Abstract
A critical challenge in mass spectrometry proteomics is accurately assessing error control, especially given that software tools employ distinct methods for reporting errors. Many tools are closed-source and poorly documented, leading to inconsistent validation strategies. Here we identify three prevalent methods for validating false discovery rate (FDR) control: one invalid, one providing only a lower bound, and one valid but under-powered. The result is that the proteomics community has limited insight into actual FDR control effectiveness, especially for data-independent acquisition (DIA) analyses. We propose a theoretical framework for entrapment experiments, allowing us to rigorously characterize different approaches. Moreover, we introduce a more powerful evaluation method and apply it alongside existing techniques to assess existing tools. We first validate our analysis in the better-understood data-dependent acquisition setup, and then, we analyze DIA data, where we find that no DIA search tool consistently controls the FDR, with particularly poor performance on single-cell datasets.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 1454-1463 |
| Number of pages | 10 |
| Journal | Nature Methods |
| Volume | 22 |
| Issue number | 7 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - Jul 2025 |
Bibliographical note
© The Author(s) 2025. Version archived for private and non-commercial use with the permission of the author/s and according to publisher conditions. For further rights please contact the publisher.Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Assessment of false discovery rate control in tandem mass spectrometry analysis using entrapment'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Research output
- 18 Citations
- 1 Preprint
-
Assessment of false discovery rate control in tandem mass spectrometry analysis using entrapment
Wen, B., Freestone, J., Riffle, M., MacCoss, M. J., Noble, W. S. & Keich, U., 21 Jan 2025, (Submitted) Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory (CSHL), 21 p. (bioRxiv).Research output: Working paper › Preprint
Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver