% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded. This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.
@ARTICLE{Kardell:266784,
author = {Kardell, Oliver and von Toerne, Christine and Merl-Pham,
Juliane and König, Ann-Christine and Blindert, Marcel and
Barth, Teresa K and Mergner, Julia and Ludwig, Christina and
Tüshaus, Johanna and Eckert, Stephan and Müller, Stephan A
and Breimann, Stephan and Giesbertz, Pieter and Bernhardt,
Alexander Maximilian and Schweizer, Lisa and Albrecht,
Vincent and Teupser, Daniel and Imhof, Axel and Kuster,
Bernhard and Lichtenthaler, Stefan F and Mann, Matthias and
Cox, Jürgen and Hauck, Stefanie M},
title = {{M}ulticenter {C}ollaborative {S}tudy to {O}ptimize {M}ass
{S}pectrometry {W}orkflows of {C}linical {S}pecimens.},
journal = {Journal of proteome research},
volume = {23},
number = {1},
issn = {1535-3893},
address = {Washington, DC},
publisher = {ACS Publications},
reportid = {DZNE-2024-00042},
pages = {117 - 129},
year = {2024},
abstract = {The foundation for integrating mass spectrometry (MS)-based
proteomics into systems medicine is the development of
standardized start-to-finish and fit-for-purpose workflows
for clinical specimens. An essential step in this pursuit is
to highlight the common ground in a diverse landscape of
different sample preparation techniques and liquid
chromatography-mass spectrometry (LC-MS) setups. With the
aim to benchmark and improve the current best practices
among the proteomics MS laboratories of the CLINSPECT-M
consortium, we performed two consecutive round-robin studies
with full freedom to operate in terms of sample preparation
and MS measurements. The six study partners were provided
with two clinically relevant sample matrices: plasma and
cerebrospinal fluid (CSF). In the first round, each
laboratory applied their current best practice protocol for
the respective matrix. Based on the achieved results and
following a transparent exchange of all lab-specific
protocols within the consortium, each laboratory could
advance their methods before measuring the same samples in
the second acquisition round. Both time points are compared
with respect to identifications (IDs), data completeness,
and precision, as well as reproducibility. As a result, the
individual performances of participating study centers were
improved in the second measurement, emphasizing the effect
and importance of the expert-driven exchange of best
practices for direct practical improvements.},
keywords = {Tandem Mass Spectrometry: methods / Chromatography, Liquid:
methods / Workflow / Reproducibility of Results / Plasma:
chemistry / LC–MS (Other) / LC–MS (Other) / LC–MS
(Other) / CSF (Other) / LC–MS (Other) / R package mpwR
(Other) / clinical specimen (Other) / data-dependent
acquisition (Other) / data-independent acquisition (Other) /
interlaboratory (Other) / intralaboratory (Other) / mass
spectrometry (Other) / plasma (Other) / round-robin study
(Other)},
cin = {AG Lichtenthaler / AG Haass / Clinical Research (Munich)},
ddc = {540},
cid = {I:(DE-2719)1110006 / I:(DE-2719)1110007 /
I:(DE-2719)1111015},
pnm = {352 - Disease Mechanisms (POF4-352) / 353 - Clinical and
Health Care Research (POF4-353)},
pid = {G:(DE-HGF)POF4-352 / G:(DE-HGF)POF4-353},
typ = {PUB:(DE-HGF)16},
pmc = {pmc:PMC10775142},
pubmed = {pmid:38015820},
doi = {10.1021/acs.jproteome.3c00473},
url = {https://pub.dzne.de/record/266784},
}