• Je něco špatně v tomto záznamu ?

Lipidomic analysis of biological samples: Comparison of liquid chromatography, supercritical fluid chromatography and direct infusion mass spectrometry methods

M. Lísa, E. Cífková, M. Khalikova, M. Ovčačíková, M. Holčapek,

. 2017 ; 1525 (-) : 96-108. [pub] 20171008

Jazyk angličtina Země Nizozemsko

Typ dokumentu srovnávací studie, časopisecké články

Perzistentní odkaz   https://www.medvik.cz/link/bmc18016277

Lipidomic analysis of biological samples in a clinical research represents challenging task for analytical methods given by the large number of samples and their extreme complexity. In this work, we compare direct infusion (DI) and chromatography - mass spectrometry (MS) lipidomic approaches represented by three analytical methods in terms of comprehensiveness, sample throughput, and validation results for the lipidomic analysis of biological samples represented by tumor tissue, surrounding normal tissue, plasma, and erythrocytes of kidney cancer patients. Methods are compared in one laboratory using the identical analytical protocol to ensure comparable conditions. Ultrahigh-performance liquid chromatography/MS (UHPLC/MS) method in hydrophilic interaction liquid chromatography mode and DI-MS method are used for this comparison as the most widely used methods for the lipidomic analysis together with ultrahigh-performance supercritical fluid chromatography/MS (UHPSFC/MS) method showing promising results in metabolomics analyses. The nontargeted analysis of pooled samples is performed using all tested methods and 610 lipid species within 23 lipid classes are identified. DI method provides the most comprehensive results due to identification of some polar lipid classes, which are not identified by UHPLC and UHPSFC methods. On the other hand, UHPSFC method provides an excellent sensitivity for less polar lipid classes and the highest sample throughput within 10min method time. The sample consumption of DI method is 125 times higher than for other methods, while only 40μL of organic solvent is used for one sample analysis compared to 3.5mL and 4.9mL in case of UHPLC and UHPSFC methods, respectively. Methods are validated for the quantitative lipidomic analysis of plasma samples with one internal standard for each lipid class. Results show applicability of all tested methods for the lipidomic analysis of biological samples depending on the analysis requirements.

Citace poskytuje Crossref.org

000      
00000naa a2200000 a 4500
001      
bmc18016277
003      
CZ-PrNML
005      
20180515103943.0
007      
ta
008      
180515s2017 ne f 000 0|eng||
009      
AR
024    7_
$a 10.1016/j.chroma.2017.10.022 $2 doi
035    __
$a (PubMed)29037587
040    __
$a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
041    0_
$a eng
044    __
$a ne
100    1_
$a Lísa, Miroslav $u Department of Analytical Chemistry, Faculty of Chemical Technology, University of Pardubice, Studentská 573, 53210 Pardubice, Czech Republic. Electronic address: miroslav.lisa@gmail.com.
245    10
$a Lipidomic analysis of biological samples: Comparison of liquid chromatography, supercritical fluid chromatography and direct infusion mass spectrometry methods / $c M. Lísa, E. Cífková, M. Khalikova, M. Ovčačíková, M. Holčapek,
520    9_
$a Lipidomic analysis of biological samples in a clinical research represents challenging task for analytical methods given by the large number of samples and their extreme complexity. In this work, we compare direct infusion (DI) and chromatography - mass spectrometry (MS) lipidomic approaches represented by three analytical methods in terms of comprehensiveness, sample throughput, and validation results for the lipidomic analysis of biological samples represented by tumor tissue, surrounding normal tissue, plasma, and erythrocytes of kidney cancer patients. Methods are compared in one laboratory using the identical analytical protocol to ensure comparable conditions. Ultrahigh-performance liquid chromatography/MS (UHPLC/MS) method in hydrophilic interaction liquid chromatography mode and DI-MS method are used for this comparison as the most widely used methods for the lipidomic analysis together with ultrahigh-performance supercritical fluid chromatography/MS (UHPSFC/MS) method showing promising results in metabolomics analyses. The nontargeted analysis of pooled samples is performed using all tested methods and 610 lipid species within 23 lipid classes are identified. DI method provides the most comprehensive results due to identification of some polar lipid classes, which are not identified by UHPLC and UHPSFC methods. On the other hand, UHPSFC method provides an excellent sensitivity for less polar lipid classes and the highest sample throughput within 10min method time. The sample consumption of DI method is 125 times higher than for other methods, while only 40μL of organic solvent is used for one sample analysis compared to 3.5mL and 4.9mL in case of UHPLC and UHPSFC methods, respectively. Methods are validated for the quantitative lipidomic analysis of plasma samples with one internal standard for each lipid class. Results show applicability of all tested methods for the lipidomic analysis of biological samples depending on the analysis requirements.
650    12
$a chromatografie kapalinová $7 D002853
650    12
$a superkritická fluidní chromatografie $7 D025924
650    _2
$a výpočetní biologie $x metody $7 D019295
650    _2
$a lipidy $x analýza $7 D008055
650    12
$a hmotnostní spektrometrie $7 D013058
650    _2
$a reprodukovatelnost výsledků $7 D015203
655    _2
$a srovnávací studie $7 D003160
655    _2
$a časopisecké články $7 D016428
700    1_
$a Cífková, Eva $u Department of Analytical Chemistry, Faculty of Chemical Technology, University of Pardubice, Studentská 573, 53210 Pardubice, Czech Republic.
700    1_
$a Khalikova, Maria $u Department of Analytical Chemistry, Faculty of Chemical Technology, University of Pardubice, Studentská 573, 53210 Pardubice, Czech Republic.
700    1_
$a Ovčačíková, Magdaléna $u Department of Analytical Chemistry, Faculty of Chemical Technology, University of Pardubice, Studentská 573, 53210 Pardubice, Czech Republic.
700    1_
$a Holčapek, Michal $u Department of Analytical Chemistry, Faculty of Chemical Technology, University of Pardubice, Studentská 573, 53210 Pardubice, Czech Republic.
773    0_
$w MED00004962 $t Journal of chromatography. A $x 1873-3778 $g Roč. 1525, č. - (2017), s. 96-108
856    41
$u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29037587 $y Pubmed
910    __
$a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y a $z 0
990    __
$a 20180515 $b ABA008
991    __
$a 20180515104117 $b ABA008
999    __
$a ok $b bmc $g 1299901 $s 1013117
BAS    __
$a 3
BAS    __
$a PreBMC
BMC    __
$a 2017 $b 1525 $c - $d 96-108 $e 20171008 $i 1873-3778 $m Journal of chromatography. A, Including electrophoresis and other separation methods $n J Chromatogr A $x MED00004962
LZP    __
$a Pubmed-20180515

Najít záznam

Citační ukazatele

Nahrávání dat ...

Možnosti archivace

Nahrávání dat ...