Mass spectrometry is being used to find disease-related patterns in mixtures of proteins derived from biological fluids. Questions have been raised about the reproducibility and reliability of peak quantifications using this technology. We collected nipple aspirate fluid from breast cancer patients and healthy women, pooled them into a quality control sample, and produced 24 replicate SELDI spectra. We developed a novel algorithm to process the spectra, denoising with the undecimated discrete wavelet transform (UDWT), and evaluated it for consistency and reproducibility. UDWT efficiently decomposes spectra into noise and signal. The noise is consistent and uncorrelated. Baseline correction produces isolated peak clusters separated by flat regions. Our method reproducibly detects more peaks than the method implemented in Ciphergen software. After normalization and log transformation, the mean coefficient of variation of peak heights is 10.6%. Our method to process spectra provides improvements over existing methods. Denoising using the UDWT appears to be an important step toward obtaining results that are more accurate. It improves the reproducibility of quantifications and supplies tools for investigation of the variations in the technology more carefully. Further study will be required, because we do not have a gold standard providing an objective assessment of which peaks are present in the samples.

MOTIVATION: There has been much interest in using patterns derived from surface-enhanced laser desorption and ionization (SELDI) protein mass spectra from serum to differentiate samples from patients both with and without disease. Such patterns have been used without identification of the underlying proteins responsible. However, there are questions as to the stability of this procedure over multiple experiments. RESULTS: We compared SELDI proteomic spectra from serum from three experiments by the same group on separating ovarian cancer from normal tissue. These spectra are available on the web at http://clinicalproteomics.steem.com. In general, the results were not reproducible across experiments. Baseline correction prevents reproduction of the results for two of the experiments. In one experiment, there is evidence of a major shift in protocol mid-experiment which could bias the results. In another, structure in the noise regions of the spectra allows us to distinguish normal from cancer, suggesting that the normals and cancers were processed differently. Sets of features found to discriminate well in one experiment do not generalize to other experiments. Finally, the mass calibration in all three experiments appears suspect. Taken together, these and other concerns suggest that much of the structure uncovered in these experiments could be due to artifacts of sample processing, not to the underlying biology of cancer. We provide some guidelines for design and analysis in experiments like these to ensure better reproducible, biologically meaningfully results. AVAILABILITY: The MATLAB and Perl code used in our analyses is available at http://bioinformatics.mdanderson.org