2022
DOI: 10.1038/s41467-022-30094-0
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Benchmarking of analysis strategies for data-independent acquisition proteomics using a large-scale dataset comprising inter-patient heterogeneity

Abstract: Numerous software tools exist for data-independent acquisition (DIA) analysis of clinical samples, necessitating their comprehensive benchmarking. We present a benchmark dataset comprising real-world inter-patient heterogeneity, which we use for in-depth benchmarking of DIA data analysis workflows for clinical settings. Combining spectral libraries, DIA software, sparsity reduction, normalization, and statistical tests results in 1428 distinct data analysis workflows, which we evaluate based on their ability t… Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

1
83
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
2

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 65 publications
(84 citation statements)
references
References 65 publications
1
83
0
Order By: Relevance
“…To benchmark the MSFragger-DIA algorithm and evaluate the actual false discovery rates of the entire workflow, we used the dataset from Frohlich et al [56], consisting of four experiments: “Lymphnode”, “1-25”, “1-12”, and “1-06”. The samples used in the first experiment contained peptides from H. sapiens only.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…To benchmark the MSFragger-DIA algorithm and evaluate the actual false discovery rates of the entire workflow, we used the dataset from Frohlich et al [56], consisting of four experiments: “Lymphnode”, “1-25”, “1-12”, and “1-06”. The samples used in the first experiment contained peptides from H. sapiens only.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The dataset published by Frohlich et al [56] was used to estimate the actual FDR. The Spectronaut (version 15) directDIA results were used as provided by the authors.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We focused our benchmark on comparing the statistical modeling methods using three different scores, while we fixed the pre-processing steps. However, there are other equally or even more important parameters of a protein quantification pipeline (Fröhlich et al 2022). One of them is the normalization of the intensities within the samples to remove systematic differences (Pursiheimo et al 2015).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To corroborate the applicability of the TMTpro labelling approach for quantitative proteomics with our instrumental setting, we performed a TMTpro-16plex benchmark analysis. Interspecies titration series are a commonly used approach to corroborate the applicability of quantitative proteomics strategies [ 42 45 ]. Therefore, we made use of this multi-species approach and analysed a benchmark dataset consisting of 16 TMT-labelled samples representing HEK- E.coli peptide mixtures of four defined ratios (Sup.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, it should be noted that the described benchmark dataset only tested protein quantification for fold changes bigger than 2.7 while fold changes in biological TMT-datasets could be considerably smaller. The focus on elevated quantitative alterations in the benchmark dataset is in line with common practice in the field of proteomics [ 42 45 , 49 ].…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%