Mass Spectrometry-Based Glycoproteomic Workflows for Cancer Biomarker Discovery

Abstract

Glycosylation has a clear role in cancer initiation and progression, with numerous studies identifying distinct glycan features or specific glycoproteoforms associated with cancer. Common findings include that aggressive cancers tend to have higher expression levels of enzymes that regulate glycosylation as well as glycoproteins with greater levels of complexity, increased branching, and enhanced chain length¹. Research in cancer glycoproteomics over the last 50-plus years has mainly focused on technology development used to observe global changes in glycosylation. Efforts have also been made to connect glycans to their protein carriers as well as to delineate the role of these modifications in intracellular signaling and subsequent cell function. This review discusses currently available techniques utilizing mass spectrometry-based technologies used to study glycosylation and highlights areas for future advancement.

Keywords

cancer glycan glycosylation post-translational modification biomarker mass spectrometry

Introduction to Glycosylation

Protein glycosylation is a post-translational modification (PTM) in which individual monosaccharides or longer polysaccharides (also called carbohydrates, sugars, or glycans) decorate asparagine (N-glycan), serine (S) or threonine (T) (O-glycan),^1,2 and, rarely, cysteine (S-glycan)³ or tryptophan (C-mannosylation)⁴ residues. Along with protein glycosylation, lipid-glycan conjugates, extended free poly or oligosaccharides such as hyaluronan, and recently identified RNA-glycan conjugates are all essential for the regulation of healthy cellular processes.² This review focuses on an overview of mass spectrometry-focused workflows to study N- and O-glycoproteoforms present in mammalian cells, but all forms of glycosylation have been shown to be perturbed in various cancer models.⁵ These modifications are vital to protein folding, solubility, and protein-protein interactions including those regulating innate immunity and infection. Protein glycosylation is challenging to predict in silico as it is not encoded genetically but is regulated through complex combinations of aptamer amino acid sequence, larger protein folds interacting with specific glycosyltransferases, proximity of glycosyltransferases and acceptor proteins, the presence or absence of additional glycan modifying enzymes (glycosidases, acetyl-, phospho- or sulfo-transferases), and the availability of activated glycan substrates. The fundamental building block of glycan PTMs is glucose, which can be activated and modified through the hexosamine biosynthetic pathway (HBP) into monosaccharide subunits described below.² Although all cells can synthesize activated glycans to varying extents, these building blocks are often salvaged by the action of glycosidases (enzymes which degrade oligosaccharides) during the trimming of larger oligosaccharide modifications in the endoplasmic reticulum (ER) and Golgi, or during lysosomal degradation of misfolded proteins.² The presence or absence of glycosylation at specific amino acids (macro-heterogeneity), differences in the structures of glycans at individual sites (micro-heterogeneity), as well as the sum of variation in occupied glycosylation sites across a protein (meta-heterogeneity) can result in biological and technical challenges to link specific glycans to potential health versus pathological function.⁶

Oligosaccharide Structure and Biosynthesis

Monosaccharides and combinations of oligosaccharides (2 +monosaccharides in combination) differ across the kingdoms of life, with the deepest understanding being in mammalian cells and tissue. Originally termed carbohydrates, or hydrates of carbon, they follow the molecular formula of C_x(H2O)_n. Although they generally exist in a conformationally stable ring formation, often drawn as a chair, the structures have various linear form equilibriums which can be trapped for downstream chemical analyses including mass spectrometry (Figure 1). Each carbon in the glycan ring (C1-C5) is a chiral center which can have substituents at the α or β position (Figure 1). Nomenclature of glycan linkages follows the rule of orientation (α or β) followed by the carbon atoms of the sugar rings being linked in the bond. The complexity of oligosaccharides arises from the α or β bonds which can be formed on each chiral carbon, creating a large combinatorial number of potential oligosaccharides with identical chemical compositions but completely different structural characteristics. A classic example is the polysaccharide structures of cellulose versus amylose, which are both formed from glucose. The β(1-4) linkage in cellulose makes a strong large fiber while the α(1-4) linkages in amylose are compact and easily digested.⁷ Individual monosaccharides are often simplified in symbolic notation as shown in Figure 1.⁸ If the precise stereochemistry of a monosaccharide is unknown, the associated symbol can be left with no color and a generic designation such as hexose. In humans, there are 9 typical monosaccharides which create combinations of linear and branched glycoconjugates (Hexoses: D-glucose (Glc), N-Acetyl-D-glucosamine (GlcNAc), D-galactose (Gal), N-Acetyl-D-galactosamine (GalNAc), D-Mannose (Man), D-Glucoronic acid (GlcA); Pentoses: D-Xylose (Xyl), L-fucose (Fuc); Nonosulonic or sialic acids: N-Acetylneuraminic acid (Neu5Ac)).

Figure 1.

(A) Chair and (B) Fisher projection representations of D-Glucose indicating chiral carbons. (C) Representative nomenclatures of structures of N- and O-glycans including the location of cleavage by commonly utilized endoglycosidases.¹³⁷

Although protein glycosylation was identified in the 1800s and utilized for common assays like blood typing by the early 1900s, detailed studies of the biosynthesis of glycans and glycan chains have required the development of analytical tools capable of defining monosaccharide linkage orders as well as the stereochemistry at each anomeric center.⁹ Complex glycosylated proteins are mostly thought of as localizing to the cell surface and facilitating cell-cell, immune response, or infection defense responses.² On extracellular and excreted proteins, both N- and O- linked glycosylation often occurs during processing in the ER and Golgi prior to sorting and transport through secretory pathways.^10–12 Monosaccharides must be in an activated format such as -UDP, -GDP, or -CMP in order to be transferred to a growing oligosaccharide, lipid, or directly to a protein, but these activated sugars cannot easily pass membranes and must be actively transported into the ER/Golgi, creating another point of potential glycosylation dysregulation.^10,13 Both N -and O- glycan modifications have a “core” structure attached to an amino acid side chain which can then be further extended/modified by specific glycosyltransferases. N-linked glycans have a core glycan moiety of two N-acetylglucosamine (GlcNAc) and three mannose residues are generally associated with the amino acid backbone consensus sequences (N-X-S/T, Figure 1).

During N-glycan biosynthesis, a multi-enzyme pathway begins on the cytoplasmic side of the ER and flips to the lumen, eventually creating a 14-sugar oligosaccharide on a dolichol phosphate anchor. This oligosaccharide is then transferred to a nascent protein, and, following successful protein folding, the oligosaccharide is trimmed to a core 11-unit oligomannose structure (Figure 1, oligomannose or high mannose structure). As the protein matures through the ER and into Golgi compartments, this core oligosaccharide structure may be trimmed, extended, and modified by sulfation or phosphorylation, eventually creating hybrid and complex glycoproteins for secretion or display on the cell surface.²

Core O-GalNAc glycans (4 basic cores shown in Figure 1) are also synthesized in the ER/Golgi; initiated by the transfer of GalNAc in an α linkage to serine (S) or threonine (T) by one of several polypeptide-N-Acetylgalactosaminyltransferases. This initial GalNAc is then expanded by additional glycosyltransferases within the Golgi to one of 4 di- or tri-saccharide cores in a cell type-specific manner.² Extended glycosylation, along with antennae fucosylation and sialylation, can be performed by some of the same glycosyltransferases that extend complex N-glycans. These O-GalNAc glycans can be extremely diverse and complex, and are responsible for self-recognition, preventing infection, and the definition of blood groups. Adding to the challenge of analysis, some heavily O-glycosylated glycoproteins, known as mucins, have dense regions of Proline/Serine/Threonine domains with extensive, branching O-glycan structures creating a characteristic “bottlebrush” 3D structure.¹⁴

O-GlcNAcylation is extremely common, generally underappreciated, and catalyzed within the cytoplasm by a single enzyme, O-GlcNAc transferase (OGT).¹⁵ This modification appears to have fairly rapid on/off rates and competes with phosphorylation at the same or adjacent sites creating a means of intracellular signaling.¹⁶

In addition to these canonical glycosylation pathways, recent studies have identified glycosyltransferases and glycoproteins in unexpected cellular locations such as the mitochondria,¹⁷ so it is clear that there is still much to learn about when, where, and how proteins are glycosylated in healthy cells. Although prior knowledge of glycan PTMs can be incorporated into glycobiology experiments, researchers should both be open to unexpected findings and demand strong analytical confirmation of unusual modifications.

Glycosylation in Disease

As expected from the heterogeneity and ubiquitous presence of glycan modifications, they are vital to health; genetic disruptions in glycan biosynthesis are often embryonic lethal but lead to severe neurological defects if present.^18–20 Acquired diseases related to glycosylation run the gamut and include cardiac,²¹ neurological,²² immune-related,²³ gastrointestinal,²⁴ and metabolic disorders.²⁵ A mid-year 2022 PubMed.gov search of glycosylation + cancer results in nearly 13,000 scientific articles. Cancer-specific glycan biomarkers have been implicated in breast,^26–28 ovarian,^29,30 lymphoma,³¹ colon,³² myeloma,³³ pancreatic,³⁴ and prostate^35,36 cancers.¹ Research in cancer progression and glycosylation clearly indicates cancer cells often have modified glycan profiles due to aberrant increases or decreases of glycotransferases and glyco-modifying enzymes. Additionally, saccharide subunit and oligosaccharide biosynthesis occur through a branch of the glycolysis pathway, important in cell metabolism and often disregulated in cancer.^37,38 Furthermore, cancer cells evolve to have mechanisms that promote survival, circumventing the severe loss of survivability imposed by the consequences of aberrant glycosylation. Some studies have identified either global changes in glycan structures associated with specific cancers or specific glycan/glycoproteoforms that directly lead to increased cancer. Both may lead to potential therapeutic targets and continued studies using the mass spectrometry workflows described in Figure 2 are expected to create deeper connections between glycobiology and cancer. Below we highlight some common forms of glycosylation dysregulation identified in cancer.

