Comparison of SPEED, S-Trap, and In-Solution-Based Sample Preparation Methods for Mass Spectrometry in Kidney Tissue and Plasma

Evelyn M Templeton,Anna P Pilbrow,Torsten Kleffmann,John W Pickering,Miriam T Rademaker,Nicola J A Scott,Leigh J Ellmers,Christopher J Charles,Zoltan H Endre,A Mark Richards,Vicky A Cameron,Moritz Lassé
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms24076290
2023-03-27
Abstract:Mass spectrometry is a powerful technique for investigating renal pathologies and identifying biomarkers, and efficient protein extraction from kidney tissue is essential for bottom-up proteomic analyses. Detergent-based strategies aid cell lysis and protein solubilization but are poorly compatible with downstream protein digestion and liquid chromatography-coupled mass spectrometry, requiring additional purification and buffer-exchange steps. This study compares two well-established detergent-based methods for protein extraction (in-solution sodium deoxycholate (SDC); suspension trapping (S-Trap)) with the recently developed sample preparation by easy extraction and digestion (SPEED) method, which uses strong acid for denaturation. We compared the quantitative performance of each method using label-free mass spectrometry in both sheep kidney cortical tissue and plasma. In kidney tissue, SPEED quantified the most unique proteins (SPEED 1250; S-Trap 1202; SDC 1197). In plasma, S-Trap produced the most unique protein quantifications (S-Trap 150; SDC 148; SPEED 137). Protein quantifications were reproducible across biological replicates in both tissue (R2 = 0.85-0.90) and plasma (SPEED R2 = 0.84; SDC R2 = 0.76, S-Trap R2 = 0.65). Our data suggest SPEED as the optimal method for proteomic preparation in kidney tissue and S-Trap or SPEED as the optimal method for plasma, depending on whether a higher number of protein quantifications or greater reproducibility is desired.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?