|
Advertisement | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Molecular & Cellular Proteomics 4:1240-1250, 2005.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ABSTRACT |
|---|
|
|
|---|
, and phosphoinositide 3-kinase pathways, leading to proliferation, differentiation, migration, and antiapoptotic effects (46). Because EGFR is at the origin of pathways governing diverse cell behavioral responses such as cell survival, proliferation, differentiation, and motility, ascertaining quantitative and dynamic features of the various regulatory pathways will be imperative for determining which features are related to particular responses. Indeed, because dysregulation of EGFR-activated pathways, often a consequence of receptor overexpression or mutation, has been shown to be correlated with many types of cancer, one promising step toward identifying mechanisms underlying tumorigenesis associated with aberrant EGFR signaling would be to generate a quantitative comparison of a broad variety of specific cellular signaling events downstream of this RTK under multiple biological cell states. These data could then be used to implement models of cellular signaling pathways, from which predictions could be made as to the most beneficial intervention strategies. Toward this end, we describe here a quantitative mass spectrometric method for time-resolved analysis of dynamic tyrosine phosphorylation at specific sites on multiple proteins simultaneously, using the EGFR signaling cascade as a model. All phosphorylation-mediated cellular signaling cascades are bound by the same principles. A dynamic relationship between component proteins in the pathway generates site- and time-specific phosphorylation/dephosphorylation events that propagate down the cascade until the desired response is elicited. Most proteins have more than one potential phosphorylation site, and phosphorylation/dephosphorylation of different sites in the same protein may lead to different responses; i.e. activation events may involve a particular protein, but specific phosphorylation sites regulate the cellular activity (7, 8). So far, most of the literature deals with either time dynamics on the activation of a handful of proteins and phosphorylation sites (9, 10) or global identification of protein phosphorylation sites under static conditions (1114).
Our current knowledge about the EGFR-related pathways dynamics and the phosphorylation sites of their proteins represent the summary of decades of work by many groups using traditional biochemistry tools to study the activation of only several proteins at a time. Only recently has mass spectrometry been used to identify many tyrosine phosphorylation sites in receptor tyrosine kinase pathways (1518) and to monitor total phosphotyrosine content in pathway proteins over time (19). However, these studies have not provided information on the dynamic regulation of specific tyrosine phosphorylation sites. We have developed a method to provide this level of information and have applied it to the EGFR model system, generating time course phosphorylation profiles for 78 tyrosine phosphorylation sites on 58 proteins at four time points of EGF stimulation (0, 5, 10 and 30 min) in a single analysis. Stimulation and replicate analyses of a separate set of cell cultures were used to validate the data set while providing identification of an additional 26 phosphorylation sites and 18 proteins with associated temporal phosphorylation profiles.
| MATERIALS AND METHODS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
3 x 107 cells) after 80% confluence was reached. The synchronized cells were washed with PBS after removal of media. The cells were then stimulated with 25 nM EGF in serum-free media without sodium bicarbonate for 5, 10, or 30 min or left untreated with serum-free media for 5 min as control.
Cell Lysis, Protein Digestion, and Peptide Fractionation
After EGF stimulation, cells were lysed on ice with 3 ml of 8 M urea supplemented with 1 mM Na3VO4. A 10-µl aliquot was taken from each sample to perform bicinchoninic acid protein concentration assay (Pierce) according to the manufacturers protocol. Cell lysates were reduced with 10 mM DTT for 1 h at 56 °C, alkylated with 55 mM iodoacetamide for 45 min at room temperature, and diluted to 12 ml with 100 mM ammonium acetate, pH 8.9. 40 µg of trypsin (Promega) was added to each sample (
100:1 substrate/trypsin ratio), and the lysates were digested overnight at room temperature. The whole-cell digest solutions were acidified to pH 3 with acetic acid (HOAc) and loaded onto C18 Sep-Pak Plus Cartridges (Waters). The peptides were desalted (10 ml of 0.1% HOAc) and eluted with 10 ml of a solution composed of 25% acetonitrile (MeCN) with 0.1% HOAc. Each sample was divided into 10 aliquots and lyophilized overnight to dryness for storage at 80 °C.