Figure 2.

Glycoproteomics workflows. Based on sample type, available technology, and final goals some or all of these may be combined to define glycan micro and macro heterogeneity in a sample. (A). MALDI imaging mass spectrometry utilizes a solid phase to create glycan intensity overlays directly from tissue samples or from spotted slides of antibodies or lectins. (B–D). Separations-based glycan or glycopeptide mass spectrometry utilizes traditional bottom-up mass spectrometry in which proteins are digested with a protease, usually trypsin, to create peptides. (B). Glycopeptides can be enriched and analyzed for glycan and peptide structure in tandem or (C). Glycans can be removed by endoglycosidase treatment for separate mass spec runs of glycans and peptides. (D). Specific proteins or sets of glycans be enriched first to examine the glycan profiles for variation across conditions, as in biological manufacturing. (E). Top-down proteomics utilizes enrichment of a specific protein of interest and state-of-the-art mass spectrometry to identify glycoproteoforms—or the sum of protein sequence and macroheterogeneity of glycan modifications on the protein.

Oligomannose or high mannose N-glycans (Figure 1C), arising from dysregulation of glycosidases and glycosyltransferases in the N-glycan biosynthetic pathway, have been identified as increased in aggressive cancer.^39–44 N-glycans impact protein stability and solubility and folding, and in healthy cells improper glycosylation should lead to protein degradation.¹³ In addition, N-glycans also regulate extracellular and physiological functions including cell-cell adhesion, maintenance of mucosal barriers, and immune cell function.^2,45 Oligomannose N-glycans terminate in unsubstituted mannose residues which are typically trimmed during ER-to-Golgi protein processing (Figure 1), but, in cancer, these glycoproteins avoid lysosomal degradation and are sent to the cell surface or excreted leading to both immune responses as well as potential biomarkers with this glycan modification.^46–48,49

Truncated O-GalNAc glycans, containing a single O-GalNAc (Tn antigen) or a sialylated O-GalNAc (sTn) are also common in cancers.^50–52 Where healthy cells have mature linear or branched O-GalNAc glycans, cancer cells have decreased expression of upstream glycosyltransferases and chaperones creating membrane-bound and secreted glycoproteins bearing only Tn or sTn. Sialyl-Tn is currently being targeted with several Car-T type therapies in development.^51,53

Core N-glycan fucosylation (shown in complex and hybrid structures in Figure 1) is associated with several kinds of aggressive cancers.^26,29,39,54 Mass spectrometry in combination with specific lectin and glycosidases has been vital for identifying this cancer biomarker and differentiating it from outer arm fucosylation (Figure 1).³⁶ Some of these core-fucosylated N-glycoproteins are known and understood, for example, alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) and L-AFP, when core-fucosylated, are associated with poor cancer prognosis.⁵⁵

Increased or changed sialylation (Neu5Ac) profiles on both mature N- and O-glycans have been identified as cancer biomarkers (Figure 1).^5,56 Since many of the glycosyltransferases responsible for the antennae modifications are capable of acting on either N- or O-glycans, perturbation in this pathway can potentially impact all complex glycosylated proteins. For example, increases in glycotransferases in pancreatic cancers create an extra sialylated N- or O-glycan known as C19-9 which is found in the serum of 75% of pancreatic cancer patients.³⁴ Non-human glycan N-glycolylneuraminic acid (Neu5Gc), which differs by one oxygen from Neu5Ac, has been found in tumors and malignant tissues and is suspected to be incorporated into glycoproteins by scavenging from dietary sources combined with increased glycosyltransferase activity.^57,58

O-GlcNAcylation is generally increased in human cancers,^59–61 directly impacting several nucleocytoplasmic signaling pathways.^{16,32,62–78} An example of a key cancer-related process impacted by O-GlcNAc is epithelial to mesenchymal transition (EMT). TGFβ activates Smad transcription factors leading to the transcription of EMT-related genes. SMAD2 and SMAD4 have been reported to be modified by O-GlcNAc,^62,79 and, in the case of SMAD4, this modification prevents proteasomal degradation by blocking interaction and phosphorylation of SMAD4 by glycogen kinase-3β (GSK3β), increasing SMAD4 half-life and transcriptional activity.⁸⁰

Often one can find various combinations or all forms of aberrant glycosylation on specific proteins important for proper cell growth and death.⁸¹ Recently, there has been a rapid development of technologies to analyze glycosylation. The enzymes needed for glycosylation are ubiquitous and often essential across organ systems. Therefore, it is imperative to determine which tumor glycoforms drive aggressive disease. The development of technologies to study glycosylation has often overshadowed the need for connection to the functional consequences of the specific glycosylation modifications on individual proteins. Only once these connections are made can potential novel cancer therapies target glyco-modifications and glycoproteins.⁸² This review discusses current technologies used to study glycosylation as well as the strengths and limitations of these technologies.

Chemical Biology Toolkit

Since the discovery of glycosylated proteins in the late 1800s scientists have made use of natural biological systems which create, degrade or bind glycan structures. The proteins and enzymes described below are regularly used with traditional methods such as western blotting, immunofluorescence, and UV or fluorescence liquid chromatography (LC) separations as well as with mass spectrometry. While these tools have greatly increased our knowledge about glycan profiles of specific cell and tissue types, alone, they lack analytical precision to identify specific glycan structures. Due to the isobaric and isomeric nature of oligosaccharide modifications, it is often necessary to utilize complementary analytical techniques including various affinity or LC, lectin binding, mass spectrometry and Nuclear Magnetic Resonance (NMR) to fully annotate glycan linkages and isomeric status. Advances in protein level NMR as well as the accessibility of techniques such as Cryo-electron microscopy are additional means of determining the 3D structure and potential molecular interactions of glycoproteins which will not be discussed here.

Glycan Binding Proteins and Antibodies

The most common classes of naturally occurring glycan-binding proteins are known as lectins. These proteins are found throughout nature and bind carbohydrates, either as the soluble forms of oligosaccharides or conjugated to glycoproteins of interest.^2,83 First isolated in the late 1800s when it was noted that plant seed extracts tended to agglutinate human blood, novel lectins are constantly being reported in the literature especially as isolated from plants and fungi. Lectins can be purified from their natural sources or recombinantly expressed, and then chemically bound to fluorophores for imaging/immunohistochemistry or to various solid phases for use as affinity purification reagents in studying specific oligosaccharide motifs (Workflows Figure 2).⁸⁴ The range of specificity/selectivity of these proteins can vary significantly and can be used to cross-correlate glycan changes.^{27,42,48,85–87} Lectins can be used individually or in combination to obtain more confidence about glycan structures and have been historically utilized in combination with tools such as HPLC which provide some information about glycan structure but not the precision of precise mass or hydrogen/carbon interactions which can be obtained from techniques like mass spectrometry or NMR respectively. A disadvantage of lectin-based technologies is that often the full specificity of a lectin (or lack thereof) is not perfectly understood and multiple glycoforms will be bound and purified/imaged.

A common reagent, Concanavalin A (ConA) is a lectin originally isolated from jack bean and is now recombinantly expressed and commercialized (Pierce™, Sigma-Aldrich^(R), Thermo Fisher Scientific^TM, Cytiva^TM, Vector Laboratories, GlycoMatrix^TM, and others) as a glycoprotein purification reagent which preferentially binds α-linked mannose and glucose residues.⁸⁸ However, ConA has an affinity for several N-glycan types including oligomannose-type and hybrid-type N-glycans, which bind with high affinity, and biantennary complex-type N-glycans, which bind weakly. Other examples of useful lectins in cancer research include those targeting highly branched, fucosylated, or sialylated (complex) N-glycans. These include Aleuria aurantia lectin (AAL, isolated from orange peel fungus) which binds fucose⁸⁹ and Maackia amurensis Lectin (MAL, isolated from seed from the Amur tree)⁹⁰ and Sambucus nigra lectin (SNA isolated from elderberry bark) which bind different linkages of sialic acid.^91,92 More recently, recombinant engineering of lectins has been a useful approach to improving specificity. One example is the development of a mutant form of AAL with a point mutation at asparagine (N) 224 changing this residue to a glutamine (Q) resulting in N224Q AAL, which has enhanced binding for core fucose, a key cancer biomarker.⁸⁹

Development of oligosaccharide-specific antibodies as analytical reagents and biotherapeutics is of great interest but has limited specific success due to the challenges of obtaining specific immune responses only to a glycoform of interest. Glycan, lectin, and antibody arrays are still extremely useful as diagnostic tools and even more powerful when combined with mass spectrometry.^93,94

Glycosidases

Endo or exoglycosidases are enzymes that break saccharide bonds to release oligo or monosaccharides respectively. Glycosidases are often derivatives of natural enzymes which break specific or general glycan linkages. These enzymes can be utilized combinatorially with downstream western blots, lectin purifications, HPLC, or mass spectrometry analysis to sequentially break down and identify glycan profiles.

A wide variety of recombinant enzymes have been optimized and purified by companies such as New England BioLabs, Inc^(R), Promega, QABio, and others. In the case of N-glycosylation, PNGaseF is a common commercially available reagent which cleaves N-glycan chains from the asparagine side chain, resulting in free glycans and deamidated asparagine residues (Figures 1 and 2).^95,96 Endo H, a different recombinant endoglycosidase, cleaves at the core GlcNAc of oligomannose and some complex N-glycans, leaving a GlcNAc-asparagine residue.⁹⁷ For O-glycans, O-glycosidase (Endo-α-N-Acetylgalactosaminidase) hydrolyzes the removal of core 1 and core 3 disaccharides from glycoproteins.⁹⁸ Other glycosidases hydrolyze bonds at branching or terminal portions of the glycoform. Both linear and branched sialic acid residues can be removed from N-glycan antennae structures using neuraminidase.⁹⁹ Various fucosidases exist which cleave at the core or terminal fucose residues within N-glycan structures.¹⁰⁰ Galactosidase hydrolyzes terminal β1-3 and β1-4 linked galactose residues from oligosaccharides.¹⁰¹ Various recombinant commercial or newly discovered natural glycosidases will have mixed specificities for various glycan core/antenna/and glycan linkages so the product notes should be carefully studied prior to experimental design.

