Literature DB >> 15693063

Different techniques for urinary protein analysis of normal and lung cancer patients.

Payungsak Tantipaiboonwong1, Supachok Sinchaikul, Supawadee Sriyam, Suree Phutrakul, Shui-Tein Chen.   

Abstract

Many components in urine are useful in clinical diagnosis and urinary proteins are known as important components to define many diseases such as proteinuria, kidney, bladder and urinary tract diseases. In this study, we focused on the comparison of different sample preparation methods for isolating urinary proteins prior to protein analysis of pooled healthy and lung cancer patient samples. Selective method was used for preliminary investigation of some putative urinary protein markers. Urine samples were passed first through a gel filtration column (PD-10 desalting column) to remove high salts and subsequently concentrated. Remaining interferences were removed by ultrafiltration or four precipitation methods. The analysis of urinary proteins by high-performance liquid chromatography and sodium dodecyl sulfate-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis showed many similarities in profiles among preparation methods and a few profiles were different between normal and lung cancer patients. In contrast, the results of two-dimensional gel electrophoresis (2-DE) showed more distinctly different protein patterns. Our finding showed that the sequential preparation of urinary proteins by gel filtration and ultrafiltration could retain most urinary proteins which demonstrated the highest protein spots on 2-D gels and able to identify preliminary urinary protein markers related to cancer. Although sequential preparation of urine samples by gel filtration and protein precipitation resulted in low amounts of proteins on 2-D gels, high Mr proteins were easily detected. Therefore, there are alternative choices for urine sample preparation for studying the urinary proteome and identifying urinary protein markers important for further preclinical diagnostic and therapeutic applications.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15693063     DOI: 10.1002/pmic.200401143

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Proteomics        ISSN: 1615-9853            Impact factor:   3.984


  29 in total

Review 1.  Urine collection and processing for protein biomarker discovery and quantification.

Authors:  C Eric Thomas; Wade Sexton; Kaaron Benson; Rebecca Sutphen; John Koomen
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2010-03-23       Impact factor: 4.254

2.  Biospecimen reporting for improved study quality (BRISQ).

Authors:  Helen M Moore; Andrea B Kelly; Scott D Jewell; Lisa M McShane; Douglas P Clark; Renata Greenspan; Daniel F Hayes; Pierre Hainaut; Paula Kim; Elizabeth Mansfield; Olga Potapova; Peter Riegman; Yaffa Rubinstein; Edward Seijo; Stella Somiari; Peter Watson; Heinz-Ulrich Weier; Claire Zhu; Jim Vaught
Journal:  J Proteome Res       Date:  2011-06-21       Impact factor: 4.466

3.  Biospecimen Reporting for Improved Study Quality.

Authors:  Helen M Moore; Andrea Kelly; Scott D Jewell; Lisa M McShane; Douglas P Clark; Renata Greenspan; Pierre Hainaut; Daniel F Hayes; Paula Kim; Elizabeth Mansfield; Olga Potapova; Peter Riegman; Yaffa Rubinstein; Edward Seijo; Stella Somiari; Peter Watson; Heinz-Ulrich Weier; Claire Zhu; Jim Vaught
Journal:  Biopreserv Biobank       Date:  2011-04       Impact factor: 2.300

Review 4.  Molecular diagnostic trends in urological cancer: biomarkers for non-invasive diagnosis.

Authors:  V Urquidi; C J Rosser; S Goodison
Journal:  Curr Med Chem       Date:  2012       Impact factor: 4.530

Review 5.  Contributions of immunoaffinity chromatography to deep proteome profiling of human biofluids.

Authors:  Chaochao Wu; Jicheng Duan; Tao Liu; Richard D Smith; Wei-Jun Qian
Journal:  J Chromatogr B Analyt Technol Biomed Life Sci       Date:  2016-01-12       Impact factor: 3.205

6.  Urinary glycoprotein biomarker discovery for bladder cancer detection using LC/MS-MS and label-free quantification.

Authors:  Na Yang; Shun Feng; Kerby Shedden; Xiaolei Xie; Yashu Liu; Charles J Rosser; David M Lubman; Steven Goodison
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2011-04-01       Impact factor: 12.531

Review 7.  Current peptidomics: applications, purification, identification, quantification, and functional analysis.

Authors:  David C Dallas; Andres Guerrero; Evan A Parker; Randall C Robinson; Junai Gan; J Bruce German; Daniela Barile; Carlito B Lebrilla
Journal:  Proteomics       Date:  2015-01-21       Impact factor: 3.984

8.  Optimizing sample handling for urinary proteomics.

Authors:  Richard S Lee; Flavio Monigatti; Andrew C Briscoe; Zachary Waldon; Michael R Freeman; Hanno Steen
Journal:  J Proteome Res       Date:  2008-07-29       Impact factor: 4.466

9.  Patients with ovarian carcinoma excrete different altered levels of urine CD59, kininogen-1 and fragments of inter-alpha-trypsin inhibitor heavy chain H4 and albumin.

Authors:  Siti S Abdullah-Soheimi; Boon-Kiong Lim; Onn H Hashim; Adawiyah S Shuib
Journal:  Proteome Sci       Date:  2010-11-17       Impact factor: 2.480

Review 10.  Urinary proteomic profiling for diagnostic bladder cancer biomarkers.

Authors:  Steve Goodison; Charles J Rosser; Virginia Urquidi
Journal:  Expert Rev Proteomics       Date:  2009-10       Impact factor: 3.940

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.