Detecting differential protein abundance by combining peptide level P-values

Challenges and opportunities for single cell computational proteomics

Single-cell proteomics is growing rapidly and has made several technological advancements. As most research has been focused on improving instrumentation and sample preparation methods, very little attention has been given to algorithms responsible for identifying and quantifying proteins. Given the inherent difference between bulk data and single-cell data, it's necessary to realize that current algorithms being employed on single-cell data were designed for bulk data, and have underlying assumptions that may not hold true for single-cell data. In order to develop and optimize algorithms for single-cell data, we need to characterize the differences between single-cell data and bulk data, and assess how current algorithms perform on single-cell data. Here, we present a review of algorithms responsible for identifying and quantifying peptides and proteins. We will give a review of how each type of algorithm works, assumptions it relies on, how it performs on single-cell data, and possible optimizations and solutions that could be used to address the differences in single-cell data.

Urinary Proteomic Profile of Arterial Stiffness Is Associated With Mortality and Cardiovascular Outcomes

Background

The underlying mechanisms of arterial stiffness remain not fully understood. This study aimed to identify a urinary proteomic profile to illuminate its pathogenesis and to determine the prognostic value of the profile for adverse outcomes.

Methods and Results

We measured aortic stiffness using pulse wave velocity (PWV) and analyzed urinary proteome using capillary electrophoresis coupled with mass spectrometry in 669 randomly recruited Flemish patients (mean age, 50.2 years; 51.1% women). We developed a PWV‐derived urinary proteomic score (PWV‐UP) by modeling PWV with proteomics data at baseline through orthogonal projections to latent structures. PWV‐UP that consisted of 2336 peptides explained the 65% variance of PWV, higher than 36% explained by clinical risk factors. PWV‐UP was significantly associated with PWV (adjusted β=0.73 [95% CI, 0.67–0.79]; P<0.0001). Over 9.2 years (median), 36 participants died, and 75 experienced cardiovascular events. The adjusted hazard ratios (+1 SD) were 1.46 (95% CI, 1.08–1.97) for all‐cause mortality, 2.04 (95% CI, 1.07–3.87) for cardiovascular mortality, and 1.39 (95% CI, 1.11–1.74) for cardiovascular events (P≤0.031). For PWV, the corresponding estimates were 1.25 (95% CI, 0.97–1.60), 1.35 (95% CI, 0.85–2.15), and 1.22 (95% CI, 1.02–1.47), respectively (P≥0.033). Pathway analysis revealed that the peptides in PWV‐UP mostly involved multiple pathways, including collagen turnover, cell adhesion, inflammation, and lipid metabolism.

Conclusions

PWV‐UP was highly associated with PWV and could be used as a biomarker of arterial stiffness. PWV‐UP, but not PWV, was associated with all‐cause mortality and cardiovascular mortality, implying that PWV‐UP–associated peptides may be multifaceted and involved in diverse pathological processes beyond arterial stiffness.

Benchmarking differential expression, imputation and quantification methods for proteomics data

Data analysis is a critical part of quantitative proteomics studies in interpreting biological questions. Numerous computational tools for protein quantification, imputation and differential expression (DE) analysis were generated in the past decade and the search for optimal tools is still going on. Moreover, due to the rapid development of RNA sequencing (RNA-seq) technology, a vast number of DE analysis methods were created for that purpose. The applicability of these newly developed RNA-seq-oriented tools to proteomics data remains in doubt. In order to benchmark these analysis methods, a proteomics dataset consisting of proteins derived from humans, yeast and drosophila, in defined ratios, was generated in this study. Based on this dataset, DE analysis tools, including microarray- and RNA-seq-based ones, imputation algorithms and protein quantification methods were compared and benchmarked. Furthermore, applying these approaches to two public datasets showed that RNA-seq-based DE tools achieved higher accuracy (ACC) in identifying DEPs. This study provides useful guidelines for analyzing quantitative proteomics datasets. All the methods used in this study were integrated into the Perseus software, version 2.0.3.0, which is available at https://www.maxquant.org/perseus.