After the removal of part or the full glycan, separations and mass spectrometry techniques can be tailored more specifically for glycans and peptides.¹⁰² Combinatorial usage of lectins and glycosidases in the workflows shown in Figure 2 can enable more confident identification of glycan structures and pinpoint classes of perturbed glycosylation patterns in disease.^83,103

Mass Spectrometry Techniques

Mass spectrometers are analytical instruments which allow for the measurement of a mass-to-charge ratio (m/z) of ionized species such as small molecules, lipids, peptides, and proteins which have been given positive or negative charge(s). They have been useful in the analysis of oligosaccharide structure determination since the late 1950s, although the instrument availability, modes of ionization and fragmentation have changed significantly in the last 70 years.¹⁰⁴ Although gas chromatography-mass spectrometry is still a useful tool for glycomics, here we will focus on the current common ionization and fragmentation techniques used in glycoproteomics.

Utilizing a high-resolution, precision technique such as mass spectrometry in order to identify specific glycoforms and modification sites on a protein may seem obvious, but numerous technological hurdles remain to be overcome in order to standardize mass spectrometry-based glycoproteomics.^1,105 Isomeric branched glycan structures may have identical mass-to-charge ratios making them indistinguishable without additional separation (retention time) or chemical modifications. The fundamentally different physiochemical properties of glycans versus peptides or proteins mean that varying separation, ionization techniques, and fragmentation methods within the mass spectrometer are required for optimally identifying glycans versus protein or peptide sequences (Figure 2).¹⁰⁶

Adding to the overall complexity of mass spectrometry-based glycoproteomics, N-linked versus O-linked glycopeptides also require different cleavage enzymes, workflows for the identification of sites and glycan structures, enrichment strategies, and even mass spectrometer instrument settings.¹⁰⁶

The mass spectrometry workflows described in Figure 2 use either matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization (MALDI) or electrospray ionization (ESI) of the prepared glycan, glycopeptide, or glycoprotein to create gas phase ions which are directed into the mass spectrometer. In MALDI, a solid phase matrix, such as α-Cyano-4-hydroxycinnamic acid (CHCA), absorbs energy at the wavelength of the pulsed laser leading to ablation from the solid surface and proton transfer creating gas phase sample ions.¹⁰⁷ In electrospray ionization, electrical voltage applied directly to a liquid-liquid junction or emitter creates charged droplets of solvent and sample which desolvate into gas phase sample ions. Once these gas phase ions have been created, they are manipulated and isolated by the use of a voltage gradient, ion optics, and an increasing vacuum.¹⁰⁸ Several common mass analyzers include low resolution (±1 Dal measurements) quadrupoles and ion traps, medium resolution time of flight (ToF), and high resolution Fourier-transform ion cyclotron resonance magnets (FTICR) and orbitraps. Most mass spectrometers also have the ability to fragment ions using collisions of ions with each other as well as with neutral gases (collision induced dissociation (CID) and higher energy collision-induced dissociation (HCD), anion radicals (electron transfer or capture dissociation, ETD/ECD), or the application of UV light (UV photon dissociation). The set of m/z fragments can then be used to reassemble a larger structure.¹⁰⁸

One of the challenges of utilizing mass spectrometry to assign either glycan (removed from protein) or glycopeptide structures is that differing fragmentation techniques and energies are necessary to create fragments of cross-ring, internal glycan, glycan-peptide, and peptide or protein sequences.^106,109

Ion Mobility

Ion mobility is an analytical technique where gas-phase ions are separated as they move through an applied electrical field. It can be considered analogous in concept to the “separations based techniques” described below, however it is now often integrated within the mass spectrometer.¹¹⁰ After sample ionization, ion mobility separates ions based on size and 3D shape around an electrode (field asymmetric ion mobility) or in a drift tube (traditional linear ion mobility) in the presence of an inert buffer gas, often nitrogen. This adds an analytical determinant known as collision cross section (CCS) which can be used to assist in precise identification of glycans and glycopeptides precisely.^111,112 Since glycan isomers move differently, especially if the hydroxyls have been modified with methyl, acetyl, or larger substituents, this technique can provide additional confidence in terms of identification of glycan, glycopeptide, or glycoprotein structure. Although classically a technique that was only available in specialized, commercial mass spectrometers incorporating ion mobility are now available from several vendors (Bruker^TM (timsTOF), Waters^TM (Cyclic ion mobility), Sciex^TM (SelexIon), MOBILion (MOBIE^(R)) and Thermo Fisher Scientific^TM (FAIMSpro)). Integrated ion mobility mass spectrometry can be used in any of the techniques described below and has successfully been used in combination with high-resolution precursor m/z and cross-ring fragment ions to confidently elucidate N-glycan isomer structures.¹¹³

MALDI Imaging Mass Spectrometry

MALDI is a form of mass spectrometry where a sample on a solid support can be mixed with a matrix and ionized. In the context of glycosylation, this technique can give a spatial resolution of glycan patterns and is known as either imaging mass spectrometry (IMS) or mass spectrometry imaging (Workflow Figure 2A). Pioneered by the Drake lab in 2013, this technique is especially insightful in the analysis of tissue slices, formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tissue blocks, and tissue microarrays which are commonly used for clinical samples in cancer.^27,114,115 An endoglycosidase such as PNGaseF is applied to release glycans, which are ionized from the solid phase and identified in the mass spectrometer with an output of overlays of intensities of specific glycan forms (Figure 2). This can lead to a deeper understanding of spatial changes to glycans within tissue or tumor biopsies, for example, this technique specifically identified high mannose N-glycans localizing with tumors.¹¹⁶ Recent mass spectrometry instrumentation advances and the use of laser-induced post-ionization with negative mode detection have the potential to increase the sensitivity of N-glycan tissue imaging by 10´.¹¹⁵

In addition to direct tissue glycan imaging, the use of the MALDI solid phase allows for profiling of low sample amounts of glycoproteins applied to microspots of lectins, specific antibodies, or affinity tag reagents.^{28,35,117–120} This is especially useful for potential biomarker discovery and subsequent screening as biofluid samples can be applied to slides and quickly analyzed for glycan patterns.^117,121

IMS has the advantage of potentially minimal extra sample processing, no LC-associated issues, and fast total acquisition time per sample (depending on spatial resolution). As in most techniques described here, large amounts of data are created, but specific to IMS, appropriate statistical modeling of spatial resolution must occur on large project scales in order to determine clinically relevant changes. Process convolution R packages are now available to assist with spatial information¹²²; additionally, other bioinformatics teams are beginning to investigate the use of machine learning to improve the initial raw data processing of these complex data sets.^123,124

Separations Based Bottom-up Mass Spectrometry

The following techniques utilize methods of separating glycopeptides, glycans, or peptides such as capillary electrophoresis (CE) or LC prior to mass spectrometry detection (Figure 2 workflows B-D). Although mass spectrometry can provide a high-resolution intact glycopeptide, glycan, or peptide m/z with fragment ions, the isomeric and isobaric structure of glycan structures (ie, numerous combinatorial oligosaccharide structures can be formed with the same intact mass with the same subunits in different order and configurations, Figure 1) means that separations such as CE or LC provide orthogonal characteristics (in addition to the potential built-in ion mobility) necessary to provide analytical precision and confidence to isomeric glycoform identifications.

The workflows in this section consist of bottom-up or “shotgun” mass spectrometry in which proteins are digested by proteases into peptides. The most common protease in mass spectrometry workflows is trypsin, which cleaves after lysine and arginine residues (Figure 2). In the study of O-glycans, alternative proteases may be required due to the absence of lysine and arginine residues in regions of high glycosylation.^125–127 Large glycan structures can also inhibit efficient digestion by any protease so release of glycans prior to proteolysis can be advantageous (Workflows 2C and 2D).

Similar to the analysis of other PTMs by mass spectrometry, modified proteins or peptides may be enriched by various strategies and analyzed as intact glycopeptides or separately, as glycans and deglycosylated peptides (Figure 2). A thorough 2021 review by Riley et al summarizes the use of various chemical, immuno-, and affinity enrichments for successful mass spectrometry-based N- and O-glycoproteomics.¹⁰⁹ Briefly, a protein of interest may be enriched using in vivo tags (His, FLAG, HA), natural binding protein partners, antibodies/nanobodies, or lectins known to bind glycans on that protein (Figure 2 workflows D and E). Glycopeptides may also be enriched using chromatographic methods such as hydrophobic interaction (HILIC), electrostatic repulsion-hydrophilic interaction, or porous graphitic carbon chromatography (Figure 2 workflow B). Numerous chemical biology techniques utilizing non-natural sugar substrates for the destructive enrichment of glycoproteins or glycopeptides also exist.^84,128

Glycopeptide Mass Spectrometry

Successful glycopeptide mass spectrometry (Figure 2B) will result in an identified peptide, glycan structure, and localized modification site. In the most common workflow, following digestion of a pool of proteins to create peptides, glycopeptides are enriched using hydrophilic interaction chromatography (HILIC) followed by LC or CE-mass spectrometry (Workflow Figure 2B). Since glycopeptides are generally more hydrophilic/polar than unmodified peptides they preferentially bind these solid phases. This enrichment strategy can be combined with upfront protein/lectin chromatography for increased success in purifying specific subsets of glycosylated peptides. Successful fragmentation of both the glycan chain and peptide is essential, and new improvements have led to either stepped fragmentation or use of combinations of fragmentation techniques when characteristic glycan fragment ions are identified by the mass spectrometer.^106,126 Glycopeptide studies have led to the ability to characterize the glycan occupancy and heterogeneity of modification sites within a cellular milieu.^31,109,129 Permutations of this standard workflow have identified many aberrant glycoforms and glycopeptides in various forms of cancer, for example, increased high-mannose N-glycans and sialylated O-glycans in aggressive ovarian cancers¹³⁰ and specific core fucosylated glycopeptides associated with liver tumors.¹³¹

