Independent education resourceInformation here does not replace care from a qualified health professional.
Peptide Therapy GuideClear peptide education

Educational guide

A $1,000 Proteome? Protein Sequencers Raise the Question

Development of better, cheaper, and more clinically relevant genomic analysis continues apace, but what about the proteome? If anything, the proteome—the full set of expressed proteins—would tell us more about wellness and ill health than the genome. True, gen

Written by Peptide Therapy Guide Editorial Team
For education only

This guide cannot diagnose a condition or recommend a personal treatment plan. Discuss medical questions with a qualified professional.

Development of better, cheaper, and more clinically relevant genomic analysis continues apace, but what about the proteome? If anything, the proteome—the full set of expressed proteins—would tell us more about wellness and ill health than the genome. True, genes constitute the foundation of life’s chemical hierarchy, but proteins (to mix metaphors) are where the rubber meets the road. Besides catalyzing the chemical reactions that sustain life, proteins are directly engaged in critical functions such as growth, differentiation, and repair; defense against pathogens; cellular housekeeping; and myriad structural duties.

So how hard could compiling a proteome be? After all, genome sequencing has become almost routine, and just 1.5% or so of the genome codes for proteins. Well, this is where things get tricky. While there are only about 25–25,000 human genes, scientists have already identified over 100,000 human proteins, and many, many more proteins no doubt remain unidentified. What’s more, the human proteome has millions of protein variants due to alternative RNA splicing and post-translational modification. And even that’s not all: It also appears that many so-called noncoding RNAs can actually give rise to physiologically relevant micropeptides.

If all that doesn’t sound daunting enough, consider this: Aberrant proteins that are indicative of disease or disease propensity are often present in extremely minute quantities. How could such proteins serve as biomarkers if they are so few and far between that they remain, essentially, invisible? Alas, no technology exists that could do for these proteins what the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) does for targeted regions of DNA. That is, no means exist to boost the concentrations of selected proteins and thereby enhance signal strengths.

Taking the measure of the proteome remains a huge challenge, but many researchers insist on trying. For example, a team of researchers at Arizona State University’s Biodesign Institute led by Stuart Lindsay, Ph.D., are refining a technique for single-molecule protein sequencing. The technique, which adapts technology that the team had used to sequence DNA, is known as recognition tunneling. It involves threading a peptide through a nanopore, an extremely tiny eyelet, which separates two electrodes that are coated with a layer of recognition molecules. When the protein is held between the electrodes, changes in the electron tunneling current between the electrodes is measured. Then, the current “signature” is analyzed to identify the amino acid. (Conceivably, this technique could be applied to peptides, amino acid by amino acid.)

The procedure is described in detail in a paper that appeared April 6 in Nature Nanotechnology, in a paper entitled “Single-molecule spectroscopy of amino acids and peptides by recognition tunneling.” According to this paper, signal analysis turned out to be fairly complex, requiring the services of a machine learning algorithm. This algorithm, called the Support Vector Machine, was used to train a computer to make sense of the signals that were emitted when the amino acids formed bonds in the tunnel junction and current flowed between the electrodes.

The algorithm—the same one used by the IBM computer Watson to defeat a human opponent in Jeopardy—helped the computer learn to discriminate between the different signals that could be emitted by the same molecule. For example, many molecules are able to bind with the tunnel junction in different ways. Also, as indicated in the paper, recognition tunneling let the researchers “identify D and L enantiomers, a methylated amino acid, isobaric isomers, and short peptides.”

The results of their work, reported the researchers, “suggest that direct electronic sequencing of single proteins could be possible by sequentially measuring the products of processive exopeptidase digestion, or by using a molecular motor to pull proteins through a tunnel junction integrated with a nanopore.”

“The ability of recognition tunneling to pinpoint abnormalities on a single molecule basis,” asserted Dr. Lindsay, “could be a complete game changer in proteomics.” Dr. Lindsay adds that the kind of work accomplished by his team—exploring innovative strategies for handling single molecules coupled with startling advances in computing power—may open up horizons that were inconceivable only a short time ago.

By showing that the kinds of tools that made the $1,000 genome feasible are applicable to proteome profiling, Dr. Lindsay’s team may even hearten those so bold to anticipate a $1,000 proteome. “Why not?” Dr. Lindsay asks. “People think it’s crazy, but the technical tools are there. And what will work for DNA sequencing will work for protein sequencing.”

While the tunneling measurements have until now been made using a complex laboratory instrument known as a scanning tunneling microscope, Dr. Lindsay and his colleagues are currently working on a solid-state device that may be capable of fast, cost-effective, and clinically applicable recognition tunneling of amino acids and other analytes. Eventual application of such solid-state devices in massively parallel systems could make clinical proteomics a practical reality.

Connected reading

Helpful context for this guide

Source-derived material selected through this article’s indexed topics.

Related questions

01What is the concept of the immune self, and how has it evolved over the decades?

