4.7 Article

Discovery of Novel Bladder Cancer Biomarkers by Comparative Urine Proteomics Using iTRAQ Technology

Journal

JOURNAL OF PROTEOME RESEARCH
Volume 9, Issue 11, Pages 5803-5815

Publisher

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/pr100576x

Keywords

urine proteome; iTRAQ; bladder cancer; biomarkers; apolipoprotein; heparin cofactor 2 precursor; peroxiredoxin-2

Funding

  1. Ministry of Education of Taiwan, Republic of China [EMRPD160631, EMRPD170191]
  2. Chang Gong Memorial Hospital [CMRPG371251, CMRPG371252]
  3. National Science Council of Taiwan, Republic of China [NSC96-2320-B-182-031-MY3]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A urine sample preparation workflow for the iTRAQ (isobaric tag for relative and absolute quantitation) technique was established. The reproducibility of this platform was evaluated and applied to discover proteins with differential levels between pooled urine samples from nontumor controls and three bladder cancer patient subgroups with different grades/stages (a total of 14 controls and 23 cancer cases in two multiplex iTRAQ runs). Combining the results of two independent clinical sample sets, a total of 638 urine proteins were identified. Among them, 55 proteins consistently showed >2-fold differences in both sample sets. Western blot analyses of individual urine samples confirmed that the levels of apolipoprotein A-I (APOA1), apolipoprotein A-II, heparin cofactor 2 precursor and peroxiredoxin-2 were significantly elevated in bladder cancer urine specimens (n = 25-74). Finally, we quantified APOA1 in a number of urine samples using a commercial ELISA and confirmed again its potential value for diagnosis (n = 126, 94.6% sensitivity and 92.0% specificity at a cutoff value of 11.16 ng/mL) and early detection (n = 71, 83.8% sensitivity and 94.0% specificity). Collectively, our results provide the first iTRAQ-based quantitative profile of bladder cancer urine proteins and represent a valuable resource for the discovery of bladder cancer markers.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available