Both instrumentation and computational challenges exist in this approach as both a peptide and glycan must be fragmented and correctly identified. Due to the common core structure and consensus amino acid background sequence, there is typically only one N-glycan site per tryptic peptide making the study of these modifications slightly more straightforward than O-linked glycosylation. In contrast, O-linked glycosylation can and does occur on multiple serine or threonine sites per tryptic peptide, meaning extensive fragmentation of the glycopeptide is necessary to localize the glycan. However, the advantage of identifying both glycan site and structure in a single experiment has spurred the field forward in the last ten years. Studies indicate that stepped fragmentation energies can allow for accurate fragmentation of peptide and glycan separately.¹⁰⁶

Even after successful enrichment, detection and fragmentation of both glycan chain and peptide, software to successfully deconvolute these data has been a source of constant improvement in the field of glycobiology. Software was initially developed to identify either glycan or peptides from mass spectrometry-based data, but the field has seen rapid development in options for the analysis of intact glycopeptides improving the ability to identify site and glycan isomer in the same study and now numerous commercial and academic software are available (Byonic, Protein Prospector, GlycoPAT, GPQuest, pGlyco, MSfragger-Glyco, StrucGP to name a few^{105,118,132–135}). An emphasis on appropriate controls and data transparency should be used as the glycoproteomics community is moving towards standards in data reporting. Recent reviews indicate that N-glycan moiety and site specificity can vary widely based on user and software and O-glycan identification and localization can lack reproducibility across laboratories.¹³⁶ However, computational focus on the appropriate incorporation of false discovery rates for confident identification of both peptides/glycan sites and glycan structures should begin to move the field towards more consistent and reproducible data analysis.¹³³

Glycomics (Glycan and Peptide) Profiling

Classic glycomics interrogates glycan profiles of cells or specific proteins by removing and analyzing glycans and protein/peptides using separate mass spectrometry runs (Figure 2C and 2D). N-glycans are typically cleaved with an endoglycosidase such as PNGaseF, while O-glycans are removed by O-glycosidases or β-elimination.¹³⁷ Separate experimental designs to analyze glycan and amino acid moieties allow for simplifications in the mass spectrometry and LC/CE separations. Once released, glycans can be purified by class offline on anion exchange columns followed by either direct injection or detection on the mass spec or separation on reverse phase or porous graphite column.^138,139 Traditional glycomics commonly involves the modification of free hydroxyl groups on the released glycans with acetyl groups (examples: permethylation, peracetylation) making the released molecules more hydrophobic in order to improve chromatographic resolution. Other chemical modifications to the reducing end of the glycan, such as 2-aminobenzamide, 2-aminobenzoic acid, or 2-aminopyridine, add fluorescence, modify chromatography and can result in improved ionization for mass spectrometry.¹⁴⁰ O-GalNAc glycans can be unstable in alkaline conditions and are better analyzed following β-elimination and reduction of the hemiacetal group. Although complex glycans may have identical precursor ion m/z, CE, LC retention time and potential ion mobility of modified glycans and comparison with standards allows for rapid characterization of the overall glycan profiles of purified proteins.¹⁴¹ All new researchers in the field should review the recommended Minimum Information Required for a Glycomics Experiment (MIRAGE) for field standard recommendations on designing experiments and reporting results.¹⁴² Peptides can then be analyzed separately using typical reverse phase-LC/MS/MS instrumentation settings and software.

These methods are routinely used for quality control of biotherapeutics including those used in the treatment of cancer (Figure 2D), but glycan profiles of complex mixtures of proteins can also be monitored for a higher-level view of changes across a system (Figure 2C). Recent studies have combined IMS with glycomics to analyze which families of N-glycans are increased in metastatic breast cancer, identifying a specifically increased glycan with poor outcomes.²⁷ This technique can result in high confidence ratios of specific glycan moieties, but site localization of the glycan groups is lost. The cleavage of the glycan group from the amine asparagine creates a deamidated residue which can be used to infer sites of glycosylation; however, deamidation can and does occur within solution. To use deamidation as a confident identifier of N-glycan sites, multiple controls, and potentially orthogonal endoglycosidases should be used.¹⁴³ Separate techniques utilize stringent enrichment of glycosylated peptides (cell-surface capture technology) which may or may not destroy the structure of the glycans themselves, followed by release of the peptides by PNGaseF and identification/quantification by LC-MS.³³

Mass Spectrometry of Intact Glycoproteins

Top-down mass spectrometry is the study of full-length protein sequences to define biologically relevant proteoforms, or specific combinations of protein sequences and PTMs. These analyses used to be limited to labs with large and expensive FTICR mass spectrometers and specialized knowledge for full deconvolution of high m/z species. Recent instrumentation advances have made the techniques more accessible, and in 2018/2019 the Heck research group defined varying glycoproteoforms of engineered erythropoietin¹⁴⁴ and fetuin.¹⁴⁵ Since the interaction of glycoproteins is a key step of viral infection, a byproduct of the SARS-Cov2 pandemic has created a major push for deeper mass spectrometry-based analysis of glycoproteins interactions of viral and human host proteins. By analyzing full-length proteins, the sum of various modifications can be determined—information which is lost when a protein is digested into peptides. Traditionally, glycan analysis of intact proteins is still technically challenging from both instrumentation and computational perspectives. Recent advances by Kelleher et al, however, have proven the technique capable of quantifying glycan patterns on IgGs isolated from Covid-infected patients.¹⁴⁶ Researchers used magnetic beads with recombinantly expressed SARS-Cov-2 spike protein Receptor Binding Domain (RBD) to pull down serum antibodies followed by Individual Ion mass spectrometry.¹⁴⁷ A 2022 study by Wilson et al examined optimizing LC parameters, settling on HILIC for successful optimal resolution of glycoproteoforms of the RBD protein.¹⁴⁸ Although these workflows can be carried out on commercially available orbitrap mass spectrometers, specialized techniques and laborious data analysis are still hurdles to regular glycoproteoforms mass spectrometry. At the time of publication of this review, there were no published reports of intact glycoproteoforms from clinical cancer samples, but numerous groups have taken up the challenge. The commercialization of software and ultra-high mass range instrumentation developed in collaboration with many of the labs discussed above should enable greater community implementation of intact glycoproteomics in any case with well-defined affinity or immunopurification. Ideally, the ability to quantify ratios of specific glycoproteoforms, above and beyond specific glycopeptides, will provide the next level of connectivity between protein and glycosylation changes which occur within cancer.

Challenges and Future Directions

It is clear that the current discoveries surrounding glycosylation in cancer generated from mass spectrometry-based techniques are the tip of the iceberg for understanding these important PTMs.^30,35 We expect that continued advances in specific glycan-specific enrichments, including the development of nanobodies¹⁴⁹ and the use of nanopores,¹⁵⁰ combined with standardized protocols and user-friendly software strategies will allow more laboratories to adopt discovery glycoproteomics. Deep visual proteomics combines the capabilities of workflow A and C in Figure 2 to allow for the spatial resolution of both glycans and deep global proteomics.^151,152 The application of isobaric tags, in which sets of isotopologues modify peptides with the same exact mass, allows for multiplexing of global peptide and glycopeptide samples for consistent quantitation of glycopeptides across samples. Recent use of a “boost” channel (a sample with a higher quantity of the glycopeptides of interest) with the isobaric labeling system N,N-dimethyl leucine (DiLeu) as a modification of workflow 2B, indicates the potential for improved quantitation and accurate comparisons of glycopeptides across samples.¹⁵³ Advancement of the combination of imaging and low quantity or single-cell proteomics will improve the overall spatial resolution and cell type-specific understanding of glycoproteoforms.¹⁵⁴ As a complement, IMS of low abundant proteoforms (resulting in an output of combined 2A and 2E type data) shows real promise for connecting glycoproteoforms across various tissue types.¹⁵⁵

The field of mass spectrometry is also rapidly integrating data-independent acquisition for low-abundance peptides and PTMs, and this is also the case for glycoproteomics.¹³⁵ With standardized protocols for glycopeptide sample preparation, data acquisition, and analysis created by consortiums such as the human glycome project (https://human-glycome.org/), Consortium for functional glycomics (http://www.functionalglycomics.org/), Clinical Proteomic Tumor Analysis Consortium (CPTAC https://proteomics.cancer.gov/programs/cptac/), more labs will be able to implement these techniques for successful biomarker discovery.^30,136,156 As these techniques are standardized and made more available to researchers and clinicians, we expect more focus on glycosylation as a biomarker or therapeutic target.¹⁵⁶ User-friendly interfaces such as Glycomics@ExPASy,¹⁵⁷ GlyConnect,¹⁵⁸ GlyGen,¹⁵⁹ GlyCosmos Portal,¹⁶⁰ and Glyco.me¹⁶¹ have been developed, allowing researchers without access to mass spectrometry resources of their own to interrogate differential glycosylation patterns in their samples and probe the underlying pathways.

Comprehensive and user-friendly technologies and databases will continue to drive our collective understanding of glycosylation-regulated systems biology, and the study of these pathways has high potential to be just as fulfilling as the focus on kinase and phosphatase pathways over the last two decades. An understanding of the glycosylation status of cancer therapeutic targets as well as glycan-specific cancer therapeutics holds promise for the treatment of challenging malignancies.^162,163 This review emphasizes that glycoproteomics is a challenging but potentially rewarding field with rapid technological advancement.

