N-15 HSQC and H-1-C-13 HSQC experiments on the isotope tagged samples combined with the conventional H-1 one-dimensional and H-1-H-1 TOCSY experiments provide quantitative information on a large number of metabolites in plasma. The methods were first tested on a mixture of 28 synthetic analogues of metabolites commonly present in human blood; 27 metabolites in a standard NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology) human blood plasma were then identified and quantified with an average coefficient of variation of 2.4% for 17 metabolites and 5.6% when all the metabolites were considered. Carboxylic acids and amines represent a majority of the metabolites in body fluids, and their analysis by isotope tagging enables a significant enhancement of the metabolic pool for biomarker discovery applications. Improved sensitivity and resolution of NMR experiments imparted by N-15 and C-13 isotope tagging are attractive for both the enhancement of the detectable metabolic pool and accurate analysis of plasma metabolites. The approach can be easily extended to many additional metabolites in almost any biological mixture.

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