Adaptive immunity is the ability of specific lymphocytes to differentiate between self and non-self (foreign) antigens and defend the body by selectively destroying non-self-peptides. This concept is possibly the most crucial factor in several immunological medical domains and is increasingly being explored across cancer immunotherapy, vaccine design, pathogen identification, and autoimmune disorders (including allergies). A growing body of literature elucidates the importance of peptides, short amino acid chains linked via peptide bonds, in providing the adaptive immune system with the information required to effectively distinguish between self and non-self particles. This has resulted in the proposal of the ‘immune self’ concept, which postulates that self-similarity is a fundamental determinant of immune recognition. First introduced by Frank MacFarlane Burnet in 1949, the immune self-concept and its sister, the self-nonself theory, have substantially evolved over the decades. Initially driven by observations from Medawar’s early transplantation experiments, Nils K. Jerne (1974; eigen-behavior theory), Polly Matzinger (1994; danger theory), and most recently, evidence from research conducted independently by Waldmann, Mitchison, and Janeway has refined the immune self-concept from ‘all body elements are self, and foreign elements are non-self’ to the most recent ‘infectious non-self (foreign and usually harmful) versus noninfectious self (safe) elements.’

Source: www.news-medical.net ↗
02How stable is the antibody?

A crucial question often addressed during preclinical development focuses on the in vivo stability of therapeutic antibodies. Increasing the half-life of a therapeutic antibody has several benefits ranging from higher treatment efficacy to increased advantages for the patients who will have a fewer number of therapy sessions and a reduced cost. Given these compelling benefits, following the identification of therapeutic antibodies with the desired specificity, developers usually subject them to a refinement step to increase their stability. This process is often hindered by the lack of reliable experimental tools to predict the half-life of antibodies in patients. The major hurdle of using mouse models to predict antibody stability in the serum lies in the way immunoglobulin proteins are processed by the organism. In mammals, most proteins circulating in the serum undergo constant uptake by endothelial cells and are routed through the endosomes to the lysosomal compartment for degradation. In the endosomes, immunoglobulin G (IgG) proteins are recognized and bound by a transmembrane protein, called the neonatal Fc receptor (FcRn), which mediates their recycling to the plasma membrane and subsequent release back into the serum. As a result, the half-life of IgGs are significantly extended by this mechanism. Since most therapeutic antibodies belong to the IgG class, this recycling system is very relevant for their relative stability in the body. Remarkably, the relative affinity between IgGs and FcRn is extremely disparate between different species, with the mouse receptor showing a much higher affinity than its human counterpart.

Source: www.genengnews.com ↗
03Undruggable or unscreenable?

Another obstacle to discovering new PPI inhibitors is the lack of libraries designed to hunt for them, points out Philippe Roche, PhD, senior scientist at the Integrative Structural and Chemical Biology team at the Cancer Research Center of Marseilles, France. “If you screen PPIs using libraries that were designed for kinases or GPCRs, that’s why you don’t get a lot of good results,” he says. To that end, his group began assembling a library focused on orthosteric inhibitors of PPIs. The result was 2P2Idb, a hand-curated, structural database cataloguing orthosteric inhibitors of PPIs for which the interface had been 3D characterized. From analyzing these known PPI inhibitors, and what structures they had in common, Roche and his colleagues developed a model to predict whether compounds would likely inhibit PPIs. Using this method, 2P2Idb creates an enriched screening library that dramatically increases the hit rate compared to standard libraries. Having proven their success with a small library of 1600 compounds, they are in the process of expanding the library to 10,000 compounds. Once that’s published, “the idea is to make this library available to labs around the world,” Roche says. “We will provide the library free of charge for people to be able to screen PPI targets.”

Source: www.genengnews.com ↗
04What was this study about?

It has been noted in around 20 percent of the world population suffers from some form of pain or the other. In many individuals, pain may be relieved initially with pain medications, but soon tolerance develops, and there is a decrease in the efficacy of pain relievers. One of the main symptoms of IBS seen commonly in many sufferers is chronic abdominal pain. Professor Lewis said, "All pains are complex, but gut pain is particularly challenging to treat and affects around 20 percent of the world's population. Current drugs are failing to produce effective pain relief in many patients before side effects limit the dose that can be administered." Professor Brierley echoed this statement saying, "Internal organs have a complex network of sensory nerves that have a wide array of voltage-gated ion channels and receptors to detect stimuli... The hypersensitivity of these nerves in disease often contributes to the development of pain."

Source: www.news-medical.net ↗
05What roles does the system play?

The endogenous opioids and their receptors are widely distributed throughout the central and peripheral nervous systems, particularly the parts of these systems that regulate pain, emotion, reward, stress responses, motivation, drug addiction, and autonomic control. The differential expression and location of the various receptor subtypes across different neurons account for the wide range of opioid-related behaviors. The activation of µ-opioid receptors is mainly known for playing a role in pain relief. Still, research has also indicated it may be involved in behaviors related to survival, such as appetite and reproduction. The activity of µ-opioid receptors is also known to play a critical role in responses to social stimuli by modulating responses to social rejection or social acceptance, for example. Activation of the δ-opioid receptors and κ-opioid receptors is also known to be involved in pain modulation. Also, studies have shown that NOP activation is involved in pain mechanisms and several behaviors related to psychological stress. Alterations in the endogenous opioid system are suspected to be involved in Parkinson's disease, seizures, neuroprotective mechanisms, and depression.

Source: www.news-medical.net ↗
comparison

Comparisons

Side-by-side pages for commonly compared peptides and research compounds.

Source: peptideuniv.com
Research context

Read sources and limitations before applying a claim.

Longevity, Performance & Obesity Research

A research peptide formulation developed to investigate metabolic regulation, mitochondrial function, and nutrient-sensing pathways.

Source: mypeptidematch.com ↗
P

About the author

Peptide Therapy Guide Editorial Team

Editorial team for Peptide Therapy Guide.

View all articles →