Footnotes

Abbreviations

Acknowledgments

Thanks to Whitney Smith-Kinnaman for reviewing this manuscript. Figures were created with BioRender.com.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Ethics Statement

Our study did not require ethical board approval because it did not contain human or animal trials.

Funding

The authors disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. This work was supported by funds provided to ESY by Indiana University and the Simon Comprehensive Cancer Center. Work in the IUSM Proteomics Core was supported, in part, by the Indiana Clinical and Translational Sciences Institute which is funded by Award Number UL1TR002529 from the National Institutes of Health, National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, Clinical and Translational Sciences Award.

ORCID iD

Emma H. Doud

References

Pinho

Reis

. Glycosylation in cancer: mechanisms and clinical implications. Nat Rev Cancer. 2015;15(9):540‐555. doi:10.1038/nrc3982

Varki A, Cummings RD, Esko JD, et al., eds. Essentials of Glycobiology. 4th ed. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press; 2022.

Qin

Zhang

, et al. S-glycosylation-based cysteine profiling reveals regulation of glycolysis by itaconate. Nano Lett. 2022;22(13):5357‐5364.

Crine

Acharya

. Molecular basis of C-mannosylation - a structural perspective. FEBS J. 2021;289(24):7607-8071. doi:10.1111/febs.16265

Kailemia

Park

Lebrilla

. Glycans and glycoproteins as specific biomarkers for cancer. Anal Bioanal Chem. 2017;409(2):395‐410. doi:10.1007/s00216-016-9880-6

Caval

Heck

AJR

Reiding

. Meta-heterogeneity: evaluating and describing the diversity in glycosylation between sites on the same glycoprotein. Mol Cell Proteomics. 2021;20:100010. doi:10.1074/mcp.R120.002093

Zhu

Delbianco

Seeberger

. Automated assembly of starch and glycogen polysaccharides. J Am Chem Soc. 2021;143(26):9758‐9768. doi:10.1021/jacs.1c02188.

Varki

Cummings

Aebi

, et al. Symbol nomenclature for graphical representations of glycans. Glycobiology. 2015;25(12):1323‐1324. doi:10.1093/glycob/cwv091

Montreuil

, Vliegenthart JFG, Schacter

. Glycoproteins I. 1 ed. vol 29A. New Comprehensive Biochemistry. Elsevier Science; 1995:640.

10.

Zhang

Zabotina

. Critical determinants in ER-golgi trafficking of enzymes involved in glycosylation. Plants. 2022;11(3):428. doi:10.3390/plants11030428

11.

Sun

Tie

Chen

. Glycans function as a golgi export signal to promote the constitutive exocytic trafficking. J Biol Chem. 2020;295(43):14750‐14762. doi:10.1074/jbc.RA120.014476

12.

Guo

Sirkis

Schekman

. Protein sorting at the trans-golgi network. Annu Rev Cell Dev Biol. 2014;30:169‐206. doi:10.1146/annurev-cellbio-100913-013012

13.

Lauc

Pezer

Rudan

Campbell

. Mechanisms of disease: the human N-glycome. Biochim Biophys Acta. 2016;1860(8):1574‐1582. doi:10.1016/j.bbagen.2015.10.016

14.

Malaker

Riley

Shon

, et al. Revealing the human mucinome. Nat Commun. 2022;13(1):3542. doi:10.1038/s41467-022-31062-4

15.

Burt

Alghusen

John Ephrame

Villar

Artigues

Slawson

. Mapping the O-GlcNAc modified proteome: applications for health and disease. Front Mol Biosci. 2022;9:920727. doi:10.3389/fmolb.2022.920727

16.

Hart

Slawson

Ramirez-Correa

Lagerlof

. Cross talk between O-GlcNAcylation and phosphorylation: roles in signaling, transcription, and chronic disease. Annu Rev Biochem. 2011;80:825‐858. doi:10.1146/annurev-biochem-060608-102511

17.

Yoshida

Kuroiwa

Shimada

, et al. Glycosyltransferase MDR1 assembles a dividing ring for mitochondrial proliferation comprising polyglucan nanofilaments. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2017;114(50):13284‐13289. doi:10.1073/pnas.1715008114

18.

Freeze

Eklund

Patterson

. Neurology of inherited glycosylation disorders. Lancet Neurol. 2012;11(5):453‐466. doi:10.1016/s1474-4422(12)70040-6

19.

Ohtsubo

Marth

. Glycosylation in cellular mechanisms of health and disease. Cell. 2006;126(5):855‐867. doi:10.1016/j.cell.2006.08.019

20.

Freeze

Eklund

Patterson

. Neurological aspects of human glycosylation disorders. Annu Rev Neurosci. 2015;38:105‐125. doi:10.1146/annurev-neuro-071714-034019

21.

Loaeza-Reyes

Zenteno

Moreno-Rodríguez

, et al. An overview of glycosylation and its impact on cardiovascular health and disease. Front Mol Biosci. 2021;8:751637. doi:10.3389/fmolb.2021.751637

22.

Haukedal

Freude

. Implications of glycosylation in Alzheimer's disease. Front Neurosci. 2020;14:625348. doi:10.3389/fnins.2020.625348

23.

Wolfert

Boons

. Adaptive immune activation: Glycosylation does matter. Nat Chem Biol. 2013;9(12):776‐784. doi:10.1038/nchembio.1403

24.

Wardman

Bains

Rahfeld

Withers

. Carbohydrate-active enzymes (CAZymes) in the gut microbiome. Nat Rev Microbiol. 2022;20(9):542‐556. doi:10.1038/s41579-022-00712-1.

25.

Reily

Stewart

Renfrow

Novak

. Glycosylation in health and disease. Nat Rev Neph. 2019;15(6):346‐366. doi:10.1038/s41581-019-0129-4

26.

Abbott

Aoki

Lim

, et al. Targeted glycoproteomic identification of biomarkers for human breast carcinoma. J Proteome Res. 2008;7(4):1470‐1480. doi:10.1021/pr700792g

27.

Herrera

Dilday

Uber

, et al. Core-fucosylated tetra-antennary N-glycan containing A single N-acetyllactosamine branch is associated with poor survival outcome in breast cancer. Int J Mol Sci. 2019;20(10):2528. doi:10.3390/ijms20102528

28.

Rujchanarong

Lefler

Saunders

, et al. Defining the tumor microenvironment by integration of immunohistochemistry and extracellular matrix targeted imaging mass spectrometry. Cancers (Basel). 2021;13(17):4419. doi:10.3390/cancers13174419

29.

Abbott

Lim

Wells

Benigno

McDonald

Pierce

. Identification of candidate biomarkers with cancer-specific glycosylation in the tissue and serum of endometrioid ovarian cancer patients by glycoproteomic analysis. Proteomics. 2010;10(3):470‐481. doi:10.1002/pmic.200900537

30.

Pan

Shah

, et al. Integrated proteomic and glycoproteomic characterization of human high-grade serous ovarian carcinoma. Cell Rep. 2020;33(3):108276. doi:10.1016/j.celrep.2020.108276

31.

Deeb

Cox

Schmidt-Supprian

Mann

. N-linked glycosylation enrichment for in-depth cell surface proteomics of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma subtypes. Mol Cell Proteomics. 2014;13(1):240‐251. doi:10.1074/mcp.M113.033977

32.

Guo

Zhang

Nairn

, et al. O-Linked N-acetylglucosamine (O-GlcNAc) expression levels epigenetically regulate colon cancer tumorigenesis by affecting the cancer stem cell compartment via modulating expression of transcriptional factor MYBL1. J Biol Chem. 2017;292(10):4123‐4137. doi:10.1074/jbc.M116.763201

33.

Oldham

RAA

Faber

Keppel

, et al. Discovery and validation of surface N-glycoproteins in MM cell lines and patient samples uncovers immunotherapy targets. J Immunother Cancer. 2020;8(2):e000915. doi:10.1136/jitc-2020-000915

34.

Engle

Tiriac

Rivera

, et al. The glycan CA19-9 promotes pancreatitis and pancreatic cancer in mice. Science. 2019;364(6446):1156‐1162. doi:10.1126/science.aaw3145.

35.

Kawahara

Recuero

Srougi

Leite

KRM

Thaysen-Andersen

Palmisano

. The complexity and dynamics of the tissue glycoproteome associated with prostate cancer progression. Mol Cell Proteomics. 2021;20:100026. doi:10.1074/mcp.RA120.002320

36.

Gabriele

Prestagiacomo

Cuda

Gaspari

. Mass Spectrometry-based glycoproteomics and prostate cancer. Int J Mol Sci. 2021;22(10), doi:10.3390/ijms22105222.

37.

Warburg

. On the origin of cancer cells. Science. 1956;123(3191):309‐314. doi:10.1126/science.123.3191.309.

38.

de Queiroz

Oliveira

Piva

, et al. Hexosamine biosynthetic pathway and glycosylation regulate cell migration in melanoma cells. Front Oncol. 2019;9:116. doi:10.3389/fonc.2019.00116

39.

Takahashi

Sugiyama

Shimomura

, et al. Site-specific and linkage analyses of fucosylated N-glycans on haptoglobin in sera of patients with various types of cancer: possible implication for the differential diagnosis of cancer. Glycoconj J. 2016;33(3):471‐482. doi:10.1007/s10719-016-9653-7

40.

Liu

Nie

Zhang

, et al. Cell surface-specific N-glycan profiling in breast cancer. PLoS One. 2013;8(8):e72704. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0072704

41.

de Leoz

Young

, et al. High-mannose glycans are elevated during breast cancer progression. Mol Cell Proteomics. 2011;10(1):M110 002717. doi:10.1074/mcp.M110.002717.

42.