iTRAQ Labeling and Peptide IP
Peptide labeling with iTRAQ reagent (Applied Biosystems) was performed according to the manufacturers protocol. In brief, each aliquot (3 x 106 cell equivalent) was reacted with one tube of iTRAQ reagent; i.e. acquisition of this data set from the first biological sample required 8 tubes of iTRAQ reagent (2 x iTRAQ-114 (0 min), 2 x iTRAQ-115 (5 min), 2 x iTRAQ-116 (10 min), and 2 x iTRAQ-117 (30 min)) after the sample was dissolved in 30 µl of 0.5 M triethylammonium bicarbonate (N(Et)3HCO3), pH 8.5, and the iTRAQ reagent was dissolved in 70 µl of ethanol. The mixture was incubated at room temperature for 1 h and concentrated to
20 µl. Samples labeled with four different isotopic iTRAQ reagents were combined and concentrated to 10 µl and then dissolved in 200 µl of IP buffer (100 mM Tris, 100 mM NaCl, and 1% Nonidet P-40, pH 7.4) and 200 µl of water, and pH was adjusted to 7.4. The mixed sample was incubated with 4 µg of immobilized anti-phosphotyrosine antibody (Santa Cruz Biotechnology) overnight at 4 °C. The antibody beads were spun down for 5 min at 7000 rpm, and the supernatant was separated and saved. The antibody-bound beads were washed twice with 200 µl of IP buffer for 10 min and twice with rinse buffer (100 mM Tris, 100 mM NaCl, pH 7.4) for 5 min at room temperature. The phosphotyrosine-containing peptides were eluted from antibody with 50 µl of 100 mM glycine pH 2.5 for 1 h at room temperature.
IMAC and Mass Spectrometry
Phosphopeptide enrichment on IMAC was performed as described previously (14), except that peptides were not converted to methyl esters. After antibody elution, peptides were loaded onto a 10-cm self-packed IMAC (20MC; Applied Biosystems) capillary column (inner diameter, 200 µm; outer diameter, 360 µm) and rinsed with organic rinse solution (25% MeCN, 1% HOAc, 100 mM NaCl) for 10 min at 10 µl/min. The column was equilibrated with 0.1% HOAc for 10 min at 10 µl/min and eluted onto a 10-cm self-packed C18 capillary precolumn (inner diameter, 100 µm; outer diameter, 360 µm) with 50 µl of 250 mM Na2HPO4, pH 8.0. After a 10-min rinse (0.1% HOAc), the precolumn was connected to a 10-cm self-packed C18 (YMC-Waters 5 µm ODS-AQ) analytical capillary column (inner diameter, 50 µm; outer diameter, 360 µm) with an integrated electrospray tip (
1-µm orifice). Peptides were eluted using a 100-min gradient with solvent A (H2O/HOAc, 99:1 (v/v)) and B (H2O/MeCN/HOAc, 29:70:1 (v/v)): 10 min from 0% to 15% B, 75 min from 15% to 40% B, and 15 min from 40% to 70% B. Eluted peptides were directly electrosprayed into a Q-TOF mass spectrometer (QSTAR XL Pro; Applied Biosystems). MS/MS spectra of the five most intense peaks with two to five charges in the MS scan were automatically acquired in information-dependent acquisition with previously selected peaks excluded for 40 s.
Western Blot Analysis
40 µg of protein from each sample was mixed with 4x sample buffer (250 mM Tris-HCl, pH 6.8, 8% SDS, 40% glycerol, 0.04% bromphenol blue, and 400 mM dithiothreitol) and boiled for 5 min. Proteins were separated by SDS-PAGE and transferred onto PVDF membranes. After blocking for 1 h at room temperature membranes were incubated overnight at 4 °C in primary antibody, washed three times for 5 min in TBS-Tween 20 (20 mM Tris-HCl, pH 7.5, 137 mM NaCl, and 0.1% Tween 20), incubated for 1 h at room temperature in secondary antibody (dilution 1:2500 horseradish peroxidase conjugated donkey anti-rabbit in TBS-Tween 20, 5% non-fat milk powder) (Amersham Biosciences), and finally washed three times for 5 min with TBS-Tween 20. Blots were developed with ECL Advance Western blotting detection kit (Amersham Biosciences) and scanned on a Kodak Image Station 1000. Primary antibodies used were anti-EGFR, for loading control; anti-EGFR pY1172; anti-Fak pY576; anti-STAT-3 pY705 (all from Cell Signaling Technologies), and anti-Gsk-3-ß pY216 (Upstate Biotechnology).
Phosphopeptide Sequencing, Data Clustering, and Analysis
MS/MS spectra were extracted and searched against human protein database (NCBI) using ProQuant (Applied Biosystems) and MASCOT (Matrix Science). For ProQuant, an interrogator database was generated by predigesting the human protein database with trypsin and allowing one miscleavage and up to six modifications on a single peptide (phosphotyrosine
2, phosphoserine
1, phosphothreonine
1, iTRAQ-lysine
4, and iTRAQ-tyrosine
4). Mass tolerance was set to 0.15 atomic mass units for precursor ions and 0.1 atomic mass units for fragment ions. For MASCOT, data were searched against the human non-redundant protein database with trypsin specificity, two missed cleavages, precursor mass tolerance set to 1.5 Da, and fragment ion tolerance set to 0.2 Da. Phosphotyrosine-containing peptides were manually validated and quantified. Peak areas for each of the four signature peaks (m/z: 114, 115, 116, 117) were obtained and corrected according to the manufacturers instructions to account for isotopic overlap. Data were further corrected with values generated from the peak areas of non-phosphorylated peptides to account for possible variations in the starting amounts of sample for each time point. Finally, all data were normalized by the 5-min sample. Mean phosphorylation, standard deviation, and p values to estimate statistical significance for differential phosphorylation between the different time points were calculated using Microsoft Excel. The p values were calculated using a paired, two-tailed Students test. A self-organizing map was generated with the Spotfire program to cluster phosphorylation sites with self-similar profiles. All the analyses using Spotfire were done with original built-in functions of the program.
| RESULTS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
6 x 106 cell equivalents) of each of the resulting four sets of peptides were labeled with iTRAQ reagent, mixed together, and immunoprecipitated with anti-phosphotyrosine antibody. Immunoprecipitated, phosphorylated peptides were further enriched by IMAC before LC-MS/MS analysis (Fig. 1a). The four iTRAQ labels are nominally isobaric and differ only in the positioning of isotopically tagged atoms. As a result, peptides tagged with the different forms of the reagent co-elute during the LC gradient and generate a single peak for each charge state in the MS scan (23). After selection of a peak in MS mode, MS/MS fragmentation of the iTRAQ labeled peptide results in 4 signatures peaks at m/z 114, 115, 116, and 117 respectively (Fig. 1, b and c), whereas fragmentation along the peptide backbone results in b- and y-type fragment ions, which may be used to identify the peptide sequence (Fig. 1b). To facilitate comparison of the temporal phosphorylation profiles, each of the phosphorylation profiles was normalized relative to the 5-min time point because this point typically provided the greatest signal-to-noise ratio; therefore, normalization to this time point minimized noise-associated error. To normalize the results within each sample for protein level and labeling efficiency, the supernatant from the anti-phosphotyrosine peptide immunoprecipitation was analyzed, and iTRAQ marker ions from non-phosphorylated peptides were averaged and used to correct the data (Fig. 1c; data available in Supplemental Table III).
|
|
|
|
|
|
In addition to providing validation for the data set from the first set of stimulated cells, analysis of a second set of stimulated cells also provided an estimation of the biological variance between the two sets of cell cultures. Similar stimulation conditions should produce similar results, and as expected the majority of the temporal phosphorylation profiles are quite similar between the two biological samples. It is worth noting, however, that some of the profiles show variance in both the level of stimulation (basal (0 min) relative to 5 min) and the shape of the temporal profile, perhaps reflecting signaling pathways that are potentiated differently between the two sets of cell cultures. Many possible sources of variation between the cultures exist, including slight changes in the confluence of the cells (different cell-cell contacts would prime signaling pathways differently) and changes in the passage number of the cells (the second set of cells were cultured and stimulated 1 month after the first set of cells). Given the sources of variation, it is not surprising to see slight alteration of the temporal profiles for some of the phosphorylation sites. However, most of the temporal phosphorylation profiles are very similar between the cell cultures, which is indicative of the reproducibility of the method and helps to further validate the results of this study.
