| Literature DB >> 34926578 |
Yiyang Shu1,2,3,4,5, Min Gao1,2,3,4,5, Yifan Zhou6, Haiyun Liu1,2,3,4,5, Xiaodong Sun1,2,3,4,5.
Abstract
Objectives: There have been reports of unexplained visual loss following intra-ocular silicone oil (SiO) tamponade in retinal detachment patients, yet the underlying mechanism is unknown. The aim of this study was to investigate the mechanisms behind retinal toxicity following intra-ocular SiO tamponade in retinal detachment patients. Methods andEntities:
Keywords: data-independent acquisition (DIA); quantitative proteomics; rhegmatogenous retinal detachment (RRD); silicone oil; vitreous
Year: 2021 PMID: 34926578 PMCID: PMC8678117 DOI: 10.3389/fmolb.2021.763002
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Mol Biosci ISSN: 2296-889X
Demographics and clinical characteristics of the study population.
| Demographics and clinical characteristics | SO | FA | ERM | RD |
| FA-ELISA | SO-ELISA |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |||
| Sex, | ||||||||
| Males | 1 (33.3) | 2 (66.7) | 2 (66.7) | 2 (66.7) | 2 (40.0) | 4 (40.0) | ||
| Females | 2 (66.7) | 1 (33.3) | 1 (33.3) | 1 (33.3) | 1.0a | 3 (60.0) | 6 (60.0) | 1.0a |
| Age, Y | ||||||||
| Median (range) | 71 (60–77) | 66 (60–70) | 64 (58–69) | 61 (55–68) | 0.305# | 64 (52–70) | 62 (52–72) | 0.728″ |
| PVR grade | ||||||||
| A | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | |||
| B | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
p-value was calculated by #Kruskal-Wallis H test, aChi-square test or ″Independent-samples T test.
SO, SO removal after successful retinal reattachment; FA, cataract surgery after successful retinal reattachment with sterilized air tamponade; ERM, PPV for epiretinal membrane; RD, PPV for rhegmatogenous retinal detachment; FA-ELISA, FA group for ELISA; SO-ELISA, SO group for ELISA; N, number; Y, years.
FIGURE 1(A) The number of protein groups in the four groups. (B) Quantitative heatmap of data-independent acquisition.
FIGURE 2Quality control of data-independent acquisition. (A) Average data points per peak: the average data points per peak was 8.1, which met the requirements of the quantitative analysis. (B) Column peak capacity statistics: the x-axis presents the order of the samples, the green line details the data of all peptides, and the red one details the data of the iRT internal standard. Peak capacity represented the separation and analysis capability of the column. The average peak capacity was 409.8, indicating better separation and analysis. (C) Elution time of iRT peptide segment: the main iRTs were detected, and the retention time was generally stable. (D) Chart of principal component analysis (PCA). Detected changes in the protein shown in PCA plots could well explain the differences in this experiment. (E) Protein false discovery rate (FDR) distribution data. The qualitative results are highly reliable under the FDR 0.01 standard. (F) CV distribution of QC samples. The median CV of the QC sample was 15.1%, indicating the high stability of the experimental process.
The number of differentially expressed proteins in each group.
| Comparisons | Up- | Down- | All- |
|---|---|---|---|
| SO | 10 | 33 | 43 |
| SO | 20 | 100 | 120 |
| RD | 32 | 68 | 100 |
| FA | 5 | 36 | 41 |
Comparisons, differential comparison group; Up-, upregulated differentially expressed proteins; Down-, downregulated differentially expressed proteins; All-, all differentially expressed proteins; SO vs. FA, the SO group compared to the FA group; SO vs. ERM, the SO group compared to the ERM group; RD vs. ERM, the RD group compared to the ERM group; FA vs. ERM, the FA group compared to the ERM group.
FIGURE 3Differential protein clusters. (A) SO vs. ERM. (B) SO vs. FA. (C) The overlapping changes between four groups of RD, ERM, FA, and SO.
FIGURE 4Gene Ontology and Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes analyses. (A, B) SO vs. FA. (C, D) SO vs. ERM.
FIGURE 5The protein–protein interaction network for differentially expressed proteins in SO vs. ERM, predicted by STRING 11.0 set to high confidence (0.70), organism (Homo sapiens), that is based on interaction evidence. The protein–protein interaction network was grouped into 11 relevant protein clusters using the Markov Cluster Algorithm (inflation parameter, 3) clustering option provided by STRING.
FIGURE 6Box plots showing TF levels. To validate the finding, TF was measured with ELISA in Ten SO group and 5 FA group that were matched according to age and sex. TF was significantly downregulated in SO eyes relative to FA eyes (p-value = 0.002, independent-samples t-test; n = 15).