SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Global quantitative analysis of the human brain proteome in Alzheimer's and Parkinson's Disease.

Sci Data · 2018-03-13

DOI: 10.1038/sdata.2018.36PMID: 29533394

Open accessResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov't; Dataset; data-paper; Journal Article; Research Support, N.I.H., ExtramuralOriginal source ↗

Research overview

The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by

Patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD) and Parkinson's disease (PD) often have overlap in clinical presentation and brain neuropathology suggesting that these two diseases share common underlying mechanisms. Currently, the molecular pathways linking AD and PD are incompletely understood. Utilizing Tandem Mass Tag (TMT) isobaric labeling and synchronous precursor selection-based MS3 (SPS-MS3) mass spectrometry, we performed an unbiased quantitative proteomic analysis of post-mortem human brain tissues (n=80) from four different groups defined as controls, AD, PD, and co-morbid AD/PD cases across two brain regions (frontal cortex and anterior cingulate gyrus). In total, we identified 11 840 protein groups representing 10 230 gene symbols, which map to ~65% of the protein coding genes in brain. The utility of including two reference standards in each TMT 10-plex assay to assess intra- and inter-batch variance is also described. Ultimately, this comprehensive human brain proteomic dataset serves as a valuable resource for various research endeavors including, but not limited to, the identification of disease-specific protein signatures and molecular pathways that are common in AD and PD.

Scientific assessment

01

Research question

Assess the question within the original study’s scope.

02

Methods & sample

Check the source article for study design and sample details.

03

Key findings

An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.

04

Limitations

Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.

Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.