Bioinformatic Analysis Reveals Dynamic Modules within the EGFR Signaling Network
To ascribe potential functionality to proteins and phosphorylation sites not previously associated with the EGFR signaling network, we attempted to find similar features in temporal phosphorylation profiles between poorly and well characterized protein phosphorylation sites. Sorting through the data manually tends to introduce bias and proved to be time intensive and non-productive. Therefore, with the goal of clustering self-similar phosphorylation profiles (modules) within the EGFR signaling network, we resorted to bioinformatic analysis and generated a self-organizing map (SOM) with the data set from the first set of cells. SOM is a mathematical technique designed to identify underlying patterns in complex data sets; SOMs have been used to analyze gene expression patterns in hematopoietic differentiation, creating biologically relevant clusters and enabling the generation of interesting hypotheses (28). Using the quantitative tyrosine phosphorylation profiles we tested several different options for SOM matrix size before settling on a 3 x 3 matrix (Fig. 4a). Smaller matrixes generated clusters that were too complex and difficult to interpret, whereas larger matrixes separated clusters of phosphorylation sites with similar patterns. Clustering self-similar phosphorylation profiles revealed interesting modules in the EGFR signaling network and successfully grouped poorly characterized sites with several well described proteins in the network. For instance, one of the SOM clusters (Fig. 4b) has the common profile of a large increase in phosphorylation level from basal to 5 min followed by slow de-phosphorylation from 5 to 10 and 30 min. Included in this cluster is the EGFR pY1172 autophosphorylation site and two tyrosine phosphorylation sites on SHC, a protein whose PTB (phosphotyrosine-binding) domain binds to EGFR pY1172 (29). In fact, almost all of the phosphorylation sites in this cluster are located on proteins known to interact with EGFR or other receptor tyrosine kinases. For instance, phosphoinositide 3-kinase p85
has been shown to interact (both directly and indirectly) with both EGFR and PDGFR (30). Phosphoinositide 3-kinase p85
pY580 has been ascribed to insulin receptor tyrosine kinase activity (31) but is most probably the result of phosphorylation by EGFR under these stimulation conditions. Other proteins in this group include c-Cbl, Rho-GEF 5, ACK1, BDP1, Erk1, and hypothetical protein FLJ30532, one of the six proteins not previously associated with the EGFR network. c-Cbl is tyrosine-phosphorylated after EGF stimulation and has recently been shown to interact with pY1045 of EGFR after EGF stimulation and before endocytosis of the receptor (32). Tyrosine phosphorylation of activated CDC42 kinase 1 (ACK1) in response to EGF stimulation has been established (33). This protein is most probably localized to the receptor through an interaction with CDC42 and Rho-GEF 5; Rho-GEF proteins have been shown to interact directly with tyrosine kinase receptors (34). BDP1 is a phosphatase involved in regulation of Gab1, mitogen-activated protein kinase, and HER2 signaling after EGF stimulation (35); it is likely that phosphorylation of this protein stimulates phosphatase activity in a negative feedback mechanism.