Scupakova

Adelaja

Balluff

, et al. Clinical importance of high-mannose, fucosylated, and complex N-glycans in breast cancer metastasis. JCI Insight. 2021;6(24):e146945. doi:10.1172/jci.insight.146945

43.

Cheng

Davidson

Bhat

. Markers of malignant prostate cancer cells: golgi localization of alpha-mannosidase 1A at GM130-GRASP65 site and appearance of high mannose N-glycans on cell surface. Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 2020;527(2):406‐410. doi:10.1016/j.bbrc.2020.03.168

44.

Liu

Guan

Gao

Jiang

Kang

. Mannose receptor as a potential biomarker for gastric cancer: a pilot study. Int J Biol Markers. 2017;32(3):e278‐e283. doi:10.5301/jbm.5000244

45.

Maverakis

Kim

Shimoda

, et al. Glycans in the immune system and the altered glycan theory of autoimmunity: a critical review. J Autoimmun. 2015;57:1‐13. doi:10.1016/j.jaut.2014.12.002

46.

Wang

Dafik

Nolley

, et al. Anti-oligomannose antibodies as potential serum biomarkers of aggressive prostate cancer. Drug Dev Res. 2013;74(2):65‐80. doi:10.1002/ddr.21063

47.

Yamaguchi

Uchida

. A chaperone-like function of intramolecular high-mannose chains in the oxidative refolding of bovine pancreatic RNase B. J Biochem. 1996;120(3):474‐477. doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.jbchem.a021435

48.

Morishima

Morita

Tokushima

, et al. Expression and role of mannose receptor/terminal high-mannose type oligosaccharide on osteoclast precursors during osteoclast formation. J Endocrinol. 2003;176(2):285‐292. doi:10.1677/joe.0.1760285

49.

Driouich

Gonnet

Makkie

Laine

Faye

. The role of high-mannose and complex asparagine-linked glycans in the secretion and stability of glycoproteins. Planta. 1989;180(1):96‐104. doi:10.1007/BF02411415

50.

Brockhausen

. Mucin-type O-glycans in human colon and breast cancer: glycodynamics and functions. EMBO Rep. 2006;7(6):599‐604. doi:10.1038/sj.embor.7400705

51.

Gupta

Leon

Rauth

Batra

Ponnusamy

. A systematic review on the implications of O-linked glycan branching and truncating enzymes on cancer progression and metastasis. Cells. 2020;9(2):446. doi:10.3390/cells9020446

52.

Magalhaes

Duarte

Reis

. The role of O-glycosylation in human disease. Mol Aspects Med. 2021;79:100964. doi:10.1016/j.mam.2021.100964

53.

Loureiro

Feldmann

Bergmann

, et al. Extended half-life target module for sustainable UniCAR T-cell treatment of STn-expressing cancers. J Exp Clin Cancer Res. 2020;39(1):77. doi:10.1186/s13046-020-01572-4.

54.

Zhao

Jia

, et al. Heterogeneities of site-specific N-glycosylation in HCC tumors with low and high AFP concentrations. Front Oncol. 2020;10:496. doi:10.3389/fonc.2020.00496

55.

Egashira

Suganuma

Kataoka

, et al. Establishment and characterization of a fucosylated α-fetoprotein-specific monoclonal antibody: a potential application for clinical research. Sci Rep. 2019;9(1):12359. doi:10.1038/s41598-019-48821-x.

56.

Zhao

Takahashi

, et al. Functional roles of N-glycans in cell signaling and cell adhesion in cancer. Cancer Sci. 2008;99(7):1304‐1310. doi:10.1111/j.1349-7006.2008.00839.x

57.

Bashir

Fezeu

Leviatan Ben-Arye

, et al. Association between Neu5Gc carbohydrate and serum antibodies against it provides the molecular link to cancer: French NutriNet-santé study. BMC Med. 2020;18(1):262. doi:10.1186/s12916-020-01721-8

58.

Dorvignit

Boligan

Relova-Hernández

, et al. Antitumor effects of the GM3(Neu5Gc) ganglioside-specific humanized antibody 14F7hT against Cmah-transfected cancer cells. Sci Rep. 2019;9(1):9921. doi:10.1038/s41598-019-46148-1.

59.

Schnaar

. Gangliosides of the vertebrate nervous system. J Mol Biol. 2016;428(16):3325‐3336. doi:10.1016/j.jmb.2016.05.020

60.

Zhang

Ten Hagen

. Pleiotropic effects of O-glycosylation in colon cancer. J Biol Chem. 2018;293(4):1315‐1316. doi:10.1074/jbc.H117.812826

61.

Cervoni

Cheng

Stackhouse

Heimburg-Molinaro

Cummings

. O-glycan recognition and function in mice and human cancers. Biochem J. 2020;477(8):1541‐1564. doi:10.1042/BCJ20180103

62.

Zhang

Ten Dijke

Wuhrer

Zhang

. Role of glycosylation in TGF-beta signaling and epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition in cancer. Protein Cell. 2021;12(2):89‐106. doi:10.1007/s13238-020-00741-7

63.

Ferrer

Sodi

Reginato

. O-GlcNAcylation in cancer biology: Linking metabolism and signaling. J Mol Biol. 2016;428(16):3282‐3294. doi:10.1016/j.jmb.2016.05.028

64.

Yang

Kim

Seo

, et al. Elevated O-GlcNAcylation promotes colonic inflammation and tumorigenesis by modulating NF-kappaB signaling. Oncotarget. 2015;6(14):12529‐12542. doi:10.18632/oncotarget.3725

65.

Yang

Jang

Yoon

, et al. OGA Heterozygosity suppresses intestinal tumorigenesis in Apc(min/+) mice. Oncogenesis. 2014;3(7):e109. doi:10.1038/oncsis.2014.24

66.

Ferrer

Lynch

Sodi

, et al. O-GlcNAcylation regulates cancer metabolism and survival stress signaling via regulation of the HIF-1 pathway. Mol Cell. 2014;54(5):820‐831. doi:10.1016/j.molcel.2014.04.026

67.

Phueaouan

Chaiyawat

Netsirisawan

, et al. Aberrant O-GlcNAc-modified proteins expressed in primary colorectal cancer. Oncol Rep. 2013;30(6):2929‐2936. doi:10.3892/or.2013.2794

68.

Vocadlo

Vosseller

. Hyper-O-GlcNAcylation is anti-apoptotic and maintains constitutive NF-kappaB activity in pancreatic cancer cells. J Biol Chem. 2013;288(21):15121‐15130. doi:10.1074/jbc.M113.470047

69.

Itkonen

Minner

Guldvik

, et al. O-GlcNAc transferase integrates metabolic pathways to regulate the stability of c-MYC in human prostate cancer cells. Cancer Res. 2013;73(16):5277‐5287. doi:10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-13-0549

70.

Champattanachai

Netsirisawan

Chaiyawat

, et al. Proteomic analysis and abrogated expression of O-GlcNAcylated proteins associated with primary breast cancer. Proteomics. 2013;13(14):2088‐2099. doi:10.1002/pmic.201200126

71.

Zhu

Zhou

Yang

, et al. O-GlcNAcylation plays a role in tumor recurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma following liver transplantation. Med Oncol. 2012;29(2):985‐993. doi:10.1007/s12032-011-9912-1

72.

Yehezkel

Cohen

Kliger

Manor

Khalaila

. O-linked beta-N-acetylglucosaminylation (O-GlcNAcylation) in primary and metastatic colorectal cancer clones and effect of N-acetyl-beta-D-glucosaminidase silencing on cell phenotype and transcriptome. J Biol Chem. 2012;287(34):28755‐28769. doi:10.1074/jbc.M112.345546

73.

Rozanski

Krzeslak

Forma

, et al. Prediction of bladder cancer based on urinary content of MGEA5 and OGT mRNA level. Clin Lab. 2012;58(5-6):579‐583.

74.

Lynch

Ferrer

Jackson

Shahriari

Vosseller

Reginato

. Critical role of O-linked beta-N-acetylglucosamine transferase in prostate cancer invasion, angiogenesis, and metastasis. J Biol Chem. 2012;287(14):11070‐11081. doi:10.1074/jbc.M111.302547

75.

Krzeslak

Forma

Bernaciak

Romanowicz

Brys

. Gene expression of O-GlcNAc cycling enzymes in human breast cancers. Clin Exp Med. 2012;12(1):61‐65. doi:10.1007/s10238-011-0138-5

76.

Han

, et al. O-GlcNAcylation is a novel regulator of lung and colon cancer malignancy. Biochim Biophys Acta. 2011;1812(4):514‐519. doi:10.1016/j.bbadis.2011.01.009

77.

, et al. GlcNAcylation plays an essential role in breast cancer metastasis. Cancer Res. 2010;70(15):6344‐6351. doi:10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-09-1887

78.

Caldwell

Jackson

Shahriari

, et al. Nutrient sensor O-GlcNAc transferase regulates breast cancer tumorigenesis through targeting of the oncogenic transcription factor FoxM1. Oncogene. 2010;29(19):2831‐2842. doi:10.1038/onc.2010.41

79.

Gotoh

Iwahana

Kannan

, et al. Glycosylation is a novel TGFbeta1-independent post-translational modification of Smad2. Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 2020;521(4):1010‐1016. doi:10.1016/j.bbrc.2019.11.039

80.

Kim

Kang

Kim

, et al. O-GlcNAc stabilizes SMAD4 by inhibiting GSK-3beta-mediated proteasomal degradation. Sci Rep. 2020;10(1):19908. doi:10.1038/s41598-020-76862-0

81.

Subramanian

Gundry

. The known unknowns of apolipoprotein glycosylation in health and disease. iScience. 2022;25(9):105031. doi:10.1016/j.isci.2022.105031

82.

