These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

153 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 26412744)

  • 21. Assessment and Refinement of Sample Preparation Methods for Deep and Quantitative Plant Proteome Profiling.
    Song G; Hsu PY; Walley JW
    Proteomics; 2018 Sep; 18(17):e1800220. PubMed ID: 30035338
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Quantitative assessment of in-solution digestion efficiency identifies optimal protocols for unbiased protein analysis.
    León IR; Schwämmle V; Jensen ON; Sprenger RR
    Mol Cell Proteomics; 2013 Oct; 12(10):2992-3005. PubMed ID: 23792921
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Evaluation of sample preparation methods for label-free quantitative profiling of salivary proteome.
    Zhang X; Sadowski P; Punyadeera C
    J Proteomics; 2020 Jan; 210():103532. PubMed ID: 31629056
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. [Rapid and efficient extraction of soluble proteins from gram-negative microorganisms without disruption of cell walls].
    Danilevich VN; Petrovskaia LE; Grishin EV
    Bioorg Khim; 2006; 32(6):579-88. PubMed ID: 17180908
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Ecological Monitoring and Omics: A Comprehensive Comparison of Workflows for Mass Spectrometry-Based Quantitative Proteomics of Fish (
    Nissa MU; Pinto N; Varshnay A; Goswami M; Srivastava S
    OMICS; 2022 Sep; 26(9):489-503. PubMed ID: 36036978
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Minimizing technical variation during sample preparation prior to label-free quantitative mass spectrometry.
    Scheerlinck E; Dhaenens M; Van Soom A; Peelman L; De Sutter P; Van Steendam K; Deforce D
    Anal Biochem; 2015 Dec; 490():14-9. PubMed ID: 26302362
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Proteomic Sample Preparation through Extraction by Unspecific Adsorption on Silica Beads for ArgC-like Digestion.
    Lewin Y; Neupärtl M; Golghalyani V; Karas M
    J Proteome Res; 2019 Mar; 18(3):1289-1298. PubMed ID: 30698437
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Extracting histones for the specific purpose of label-free MS.
    Govaert E; Van Steendam K; Scheerlinck E; Vossaert L; Meert P; Stella M; Willems S; De Clerck L; Dhaenens M; Deforce D
    Proteomics; 2016 Dec; 16(23):2937-2944. PubMed ID: 27718312
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Comprehensive comparison of sample preparation workflows for proteomics.
    Zheng W; Yang P; Sun C; Zhang Y
    Mol Omics; 2022 Jul; 18(6):555-567. PubMed ID: 35671090
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. In Search of a Universal Method: A Comparative Survey of Bottom-Up Proteomics Sample Preparation Methods.
    Varnavides G; Madern M; Anrather D; Hartl N; Reiter W; Hartl M
    J Proteome Res; 2022 Oct; 21(10):2397-2411. PubMed ID: 36006919
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. GASP and FASP are Complementary for LC-MS/MS Proteomic Analysis of Drug-Metabolizing Enzymes and Transporters in Pig Liver.
    Howard M; Achour B; Al-Majdoub Z; Rostami-Hodjegan A; Barber J
    Proteomics; 2018 Dec; 18(24):e1800200. PubMed ID: 30371990
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Comparison between chaotropic and detergent-based sample preparation workflow in tendon for mass spectrometry analysis.
    Ashraf Kharaz Y; Zamboulis D; Sanders K; Comerford E; Clegg P; Peffers M
    Proteomics; 2017 Jul; 17(13-14):. PubMed ID: 28547889
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Comparative Evaluation of Small Molecular Additives and Their Effects on Peptide/Protein Identification.
    Gao J; Zhong S; Zhou Y; He H; Peng S; Zhu Z; Liu X; Zheng J; Xu B; Zhou H
    Anal Chem; 2017 Jun; 89(11):5784-5792. PubMed ID: 28530406
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Evaluation of the combinative application of SDS and sodium deoxycholate to the LC-MS-based shotgun analysis of membrane proteomes.
    Lin Y; Wang K; Yan Y; Lin H; Peng B; Liu Z
    J Sep Sci; 2013 Sep; 36(18):3026-34. PubMed ID: 23832743
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. From cells to peptides: "one-stop" integrated proteomic processing using amphipols.
    Ning Z; Seebun D; Hawley B; Chiang CK; Figeys D
    J Proteome Res; 2013 Mar; 12(3):1512-9. PubMed ID: 23394071
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Critical assessment of proteome-wide label-free absolute abundance estimation strategies.
    Ahrné E; Molzahn L; Glatter T; Schmidt A
    Proteomics; 2013 Sep; 13(17):2567-78. PubMed ID: 23794183
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Sample preparation with solid phase microextraction and exhaustive extraction approaches: Comparison for challenging cases.
    Boyacı E; Rodríguez-Lafuente Á; Gorynski K; Mirnaghi F; Souza-Silva ÉA; Hein D; Pawliszyn J
    Anal Chim Acta; 2015 May; 873():14-30. PubMed ID: 25911426
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Reprint of "Which metaproteome? The impact of protein extraction bias on metaproteomic analyses".
    Leary DH; Hervey WJ; Deschamps JR; Kusterbeck AW; Vora GJ
    Mol Cell Probes; 2014; 28(2-3):51-7. PubMed ID: 24486298
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Proteome Profiles of Outer Membrane Vesicles and Extracellular Matrix of Pseudomonas aeruginosa Biofilms.
    Couto N; Schooling SR; Dutcher JR; Barber J
    J Proteome Res; 2015 Oct; 14(10):4207-22. PubMed ID: 26303878
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Coupling a detergent lysis/cleanup methodology with intact protein fractionation for enhanced proteome characterization.
    Sharma R; Dill BD; Chourey K; Shah M; VerBerkmoes NC; Hettich RL
    J Proteome Res; 2012 Dec; 11(12):6008-18. PubMed ID: 23126408
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.