OBJECTIVE: To investigate protein expression in prostate cancer using 2-dimensional gel electrophoresis (2-DE) and mass spectrometry. STUDY DESIGN: Cells were collected from 29 peripheral zone tumors and from benign tissue by scraping cut surfaces of radical prostatectomy specimens. Samples were suspended in a medium with protease inhibitors and prepared for 2-DE. Gels were analyzed, and protein spots that differed quantitatively between tumor and benign tissue were identified via mass spectrometric fingerprinting of tryptic fragments and tandem mass spectrometry sequence analysis. RESULTS: In total, 63 spots differed between cancer and benign samples (p < 0.01); 56 were overexpressed (> 1.5 fold) in cancer and 7 underexpressed (< 0.6 fold). Among overexpressed proteins were transcription factors (nucleoside diphosphate kinase 1) and enzymes involved in gene silencing (chromobox protein), protein synthesis (39S ribosomal protein L12, BiP protein, protein disulfide isomerase), degradation (cytosol aminopeptidase, endopeptidase Clp, inorganic pyrophosphatase) and energy metabolism (acyl-CoA dehydrogenase, isocitrate dehydrogenase, NADH-ubiquinone oxidoreductase, pyruvate dehydrogenase), heat-shock proteins (60 and 70 kd), structural proteins (cytokeratins) and membrane proteins (stomatinlike protein 2). CONCLUSION: The protein profile of prostate cancer differs from that of benign tissue. Several potential target proteins for detection or evaluation of prognosis in prostate cancer were identified.
OBJECTIVE: To investigate protein expression in prostate cancer using 2-dimensional gel electrophoresis (2-DE) and mass spectrometry. STUDY DESIGN: Cells were collected from 29 peripheral zone tumors and from benign tissue by scraping cut surfaces of radical prostatectomy specimens. Samples were suspended in a medium with protease inhibitors and prepared for 2-DE. Gels were analyzed, and protein spots that differed quantitatively between tumor and benign tissue were identified via mass spectrometric fingerprinting of tryptic fragments and tandem mass spectrometry sequence analysis. RESULTS: In total, 63 spots differed between cancer and benign samples (p < 0.01); 56 were overexpressed (> 1.5 fold) in cancer and 7 underexpressed (< 0.6 fold). Among overexpressed proteins were transcription factors (nucleoside diphosphate kinase 1) and enzymes involved in gene silencing (chromobox protein), protein synthesis (39S ribosomal protein L12, BiP protein, protein disulfide isomerase), degradation (cytosol aminopeptidase, endopeptidase Clp, inorganic pyrophosphatase) and energy metabolism (acyl-CoA dehydrogenase, isocitrate dehydrogenase, NADH-ubiquinone oxidoreductase, pyruvate dehydrogenase), heat-shock proteins (60 and 70 kd), structural proteins (cytokeratins) and membrane proteins (stomatinlike protein 2). CONCLUSION: The protein profile of prostate cancer differs from that of benign tissue. Several potential target proteins for detection or evaluation of prognosis in prostate cancer were identified.
Authors: Paweena Kreunin; Chul Yoo; Virginia Urquidi; David M Lubman; Steve Goodison Journal: Cancer Genomics Proteomics Date: 2007 Sep-Oct Impact factor: 4.069
Authors: Runsheng Li; Yan Guo; Bang Ming Han; Xiaowei Yan; Angelita G Utleg; Wei Li; Lan Chun Tu; Jian Wang; Leroy Hood; Shujie Xia; Biaoyang Lin Journal: Proteomics Clin Appl Date: 2008-04-01 Impact factor: 3.494
Authors: Dominik A Megger; Thilo Bracht; Michael Kohl; Maike Ahrens; Wael Naboulsi; Frank Weber; Andreas-Claudius Hoffmann; Christian Stephan; Katja Kuhlmann; Martin Eisenacher; Jörg F Schlaak; Hideo A Baba; Helmut E Meyer; Barbara Sitek Journal: Mol Cell Proteomics Date: 2013-03-05 Impact factor: 5.911