Mereiter

Balmaña

Campos

Gomes

Reis

. Glycosylation in the era of cancer-targeted therapy: where are we heading? Cancer Cell. 2019;36(1):6‐16. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ccell.2019.06.006.

83.

Ghazarian

Idoni

Oppenheimer

. A glycobiology review: carbohydrates, lectins and implications in cancer therapeutics. Acta Histochem. 2011;113(3):236‐247. doi:10.1016/j.acthis.2010.02.004

84.

Wisnovsky

Bertozzi

. Reading the glyco-code: new approaches to studying protein-carbohydrate interactions. Curr Opin Struct Biol. 2022;75:102395. doi:10.1016/j.sbi.2022.102395.

85.

Klamer

Harris

Beirne

Kelly

Zhang

Haab

. Carbogrove: a resource of glycan-binding specificities through analyzed glycan-array datasets from all platforms. Glycobiology. 2022;32(8):679‐690. doi:10.1093/glycob/cwac022.

86.

Tan

Yin

Nie

, et al. Large-scale identification of core-fucosylated glycopeptide sites in pancreatic cancer serum using mass spectrometry. J Proteome Res. 2015;14(4):1968‐1978. doi:10.1021/acs.jproteome.5b00068

87.

Dodla

Young

Venable

, et al. Differing lectin binding profiles among human embryonic stem cells and derivatives aid in the isolation of neural progenitor cells. PLoS One. 2011;6(8):e23266. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0023266

88.

Cummings

Etzler

. Antibodies and lectins in glycan analysis. In: Varki

Cummings

89.

Norton

Comunale

Herrera

, et al. Development and application of a novel recombinant Aleuria aurantia lectin with enhanced core fucose binding for identification of glycoprotein biomarkers of hepatocellular carcinoma. Proteomics. 2016;16(24):312‐3136. doi:10.1002/pmic.201600064

90.

Geisler

Jarvis

. Effective glycoanalysis with Maackia amurensis lectins requires a clear understanding of their binding specificities. Glycobiology. 2011;21(8):988‐993. doi:10.1093/glycob/cwr080

91.

Orczyk-Pawilowicz

Augustyniak

Hirnle

Katnik-Prastowska

. Lectin-based analysis of fucose and sialic acid expressions on human amniotic IgA during normal pregnancy. Glycoconj J. 2013;30(6):599‐608. doi:10.1007/s10719-012-9460-8

92.

Van Damme

EJM

. 35 Years in plant lectin research: a journey from basic science to applications in agriculture and medicine. Glycoconj J. 2022;39(1):83‐97. doi:10.1007/s10719-021-10015-x

93.

Black

Angel

Drake

Mehta

. Antibody panel based N-glycan imaging for N-glycoprotein biomarker discovery. Curr Protoc Protein Sci. 2019;98(1):e99. doi:10.1002/cpps.99

94.

Black

Liang

West

, et al. A novel mass spectrometry platform for multiplexed N-glycoprotein biomarker discovery from patient biofluids by antibody panel based N-glycan imaging. Anal Chem. 2019;91(13):8429‐8435. doi:10.1021/acs.analchem.9b01445

95.

Magnelli

Bielik

Guthrie

. Identification and characterization of protein glycosylation using specific endo- and exoglycosidases. Methods Mol Biol. 2012;801:189‐211. doi:10.1007/978-1-61779-352-3_13

96.

Hagglund

Matthiesen

Elortza

, et al. An enzymatic deglycosylation scheme enabling identification of core fucosylated N-glycans and O-glycosylation site mapping of human plasma proteins. J Proteome Res. 2007;6(8):3021‐3031. doi:10.1021/pr0700605

97.

Maley

Trimble

Tarentino

Plummer

Jr . Characterization of glycoproteins and their associated oligosaccharides through the use of endoglycosidases. Anal Biochem. 1989;180(2):195‐204. doi:10.1016/0003-2697(89)90115-2

98.

Koutsioulis

Landry

Guthrie

. Novel endo-alpha-N-acetylgalactosaminidases with broader substrate specificity. Glycobiology. 2008;18(10):799‐805. doi:10.1093/glycob/cwn069

99.

Albrecht

Vainauskas

Stockmann

McManus

Taron

Rudd

. Comprehensive profiling of glycosphingolipid glycans using a novel broad specificity endoglycoceramidase in a high-throughput workflow. Anal Chem. 2016;88(9):4795‐4802. doi:10.1021/acs.analchem.6b00259

100.

Vainauskas

Kirk

Petralia

, et al. A novel broad specificity fucosidase capable of core alpha1-6 fucose release from N-glycans labeled with urea-linked fluorescent dyes. Sci Rep. 2018;8(1):9504. doi:10.1038/s41598-018-27797-0

101.

Wong-Madden

Landry

. Purification and characterization of novel glycosidases from the bacterial genus Xanthomonas. Glycobiology. 1995;5(1):19‐28. doi:10.1093/glycob/5.1.19

102.

Oliveira

Thaysen-Andersen

Packer

Kolarich

. The hitchhiker's guide to glycoproteomics. Biochem Soc Trans. 2021;49(4):1643‐1662. doi:10.1042/BST20200879

103.

Lastovickova

Strouhalova

Bobalova

. Use of lectin-based affinity techniques in breast cancer glycoproteomics: A review. J Proteome Res. 2020;19(5):1885‐1899. doi:10.1021/acs.jproteome.9b00818

104.

Biemann

. Mass spectrometry. Ann Rev of Biochem. 1963;32:755‐780.

105.

Thaysen-Andersen

Packer

Schulz

. Maturing glycoproteomics technologies provide unique structural insights into the N-glycoproteome and its regulation in health and disease. Mol Cell Proteomics. 2016;15(6):1773‐1790. doi:10.1074/mcp.O115.057638

106.

Riley

Malaker

Driessen

Bertozzi

. Optimal dissociation methods differ for N- and O-glycopeptides. J Proteome Res. 2020;19(8):3286‐3301. doi:10.1021/acs.jproteome.0c00218

107.

Fenselau

. Peer reviewed: MALDI MS and strategies for protein analysis. Anal Chem. 1997;69(21):661A‐665A. doi:10.1021/ac971831z.

108.

Savaryn

Toby

Kelleher

. A researcher's guide to mass spectrometry-based proteomics. Proteomics. 2016;16(18):2435‐2443. doi:10.1002/pmic.201600113

109.

Riley

Bertozzi

Pitteri

. A pragmatic guide to enrichment strategies for mass spectrometry-based glycoproteomics. Mol Cell Proteomics. 2021;20:100029. doi:10.1074/mcp.R120.002277

110.

Dodds

Baker

. Ion mobility spectrometry: fundamental concepts, instrumentation, applications, and the road ahead. J Am Soc Mass Spectrom. 2019;30(11):2185‐2195. doi:10.1007/s13361-019-02288-2

111.

Chen

Glover

. Recent advances in ion mobility-mass spectrometry for improved structural characterization of glycans and glycoconjugates. Curr Opin Chem Biol. 2018;42:1‐8. doi:10.1016/j.cbpa.2017.10.007

112.

Pallister

Choo

MSF

Walsh

, et al. Utility of Ion-mobility spectrometry for deducing branching of multiply charged glycans and glycopeptides in a high-throughput positive ion LC-FLR-IMS-MS workflow. Anal Chem. 2020;92(23):15323‐15335. doi:10.1021/acs.analchem.0c01954

113.

Oganesyan

Hajduk

Harrison

Marchand

Czar

Zenobi

. Exploring gas-phase MS methodologies for structural elucidation of branched N-glycan isomers. Anal Chem. 2022;94(29):10531‐10539. doi:10.1021/acs.analchem.2c02019.

114.

Drake

Powers

Jones

Bruner

Mehta

Angel

. MALDI Mass spectrometry imaging of N-linked glycans in cancer tissues. Adv Cancer Res. 2017;134:85‐116. doi:10.1016/bs.acr.2016.11.009

115.

Heijs

Potthoff

Soltwisch

Dreisewerd

. MALDI-2 for the enhanced analysis of N-linked glycans by mass spectrometry imaging. Anal Chem. 2020;92(20):13904‐13911. doi:10.1021/acs.analchem.0c02732

116.

Briggs

Condina

, et al. MALDI Mass spectrometry imaging of early- and late-stage serous ovarian cancer tissue reveals stage-specific N-glycans. Proteomics. 2019;19(21-22):e1800482. doi:10.1002/pmic.201800482

117.

Scott

Wang

Grauzam

, et al. Glycofibrotyper: A novel method for the glycan analysis of IgG and the development of a biomarker signature of liver fibrosis. Front Immunol. 2022;13:797460. doi:10.3389/fimmu.2022.797460

118.

Klamer

Hsueh

Ayala-Talavera

Haab

. Deciphering protein glycosylation by computational integration of on-chip profiling, glycan-array data, and mass spectrometry. Mol Cell Proteomics. 2019;18(1):28‐40. doi:10.1074/mcp.RA118.000906

119.

Blaschke

CRK

Black

Mehta

Angel

Drake

. Rapid N-glycan profiling of serum and plasma by a novel slide-based imaging mass spectrometry workflow. J Am Soc Mass Spectrom. 020;31(12):2511‐2520. doi:10.1021/jasms.0c00213

120.

Nakajima

Inomata

Iha

, et al. Establishment of new predictive markers for distant recurrence of colorectal cancer using lectin microarray analysis. Cancer Med. 2015;4(2):293‐302. doi:10.1002/cam4.342

121.

Angel

Saunders

Clift

, et al. A rapid array-based approach to N-glycan profiling of cultured cells. J Proteome Res. 2019;18(10):3630‐3639. doi:10.1021/acs.jproteome.9b00303

122.

Miller

Lawson

Chung

, et al. Automating a process convolution approach to account for spatial information in imaging mass spectrometry data. Spat Stat. 2020;36:100422. doi:10.1016/j.spasta.2020.100422

123.