|
In addition to the immediate-early response module, SOM analysis of the data also uncovered an endocytosis and trafficking module in a metacluster of self-similar time-course phosphorylation profiles found in two adjacent compartments of the SOM (Fig. 4c). These phosphorylation sites are all maximally phosphorylated at 10 min after EGF stimulation and have separated into two SOM compartments based on phosphorylation level at 10 min relative to 5 min of stimulation. Proteins within this cluster known to be involved in endocytosis and trafficking included Eps15, STAM1, STAM2, and Annexin A2. EPS15 is necessary for receptor-mediated endocytosis of EGF, and tyrosine phosphorylation of Eps15 after EGF stimulation has been shown (38). Monoubiquitination of Eps15 occurs after EGF-induced internalization of the EGF receptor (39) and may be related to c-Cbl activity, but a phosphorylation site from an alternate E3 ubiquitin-protein ligase, chromosome 20 open reading frame 18 (also known as HOIL-1 (40)) is localized to this cluster and may be responsible for further ubiquitination within the endosomes. Involvement of HOIL-1 in the EGFR pathway has not been characterized, but its biological function fits in well with endocytosis and trafficking. STAM1 and STAM2 phosphorylation sites are also located in these clusters, these proteins bind to ubiquitinated proteins via their Vps27p, Hrs, and STAM domains and ubiquitin-interacting motifs in early endosomes and are involved in endosomal trafficking (41). The N terminus of annexin A2 is tyrosine-phosphorylated after growth factor stimulation and may play a role in receptor trafficking; recently it has been shown that phosphorylation is blocked when receptor internalization is inhibited (42). Based on the clustering of these phosphorylation sites, it is possible that phosphorylation of these sites occurs after EGFR ubiquitination by Cbl and endocytosis via clathrin-coated early endosomes. If so, it may be that Ymer, a protein recently found to be modulated by EGF stimulation (19) and located in these clusters, may be localized to early endosomes. If Ymer follows the role of the other proteins within this cluster, tyrosine phosphorylation of this protein may regulate endosomal trafficking of the receptor. Identification of this regulated site will enable further investigation to determine the functional role of phosphorylation of this protein in EGFR signaling.
| DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
It is worth noting that Blagoev et al. (19) have recently published an alternative method combining stable isotope labeling with amino acids in cell culture and immunoprecipitation of tyrosine-phosphorylated proteins, thereby enabling the quantification of temporal involvement in the EGFR signaling network at the protein level. Although the two methods seem quite similar, there are important advantages and disadvantages of each that should be noted. The method that we describe here provides identification of specific protein phosphorylation sites and quantitative temporal phosphorylation profiles for each of these sites; the method of Blagoev et al. (19) monitors tyrosine phosphorylation (or association with tyrosine-phosphorylated proteins) at the protein level without site specification. Our site-specific monitoring of protein phosphorylation provides more explicit detail regarding the regulation of proteins within the network but precludes analysis of potential other, non-phosphorylated proteins associated (and therefore co-immunoprecipitated) with tyrosine-phosphorylated proteins. In both methods, only those peptides (and therefore proteins) amenable to LC/MS/MS analysis will be identified; this limitation is more significant for peptide-immunoprecipitation in that there are fewer peptides with which to identify each protein. Our current method uses only a single anti-phosphotyrosine antibody such that the results may be constrained by the bias associated with this particular antibody. Future work will investigate the use of multiple different antibodies to increase coverage of the network. Despite differences between the two methods, there is significant consistency at the protein level between the Blagoev et al. (19) data set and our data set, with ours then providing additional site-specific information. Differences in the temporal phosphorylation profiles between the two studies are probably caused by multiple tyrosine phosphorylation sites on a given protein but may also be caused by the different quantification methods (stable isotope labeling with amino acids in cell culture versus iTRAQ).
Another study using anti-phosphotyrosine protein immunoprecipitation, stable isotope (ICAT) labeling, and mass spectrometry to study EGFR signaling was recently published (43). Similar to Blagoev et al. (19), Thelemann et al. (43) monitored tyrosine phosphorylation (or association with tyrosine-phosphorylated proteins) at the protein level without site specification, although many phosphorylation sites were identified without stable-isotope quantification in a separate section of the manuscript. It is difficult to directly compare our data with those reported by Thelemann et al. (43) because the total number of proteins quantified in their report was significantly fewer than contained in either our data set or the data set reported by Blagoev et al. (19).
In this article, we have demonstrated an analytical method enabling the quantification of time-resolved tyrosine phosphorylation profiles with site-specific resolution and estimated the statistical significance of the relative phosphorylation levels at each time point after stimulation. Data generated by this method self-organize into clusters of phosphorylation sites that recapitulate and extend biological findings in the literature. Generation of an SOM has enabled the identification of modules in the EGFR signaling network. Based on the presence of particular proteins within these modules, we can generate additional hypotheses aimed at defining the potential function of tyrosine phosphorylation on several proteins not previously implicated in EGFR signaling. Further analysis and modeling of the data generated in this study are likely to result in the development of more sophisticated models of receptor-initiated signal transduction, endocytosis, trafficking, and regulation. Future application of this method to interrogate aberrant signaling downstream of constitutively active tyrosine kinases may reveal mechanisms of pathogenesis in these systems, and may provide additional targets for novel therapeutics.
| ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
|---|
| FOOTNOTES |
|---|
Published, MCP Papers in Press, June 11, 2005, DOI 10.1074/mcp.M500089-MCP200
1 The abbreviations used are: EGFR, epidermal growth factor receptor; SOM, self-organizing map; IP, immunoprecipitation. ![]()
* This work was supported by NCI, National Institutes of Health, Bioengineering Research Partnership Grant CA96504 (to D. A. L) and National Institutes of Health Grants GM68762 (to D. A. L.), DK070172 (to F. M. W.), and DK42816 (to F. M. W.). ![]()
The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the payment of page charges. This article must therefore be hereby marked "advertisement" in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1734 solely to indicate this fact.
S The on-line version of this article (available at http://www.mcponline.org) contains Supplemental Tables IIII. ![]()
Both authors contributed equally to this work. ![]()
** To whom correspondence should be addressed: Biological Engineering Division, 56-787, MIT, Cambridge, MA 02139. Tel.: 617-258-8949; E-mail: fwhite{at}mit.edu
| REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
E. D. Lew, C. M. Furdui, K. S. Anderson, and J. Schlessinger The Precise Sequence of FGF Receptor Autophosphorylation Is Kinetically Driven and Is Disrupted by Oncogenic Mutations Sci. Signal., February 17, 2009; 2(58): ra6 - ra6. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. Oyama, H. Kozuka-Hata, S. Tasaki, K. Semba, S. Hattori, S. Sugano, J.-i. Inoue, and T. Yamamoto Temporal Perturbation of Tyrosine Phosphoproteome Dynamics Reveals the System-wide Regulatory Networks Mol. Cell. Proteomics, February 1, 2009; 8(2): 226 - 231. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
K. D. Rodland, N. Bollinger, D. Ippolito, L. K. Opresko, R. J. Coffey, R. Zangar, and H. S. Wiley Multiple Mechanisms Are Responsible for Transactivation of the Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor in Mammary Epithelial Cells J. Biol. Chem., November 14, 2008; 283(46): 31477 - 31487. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. P. Mirza and M. Olivier Methods and approaches for the comprehensive characterization and quantification of cellular proteomes using mass spectrometry Physiol Genomics, October 8, 2008; 33(1): 3 - 11. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
U. Kruse, M. Bantscheff, G. Drewes, and C. Hopf Chemical and Pathway Proteomics: Powerful Tools for Oncology Drug Discovery and Personalized Health Care Mol. Cell. Proteomics, October 1, 2008; 7(10): 1887 - 1901. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
U. Guha, R. Chaerkady, A. Marimuthu, A. S. Patterson, M. K. Kashyap, H. C. Harsha, M. Sato, J. S. Bader, A. E. Lash, J. D. Minna, et al. Comparisons of tyrosine phosphorylated proteins in cells expressing lung cancer-specific alleles of EGFR and KRAS PNAS, September 16, 2008; 105(37): 14112 - 14117. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
T. K. Nadler, C. Rauh-Adelmann, C. Murphy, A. B. Hall, J. R. Graham, L. Yen, N. F. Gordon, and J. A. Radding Profiling Protein Tyrosine Phosphorylation: A Quantitative 45-Plex Peptide-Based Immunoassay J Biomol Screen, August 1, 2008; 13(7): 626 - 637. [Abstract] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. Stuible, N. Dube, and M. L. Tremblay PTP1B Regulates Cortactin Tyrosine Phosphorylation by Targeting Tyr446 J. Biol. Chem., June 6, 2008; 283(23): 15740 - 15746. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. L. Koff, M. X. G. Shao, I. F. Ueki, and J. A. Nadel Multiple TLRs activate EGFR via a signaling cascade to produce innate immune responses in airway epithelium Am J Physiol Lung Cell Mol Physiol, June 1, 2008; 294(6): L1068 - L1075. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. A. J. Steen, H. Steen, A. Georgi, K. Parker, M. Springer, M. Kirchner, F. Hamprecht, and M. W. Kirschner Different phosphorylation states of the anaphase promoting complex in response to antimitotic drugs: A quantitative proteomic analysis PNAS, April 22, 2008; 105(16): 6069 - 6074. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
