PURPOSE: To compare vitreous biopsy methods using analysis platforms used in proteomics biomarker discovery. METHODS: Vitreous biopsies from 10 eyes were collected sequentially using a 23-gauge needle and a 23-gauge vitreous cutter instrument. Paired specimens were evaluated by UV absorbance spectroscopy, sodium dodecyl sulfate-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis, and liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS). RESULTS: The total protein concentration obtained with a needle and vitrectomy instrument biopsy averaged 1.10 mg/mL (standard error of the mean = 0.35) and 1.13 mg/mL (standard error of the mean = 0.25), respectively. In eight eyes with low or medium viscidity, there was a very high correlation (R = 0.934) between the biopsy methods. When data from 2 eyes with high viscidity vitreous were included, the correlation was reduced (R = 0.704). The molecular weight protein sodium dodecyl sulfate-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis profiles of paired needle and vitreous cutter samples were similar, except for a minority of pairs with single band intensity variance. Using LC-MS/MS, equivalent peptides were identified with similar frequencies (R ≥ 0.90) in paired samples. CONCLUSION: Proteins and peptides collected from vitreous needle biopsies are nearly equivalent to those obtained from a vitreous cutter instrument. This study suggests both techniques may be used for most proteomic and biomarker discovery studies of vitreoretinal diseases, although a minority of proteins and peptides may differ in concentration.
PURPOSE: To compare vitreous biopsy methods using analysis platforms used in proteomics biomarker discovery. METHODS: Vitreous biopsies from 10 eyes were collected sequentially using a 23-gauge needle and a 23-gauge vitreous cutter instrument. Paired specimens were evaluated by UV absorbance spectroscopy, sodium dodecyl sulfate-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis, and liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS). RESULTS: The total protein concentration obtained with a needle and vitrectomy instrument biopsy averaged 1.10 mg/mL (standard error of the mean = 0.35) and 1.13 mg/mL (standard error of the mean = 0.25), respectively. In eight eyes with low or medium viscidity, there was a very high correlation (R = 0.934) between the biopsy methods. When data from 2 eyes with high viscidity vitreous were included, the correlation was reduced (R = 0.704). The molecular weight protein sodium dodecyl sulfate-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis profiles of paired needle and vitreous cutter samples were similar, except for a minority of pairs with single band intensity variance. Using LC-MS/MS, equivalent peptides were identified with similar frequencies (R ≥ 0.90) in paired samples. CONCLUSION: Proteins and peptides collected from vitreous needle biopsies are nearly equivalent to those obtained from a vitreous cutter instrument. This study suggests both techniques may be used for most proteomic and biomarker discovery studies of vitreoretinal diseases, although a minority of proteins and peptides may differ in concentration.
Authors: Saloni Walia; Allen C Clermont; Ben-Bo Gao; Lloyd Paul Aiello; Edward P Feener Journal: Semin Ophthalmol Date: 2010 Sep-Nov Impact factor: 1.975
Authors: Thiago Cabral; Marcus A Toral; Gabriel Velez; James E DiCarlo; Anuradha M Gore; MaryAnn Mahajan; Stephen H Tsang; Alexander G Bassuk; Vinit B Mahajan Journal: J Vis Exp Date: 2017-11-12 Impact factor: 1.355
Authors: Devon H Ghodasra; Ryan Fante; Thomas W Gardner; Michael Langue; Leslie M Niziol; Cagri Besirli; Steven R Cohen; Vaidehi S Dedania; Hakan Demirci; Nieraj Jain; K Thiran Jayasundera; Mark W Johnson; Partho S Kalyani; Rajesh C Rao; David N Zacks; Jeffrey M Sundstrom Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2016-06-01 Impact factor: 4.799
Authors: Lucy P Evans; Elizabeth A Newell; MaryAnn Mahajan; Stephen H Tsang; Polly J Ferguson; Jolonda Mahoney; Christopher D Hue; Edward W Vogel; Barclay Morrison; Ottavio Arancio; Russell Nichols; Alexander G Bassuk; Vinit B Mahajan Journal: Ann Clin Transl Neurol Date: 2018-02-26 Impact factor: 4.511
Authors: Gabriel Velez; Peter H Tang; Thiago Cabral; Galaxy Y Cho; Daniel A Machlab; Stephen H Tsang; Alexander G Bassuk; Vinit B Mahajan Journal: Transl Vis Sci Technol Date: 2018-09-26 Impact factor: 3.283
Authors: Rodolfo Mastropasqua; Emma Di Carlo; Carlo Sorrentino; Cesare Mariotti; Lyndon da Cruz Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2019-10-19 Impact factor: 4.241