Abdelmoula

Stopka

Randall

, et al. Massnet: integrated processing and classification of spatially resolved mass spectrometry data using deep learning for rapid tumor delineation. Bioinformatics. 2022;38(7):2015‐2021. doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btac032

124.

Laskin

. Emerging computational methods in mass spectrometry imaging. Https://doi.org/10.1002/advs.202203339. Advanced Science. 2022;n/a(n/a):2203339. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/advs.202203339.

125.

Vainauskas

Guntz

McLeod

, et al. A broad-specificity O-glycoprotease that enables improved analysis of glycoproteins and glycopeptides containing intact complex O-glycans. Anal Chem. 2022;94(2):1060‐1069. doi:10.1021/acs.analchem.1c04055.

126.

Ince

Lucas

Malaker

. Current strategies for characterization of mucin-domain glycoproteins. Curr Opin Chem Biol. 2022;69:102174. doi:10.1016/j.cbpa.2022.102174

127.

Shon

Kuo

Ferracane

Malaker

. Classification, structural biology, and applications of mucin domain-targeting proteases. Biochem J. 2021;478(8):1585‐1603. doi:10.1042/bcj20200607

128.

Bagdonaite

Malaker

Polasky

, et al. Glycoproteomics. Nat Rev Meth Prim. 2022;2(1):48. doi:10.1038/s43586-022-00128-4.

129.

Delafield

. Recent advances in analytical approaches for glycan and glycopeptide quantitation. Mol Cell Proteomics. 2021;20:100054. doi:10.1074/mcp.R120.002095

130.

Pan

Sun

, et al. Glycoproteomics-based signatures for tumor subtyping and clinical outcome prediction of high-grade serous ovarian cancer. Nat Comm. 2020;11(1):6139. doi:10.1038/s41467-020-19976-3.

131.

Cao

Lih

, et al. Characterization of core fucosylation via sequential enzymatic treatments of intact glycopeptides and mass spectrometry analysis. Nat Commun. 2022;13(1):3910. doi:10.1038/s41467-022-31472-4

132.

Riley

Shortreed

Bertozzi

Smith

. O-Pair search with MetaMorpheus for O-glycopeptide characterization. Nat Methods. 2020;17(11):1133‐1138. doi:10.1038/s41592-020-00985-5

133.

Polasky

Geiszler

Nesvizhskii

. Multiattribute glycan identification and FDR control for glycoproteomics. Mol Cell Proteomics. 2022;21(3):100205. doi:10.1016/j.mcpro.2022.100205

134.

Polasky

Teo

Nesvizhskii

. Fast and comprehensive N- and O-glycoproteomics analysis with MSFragger-Glyco. Nat Methods. 2020;17(11):1125‐1132. doi:10.1038/s41592-020-0967-9

135.

Mao

Clausen

Vakhrushev

. Glyco-DIA: A method for quantitative O-glycoproteomics with in silico-boosted glycopeptide libraries. Nat Methods. 2019;16(9):902‐910. doi:10.1038/s41592-019-0504-x

136.

Kawahara

Chernykh

Alagesan

, et al. Community evaluation of glycoproteomics informatics solutions reveals high-performance search strategies for serum glycopeptide analysis. Nat Methods. 2021;18(11):1304‐1316. doi:10.1038/s41592-021-01309-x

137.

Suzuki

Abe

Hanzawa

Natsuka

. Toward robust N-glycomics of various tissue samples that may contain glycans with unknown or unexpected structures. Sci Rep. 2021;11(1):6334. doi:10.1038/s41598-021-84668-x

138.

Young

Condina

Briggs

, et al. In-House packed porous graphitic carbon columns for liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry analysis of N-glycans. Front Chem. 2021;9:653959. doi:10.3389/fchem.2021.653959

139.

Chen

C-H

Lin

Y-P

Ren

C-T

, et al. Enhancement of fucosylated N-glycan isomer separation with an ultrahigh column temperature in porous graphitic carbon liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry. J Chromatogr A. 2020;1632:461610. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chroma.2020.461610.

140.

Ruhaak

Zauner

Huhn

Bruggink

Deelder

Wuhrer

. Glycan labeling strategies and their use in identification and quantification. Anal Bioanal Chem. 2010;397(8):3457‐3481. doi:10.1007/s00216-010-3532-z

141.

Segu

Stone

Berdugo

Roberts

Doud

. A rapid method for relative quantification of N-glycans from a therapeutic monoclonal antibody during trastuzumab biosimilar development. MAbs. 2020;12(1):1750794. doi:10.1080/19420862.2020.1750794

142.

Campbell

Abrahams

Rapp

, et al. The minimum information required for a glycomics experiment (MIRAGE) project: LC guidelines. Glycobiology. 2019;29(5):349‐354. doi:10.1093/glycob/cwz009

143.

Palmisano

Melo-Braga

Engholm-Keller

Parker

Larsen

. Chemical deamidation: a common pitfall in large-scale N-linked glycoproteomic mass spectrometry-based analyses. J Proteome Res. 2012;11(3):1949‐1957. doi:10.1021/pr2011268

144.

Čaval

Tian

Yang

Clausen

Heck

AJR

. Direct quality control of glycoengineered erythropoietin variants. Nat Commun. 2018;9(1):3342. doi:10.1038/s41467-018-05536-3

145.

Lin

Franc

Heck

AJR

. Similar albeit not the same: in-depth analysis of proteoforms of human serum, bovine serum, and recombinant human fetuin. J Proteome Res. 2018;17(8):2861‐2869. doi:10.1021/acs.jproteome.8b00318

146.

Melani

Des Soye

Kafader

, et al. Next-generation serology by mass spectrometry: readout of the SARS-CoV-2 antibody repertoire. J Proteome Res. 2022;21(1):274‐288. doi:10.1021/acs.jproteome.1c00882

147.

Kafader

Melani

Durbin

, et al. Multiplexed mass spectrometry of individual ions improves measurement of proteoforms and their complexes. Nat Methods. 2020;17(4):391‐394. doi:10.1038/s41592-020-0764-5

148.

Wilson

Bilbao

Wang

, et al. Online hydrophilic interaction chromatography (HILIC) enhanced top-down mass spectrometry characterization of the SARS-CoV-2 spike receptor-binding domain. Anal Chem. 2022;94(15):5909‐5917. doi:10.1021/acs.analchem.2c00139

149.

Khilji

Goerdeler

Frensemeier

, et al. Generation of glycan-specific nanobodies. Cell Chem Biol. 2022;S2451-9456(22):00199‐4. doi:10.1016/j.chembiol.2022.05.007

150.

Versloot

RCA

Lucas

FLR

Yakovlieva

, et al. Quantification of protein glycosylation using nanopores. Nano Lett. 2022;22(13):5357‐5364. doi:10.1021/acs.nanolett.2c01338.

151.

Mund

Coscia

Kriston

, et al. Deep visual proteomics defines single-cell identity and heterogeneity. Nat Biotechnol. 2022;40(8):1231‐1240. doi:10.1038/s41587-022-01302-5

152.

Pace

Simmons

Kelly

Muddiman

. Multimodal mass spectrometry imaging of rat brain using IR-MALDESI and NanoPOTS-LC-MS/MS. J Proteome Res. 2022;21(3):713‐720. doi:10.1021/acs.jproteome.1c00641.

153.

Wang

Huang

, et al. Boost-DiLeu: enhanced isobaric N,N-dimethyl leucine tagging strategy for a comprehensive quantitative glycoproteomic analysis. Anal Chem. 2022. doi:10.1021/acs.analchem.2c01773

154.

Sharman

Patterson

Weiss

, et al. Rapid multivariate analysis approach to explore differential spatial protein profiles in tissue. J Proteome Res. 2022. doi:10.1021/acs.jproteome.2c00206

155.

McGee

Durbin

, et al. Highly multiplexed, label-free proteoform imaging of tissues by individual ion mass spectrometry. Sci Adv. 2022;8(32):eabp9929. doi:10.1126/sciadv.abp9929.

156.

Zhou

Lih

Yang

, et al. An integrated workflow for global, glyco-, and phospho-proteomic analysis of tumor tissues. Anal Chem. 2020;92(2):1842‐1849. doi:10.1021/acs.analchem.9b03753

157.

Mariethoz

Alocci

Gastaldello

, et al. Glycomics@ExPASy: Bridging the gap. Mol Cell Proteomics. 2018;17(11):2164‐2176. doi:10.1074/mcp.RA118.000799

158.

Alocci

Mariethoz

Gastaldello

, et al. Glyconnect: glycoproteomics goes visual. Interactive, and Analytical. J Proteome Res. 2019;18(2):664‐677. doi:10.1021/acs.jproteome.8b00766

159.

York

Mazumder

Ranzinger

, et al. Glygen: computational and informatics resources for glycoscience. Glycobiology. 2020;30(2):72‐73. doi:10.1093/glycob/cwz080

160.

Yamada

Shiota

Shinmachi

, et al. The GlyCosmos portal: a unified and comprehensive web resource for the glycosciences. Nat Methods. 2020;17(7):649‐650. doi:10.1038/s41592-020-0879-8

161.

Dworkin

Clausen

Joshi

. Applying transcriptomics to study glycosylation at the cell type level. iScience. 2022;25(6):104419. doi:10.1016/j.isci.2022.104419

162.

Greco

Malacarne

De Girardi

, et al. Disrupting N-glycan expression on tumor cells boosts chimeric antigen receptor T cell efficacy against solid malignancies. S Transl Med. 2022;14(628):eabg3072. doi:doi:10.1126/scitranslmed.abg3072.

163.

Raglow

McKenna

Bonifant

, et al. Targeting glycans for CAR therapy: the advent of sweet CARs. Mol Ther. 2022;30(9):2881‐2890. doi:10.1016/j.ymthe.2022.07.006