Literature DB >> 12096109

Proteomic strategies to reveal tumor heterogeneity among urothelial papillomas.

Julio E Celis1, Pamela Celis, Hildur Palsdottir, Morten Østergaard, Pavel Gromov, Hanne Primdahl, Torben F Ørntoft, Hans Wolf, Ariana Celis, Irina Gromova.   

Abstract

Proteomics and immunohistochemistry were used to reveal tumor heterogeneity among urothelial papillomas (UPs) with the long term goal of predicting their biological potential in terms of outcome. First, we identified proteins that were deregulated in invasive fresh lesions as compared with normal urothelium, and thereafter we immunostained UPs with a panel of antibodies against some of the markers. Twenty-two major proteins showing variations of 2-fold or more in at least one-third of the invasive lesions were selected. Specific antibodies against several of the proteins were obtained, but only a few reacted positively in immunostaining. A panel consisting of antibodies against keratinocytes (CKs) 5, 13, 18, and 20 and markers of squamous metaplasia (CKs 7, 8, and 14) was used to probe normal urothelium and 30 UPs collected during a period of five years. Four UPs showed a normal phenotype, whereas the rest could be grouped in five major types that shared aberrant staining with the CK20 antibody. Type 1 heterogeneity (n = 4) showed preferred staining of the umbrella cells with the CK8 antibody. Type 2 (n = 11) was typified by the staining of the basal and intermediate layers with the CK20 antibody. Type 3 (n = 7) was characterized by the predominant staining of the basal cell layer with the CK5 antibody. Type 4 (n = 1) showed areas of CK7 negative cells, whereas type 5 (n = 3) showed loss of staining of the basal cells with the CK20. 29% of the patients experienced recurrences, but none progressed to invasive disease. Patients harboring phenotypic alterations in the basal cell compartment (types 3 and 5) showed the highest number of recurrences (4/7 and 2/3, respectively), and all type 3 lesions progressed to a higher degree of dedifferentiation. Even though a long term prospective study involving a larger sample size is required to assess the biological potential of these lesions, we believe that this approach will prove instrumental for revealing early phenotypic changes in different types of cancer.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12096109     DOI: 10.1074/mcp.m100031-mcp200

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Mol Cell Proteomics        ISSN: 1535-9476            Impact factor:   5.911


  8 in total

1.  Protein identification: the origins of peptide mass fingerprinting.

Authors:  William J Henzel; Colin Watanabe; John T Stults
Journal:  J Am Soc Mass Spectrom       Date:  2003-09       Impact factor: 3.109

2.  Clinical proteomics: present and future prospects.

Authors:  Nicole M Verrills
Journal:  Clin Biochem Rev       Date:  2006-05

Review 3.  Proteomic technology for biomarker profiling in cancer: an update.

Authors:  Moulay A Alaoui-Jamali; Ying-jie Xu
Journal:  J Zhejiang Univ Sci B       Date:  2006-06       Impact factor: 3.066

4.  Bladder cancer-associated protein, a potential prognostic biomarker in human bladder cancer.

Authors:  José M A Moreira; Gita Ohlsson; Pavel Gromov; Ronald Simon; Guido Sauter; Julio E Celis; Irina Gromova
Journal:  Mol Cell Proteomics       Date:  2009-09-25       Impact factor: 5.911

Review 5.  Challenges of using mass spectrometry as a bladder cancer biomarker discovery platform.

Authors:  Eric Schiffer; Harald Mischak; Dan Theodorescu; Antonia Vlahou
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2008-01-04       Impact factor: 4.226

6.  Spatially-Resolved Top-down Proteomics Bridged to MALDI MS Imaging Reveals the Molecular Physiome of Brain Regions.

Authors:  Vivian Delcourt; Julien Franck; Jusal Quanico; Jean-Pascal Gimeno; Maxence Wisztorski; Antonella Raffo-Romero; Firas Kobeissy; Xavier Roucou; Michel Salzet; Isabelle Fournier
Journal:  Mol Cell Proteomics       Date:  2017-11-09       Impact factor: 5.911

7.  Immunoexpression analysis and prognostic value of BLCAP in breast cancer.

Authors:  Irina Gromova; Pavel Gromov; Niels Kroman; Vera Timmermans Wielenga; Ronald Simon; Guido Sauter; José M A Moreira
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-09-25       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Does phosphorylation of cofilin affect the progression of human bladder cancer?

Authors:  Hong Chung; Bokyung Kim; Seung-Hyo Jung; Kyung-Jong Won; Xiaowen Jiang; Chang-Kwon Lee; So Dug Lim; Sang-Kuk Yang; Ki Hak Song; Hong Sup Kim
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2013-02-01       Impact factor: 4.430

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.