Different techniques for urinary protein analysis of normal and lung cancer patients.
Author(s): Tantipaiboonwong P, Sinchaikul S, Sriyam S, Phutrakul S, Chen S T
Publication: Proteomics, 2005, Vol. 5, Page 1140
PubMed ID: 15693063 PubMed Review Paper? No
Purpose of Paper
Conclusion of Paper
Studies
-
Study Purpose
The purpose of this paper was to compare the proteomics of urine prepared by gel filtration followed by ultrafiltration or one of four precipitation methods using three analytical platforms: high-performance liquid chromatography, sodium dodecyl sulfate-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (SDS-PAGE), and two-dimensional (2D) gel electrophoresis.
Summary of Findings:
Urine purification via ultrafiltration, acetone or ACN/TFA precipitation yielded similar results, while methanol/chloroform/water and TC/acetone precipitation yielded fewer protein peaks, as determined by RP-HPLC. Urine specimens from healthy and lung cancer patients had distinct protein profiles. SDS-PAGE analysis of differentially prepared urine specimens yielded similar results, although diagnosis-specific differences in protein bands were observed. Results of 2-DE analysis were superior with samples purified by ultrafiltration. Urine specimens subjected to sequential gel filtration and ultrafiltration yielded a number of differentially expressed proteins smaller than 30 kDa among healthy and lung cancer patients; nine of these differentially expressed spots were identified via MS analysis.
Biospecimens
Preservative Types
- Frozen
Diagnoses:
- Normal
- Neoplastic - Carcinoma
Platform:
Analyte Technology Platform Protein 1D/2D gels Protein LC-MS or LC-MS/MS Protein MALDI-TOF MS Protein HPLC Pre-analytical Factors:
Classification Pre-analytical Factor Value(s) Analyte Extraction and Purification Analyte isolation method Ultrafiltration
Acetone precipitation
Acetonitrile/trifluoroacetic acid precipitation
Methanol/water/chloroform precipitation
Trichloroacetic acid/acetone precipitation
1D/2D gels Specific Technology platform SDS-PAGE
2D gel