Search

This manuscript collects all the efforts of the Russian Consortium, bottlenecks revealed in the course of the C-HPP realization, and ways of their overcoming. One of the main bottlenecks in the C-HPP is the insufficient sensitivity of proteomic technologies, hampering the detection of low- and ultralow-copy number proteins forming the “dark part” of the human proteome. In the frame of MP-Challenge, to increase proteome coverage we suggest an experimental workflow based on a combination of shotgun technology and selected reaction monitoring with two-dimensional alkaline fractionation. Further, to detect proteins that cannot be identified by such technologies, nanotechnologies such as combined atomic force microscopy with molecular fishing and/or nanowire detection may be useful. These technologies provide a powerful tool for single molecule analysis, by analogy with nanopore sequencing during genome analysis. To systematically analyze the functional features of some proteins (CP50 Challenge), we created a mathematical model that predicts the number of proteins differing in amino acid sequence: proteoforms. According to our data, we should expect about 100 000 different proteoforms in the liver tissue and a little more in the HepG2 cell line. The variety of proteins forming the whole human proteome significantly exceeds these results due to post-translational modifications (PTMs). As PTMs determine the functional specificity of the protein, we propose using a combination of gene-centric transcriptome-proteomic analysis with preliminary fractionation by two-dimensional electrophoresis to identify chemically modified proteoforms. Despite the complexity of the proposed solutions, such integrative approaches could be fruitful for MP50 and CP50 Challenges in the framework of the C-HPP.

Background: Liquid chromatography coupled with targeted mass spectrometry underwent rapid technical evolution during last years and has become widely used technology in clinical laboratories. It offers confident specificity and sensitivity superior to those of traditional immunoassays. However, due to controversial reports on reproducibility of SRM measurements, the prospects of clinical appliance of the method are worth discussing. Objective: The study was aimed at assessment of capabilities of SRM to achieve a thorough assembly of the human plasma proteome. Method: We examined set of 19 human blood plasma samples to measure 100 proteins, including FDA-approved biomarkers, via SRM-assay. Results: Out of 100 target proteins 43 proteins were confidently detected in at least two blood plasma sample runs, 36 and 21 proteins were either not detected in any run or inconsistently detected, respectively. Empiric dependences on protein detectability were derived to predict the number of biological samples required to detect with certainty a diagnostically relevant quantum of the human plasma proteome. Conclusion: The number of samples exponentially increases with an increase in the number of protein targets, while proportionally decreasing to the logarithm of the limit of detection. Analytical sensitivity and enormous proteome heterogeneity are major bottlenecks of the human proteome exploration.

This work continues the series of the quantitative measurements of the proteins encoded by different chromosomes in the blood plasma of a healthy person. Selected Reaction Monitoring with Stable Isotope-labeled peptide Standards (SRM SIS) and a gene-centric approach, which is the basis for the implementation of the international Chromosome-centric Human Proteome Project (C-HPP), were applied for the quantitative measurement of proteins in human blood plasma. Analyses were carried out in the frame of C-HPP for each protein-coding gene of the four human chromosomes: 18, 13, Y, and mitochondrial. Concentrations of proteins encoded by 667 genes were measured in 54 blood plasma samples of the volunteers, whose health conditions were consistent with requirements for astronauts. The gene list included 276, 329, 47, and 15 genes of chromosomes 18, 13, Y, and the mitochondrial chromosome, respectively. This paper does not make claims about the detection of missing proteins. Only 205 proteins (30.7%) were detected in the samples. Of them, 84, 106, 10, and 5 belonged to chromosomes 18, 13, and Y and the mitochondrial chromosome, respectively. Each detected protein was found in at least one of the samples analyzed. The SRM SIS raw data are available in the ProteomeXchange repository (PXD004374, PASS01192).

A gene-centric approach was applied for a large-scale study of expression products of a single chromosome. Transcriptome profiling of liver tissue and HepG2 cell line was independently performed using two RNA-Seq platforms (SOLiD and Illumina) and also by Droplet Digital PCR (ddPCR) and quantitative RT-PCR. Proteome profiling was performed using shotgun LC–MS/MS as well as selected reaction monitoring with stable isotope-labeled standards (SRM/SIS) for liver tissue and HepG2 cells. On the basis of SRM/SIS measurements, protein copy numbers were estimated for the Chromosome 18 (Chr 18) encoded proteins in the selected types of biological material. These values were compared with expression levels of corresponding mRNA. As a result, we obtained information about 158 and 142 transcripts for HepG2 cell line and liver tissue, respectively. SRM/SIS measurements and shotgun LC–MS/MS allowed us to detect 91 Chr 18-encoded proteins in total, while an intersection between the HepG2 cell line and liver tissue proteomes was ∼66%. In total, there were 16 proteins specifically observed in HepG2 cell line, while 15 proteins were found solely in the liver tissue. Comparison between proteome and transcriptome revealed a poor correlation (R2≈ 0.1) between corresponding mRNA and protein expression levels. The SRM and shotgun data sets (obtained during 2015–2016) are available in PASSEL (PASS00697) and ProteomeExchange/PRIDE (PXD004407). All measurements were also uploaded into the in-house Chr 18 Knowledgebase at http://kb18.ru/protein/matrix/416126.