Liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry (LC–MS/MS)
based methods provide powerful tools for the quantitative analysis
of modified proteins. We have developed a label-free approach using
internal reference peptides (IRP) from the target protein for signal
normalization without the need for isotope labeling. Ion-trap mass
spectrometry and pseudo-selected reaction monitoring (pSRM) were used
to acquire full MS/MS and MS3 spectra from target peptides.
Skyline, a widely used software for SRM experiments, was used for
chromatographic ion extraction. Phosphopeptides spiked into a BSA
background yielded concentration response curves with high correlation
coefficients (typically >0.9) and low coefficients of variation
(≤15%)
over a 200-fold concentration range. Stable isotope dilution (SID)
and IRP methods were compared for quantitation of six site-specific
phosphorylations in the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) in
epidermal growth factor-stimulated A431 cells with or without the
addition of EGFR inhibitors cetuximab and gefitinib. Equivalent responses
were observed with both IRP and SID methods, although analyses using
the IRP method typically had higher median CVs (22–31%) than
SID (10–20%). Analyses using both methods were consistent with
immunoblot using site-selective antibodies. The ease of implementation
and the suitability for targeted quantitative comparisons make this
method suitable for broad application in protein biochemistry.
Analysis of cellular signaling networks typically involves targeted measurements of phosphorylated protein intermediates. However, phosphoproteomic analyses usually require affinity enrichment of phosphopeptides and can be complicated by artifactual changes in phosphorylation caused by uncontrolled preanalytical variables, particularly in the analysis of tissue specimens. We asked whether changes in protein expression, which are more stable and easily analyzed, could reflect network stimulation and inhibition. We employed this approach to analyze stimulation and inhibition of the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) by EGF and selective EGFR inhibitors. Shotgun analysis of proteomes from proliferating A431 cells, EGF-stimulated cells, and cells co-treated with the EGFR inhibitors cetuximab or gefitinib identified groups of differentially expressed proteins. Comparisons of these protein groups identified 13 proteins whose EGF-induced expression changes were reversed by both EGFR inhibitors. Targeted multiple reaction monitoring analysis verified differential expression of 12 of these proteins, which comprise a candidate EGFR inhibition signature. We then tested these 12 proteins by multiple reaction monitoring analysis in three other models: 1) a comparison of DiFi (EGFR inhibitor-sensitive) and HCT116 (EGFR-insensitive) cell lines, 2) in formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded mouse xenograft DiFi and HCT116 tumors, and 3) in tissue biopsies from a patient with the gastric hyperproliferative disorder Ménétrier's disease who was treated with cetuximab. Of the proteins in the candidate signature, a core group, including c-Jun, Jagged-1, and Claudin 4, were decreased by EGFR inhibitors in all three models. Although the goal of these studies was not to validate a clinically useful EGFR inhibition signature, the results confirm the hypothesis that clinically used EGFR inhibitors generate characteristic protein expression changes. This work further outlines a prototypical approach to derive and test protein expression signatures for drug action on signaling networks.
The assay range is 0.140-450 fmol (coefficient of variation: 25%) for XRCC4 in bovine serum albumen. The quantitative protein expression levels for XRCC and DNA-PK in HeLa, Ramos and HEK-293 cells and tumor tissues (lung and lymphoma) are reported.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.