C. Jorgensen and R. Linding Directional and quantitative phosphorylation networks Brief Funct Genomic Proteomic, February 12, 2008; (2008) eln001v1. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
K.-S. Park, J.-W. Yang, E. Seikel, and J. S. Trimmer Potassium Channel Phosphorylation in Excitable Cells: Providing Dynamic Functional Variability to a Diverse Family of Ion Channels Physiology, February 1, 2008; 23(1): 49 - 57. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D. Pflieger, M. A. Junger, M. Muller, O. Rinner, H. Lee, P. M. Gehrig, M. Gstaiger, and R. Aebersold Quantitative Proteomic Analysis of Protein Complexes: Concurrent Identification of Interactors and Their State of Phosphorylation Mol. Cell. Proteomics, February 1, 2008; 7(2): 326 - 346. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. Guo, J. Villen, J. Kornhauser, K. A. Lee, M. P. Stokes, K. Rikova, A. Possemato, J. Nardone, G. Innocenti, R. Wetzel, et al. Signaling networks assembled by oncogenic EGFR and c-Met PNAS, January 15, 2008; 105(2): 692 - 697. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. Lemeer, R. Ruijtenbeek, M. W. H. Pinkse, C. Jopling, A. J. R. Heck, J. den Hertog, and M. Slijper Endogenous Phosphotyrosine Signaling in Zebrafish Embryos Mol. Cell. Proteomics, December 1, 2007; 6(12): 2088 - 2099. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
Y. Chen, L.-Y. Choong, Q. Lin, R. Philp, C.-H. Wong, B.-K. Ang, Y.-L. Tan, M.-C.-S. Loh, C.-L. Hew, N. Shah, et al. Differential Expression of Novel Tyrosine Kinase Substrates during Breast Cancer Development Mol. Cell. Proteomics, December 1, 2007; 6(12): 2072 - 2087. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
F. Yang, D. G. Camp II, M. A. Gritsenko, Q. Luo, R. T. Kelly, T. R. W. Clauss, W. R. Brinkley, R. D. Smith, and D. L. Stenoien Identification of a novel mitotic phosphorylation motif associated with protein localization to the mitotic apparatus J. Cell Sci., November 15, 2007; 120(22): 4060 - 4070. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
L. Cao, K. Yu, C. Banh, V. Nguyen, A. Ritz, B. J. Raphael, Y. Kawakami, T. Kawakami, and A. R. Salomon Quantitative Time-Resolved Phosphoproteomic Analysis of Mast Cell Signaling J. Immunol., November 1, 2007; 179(9): 5864 - 5876. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. Yang, M. A. Raymond-Stintz, W. Ying, J. Zhang, D. S. Lidke, S. L. Steinberg, L. Williams, J. M. Oliver, and B. S. Wilson Mapping ErbB receptors on breast cancer cell membranes during signal transduction J. Cell Sci., August 15, 2007; 120(16): 2763 - 2773. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
P. H. Huang, A. Mukasa, R. Bonavia, R. A. Flynn, Z. E. Brewer, W. K. Cavenee, F. B. Furnari, and F. M. White Quantitative analysis of EGFRvIII cellular signaling networks reveals a combinatorial therapeutic strategy for glioblastoma PNAS, July 31, 2007; 104(31): 12867 - 12872. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
T. Stasyk, N. Schiefermeier, S. Skvortsov, H. Zwierzina, J. Peranen, G. K. Bonn, and L. A. Huber Identification of Endosomal Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Signaling Targets by Functional Organelle Proteomics Mol. Cell. Proteomics, May 1, 2007; 6(5): 908 - 922. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. Wolf-Yadlin, S. Hautaniemi, D. A. Lauffenburger, and F. M. White Multiple reaction monitoring for robust quantitative proteomic analysis of cellular signaling networks PNAS, April 3, 2007; 104(14): 5860 - 5865. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. Wissing, L. Jansch, M. Nimtz, G. Dieterich, R. Hornberger, G. Keri, J. Wehland, and H. Daub Proteomics Analysis of Protein Kinases by Target Class-selective Prefractionation and Tandem Mass Spectrometry Mol. Cell. Proteomics, March 1, 2007; 6(3): 537 - 547. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. Villen, S. A. Beausoleil, S. A. Gerber, and S. P. Gygi Large-scale phosphorylation analysis of mouse liver PNAS, January 30, 2007; 104(5): 1488 - 1493. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. L. Koff, M. X. G. Shao, S. Kim, I. F. Ueki, and J. A. Nadel Pseudomonas Lipopolysaccharide Accelerates Wound Repair via Activation of a Novel Epithelial Cell Signaling Cascade J. Immunol., December 15, 2006; 177(12): 8693 - 8700. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D. V. Gnatenko, P. L. Perrotta, and W. F. Bahou Proteomic approaches to dissect platelet function: half the story Blood, December 15, 2006; 108(13): 3983 - 3991. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
W.-J. Qian, J. M. Jacobs, T. Liu, D. G. Camp II, and R. D. Smith Advances and Challenges in Liquid Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry-based Proteomics Profiling for Clinical Applications Mol. Cell. Proteomics, October 1, 2006; 5(10): 1727 - 1744. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S.-L. Wu, J. Kim, R. W. Bandle, L. Liotta, E. Petricoin, and B. L. Karger Dynamic Profiling of the Post-translational Modifications and Interaction Partners of Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Signaling after Stimulation by Epidermal Growth Factor Using Extended Range Proteomic Analysis (ERPA) Mol. Cell. Proteomics, September 1, 2006; 5(9): 1610 - 1627. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
K. Tashiro, H. Konishi, E. Sano, H. Nabeshi, E. Yamauchi, and H. Taniguchi Suppression of the Ligand-mediated Down-regulation of Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor by Ymer, a Novel Tyrosine-phosphorylated and Ubiquitinated Protein J. Biol. Chem., August 25, 2006; 281(34): 24612 - 24622. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
K. Schmelzle, S. Kane, S. Gridley, G. E. Lienhard, and F. M. White Temporal dynamics of tyrosine phosphorylation in insulin signaling. Diabetes, August 1, 2006; 55(8): 2171 - 2179. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
W. S. Hlavacek, J. R. Faeder, M. L. Blinov, R. G. Posner, M. Hucka, and W. Fontana Rules for Modeling Signal-Transduction Systems Sci. Signal., July 18, 2006; 2006(344): re6 - re6. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. de la Fuente van Bentem, D. Anrather, E. Roitinger, A. Djamei, T. Hufnagl, A. Barta, E. Csaszar, I. Dohnal, D. Lecourieux, and H. Hirt Phosphoproteomics reveals extensive in vivo phosphorylation of Arabidopsis proteins involved in RNA metabolism Nucleic Acids Res., July 17, 2006; 34(11): 3267 - 3278. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
R. Bose, H. Molina, A. S. Patterson, J. K. Bitok, B. Periaswamy, J. S. Bader, A. Pandey, and P. A. Cole Phosphoproteomic analysis of Her2/neu signaling and inhibition PNAS, June 27, 2006; 103(26): 9773 - 9778. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
K. Aggarwal, L. H. Choe, and K. H. Lee Shotgun proteomics using the iTRAQ isobaric tags Brief Funct Genomic Proteomic, June 1, 2006; 5(2): 112 - 120. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. C. Trinidad, C. G. Specht, A. Thalhammer, R. Schoepfer, and A. L. Burlingame Comprehensive Identification of Phosphorylation Sites in Postsynaptic Density Preparations Mol. Cell. Proteomics, May 1, 2006; 5(5): 914 - 922. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J.-E. Kim and F. M. White Quantitative analysis of phosphotyrosine signaling networks triggered by CD3 and CD28 costimulation in jurkat cells. J. Immunol., March 1, 2006; 176(5): 2833 - 2843. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
E. McGregor and M. J. Dunn Proteomics of the Heart: Unraveling Disease Circ. Res., February 17, 2006; 98(3): 309 - 321. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| All ASBMB Journals | Journal of Biological Chemistry |
| Journal of Lipid Research | ASBMB Today |