4.7 Review

Urine in Clinical Proteomics

Journal

MOLECULAR & CELLULAR PROTEOMICS
Volume 7, Issue 10, Pages 1850-1862

Publisher

AMER SOC BIOCHEMISTRY MOLECULAR BIOLOGY INC
DOI: 10.1074/mcp.R800001-MCP200

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. CNRS, the Genopole Toulouse Midi-Pyrenees, Agence Nationale pour la Recherche [ANR-07-PHYSIO-004-01]
  2. Fondation pour la Recherche Medicale
  3. EUROTRANS-BIO [ETB-2006-016]
  4. European Union funding through InGenious HyperCare [LSHM-C7-2006-037093]
  5. PREDICTIONS [1272568]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Urine has become one of the most attractive biofluids in clinical proteomics as it can be obtained non-invasively in large quantities and is stable compared with other biofluids. The urinary proteome has been studied by almost any proteomics technology, but mass spectrometry-based urinary protein and peptide profiling has emerged as most suitable for clinical application. After a period of descriptive urinary proteomics the field is moving out of the discovery phase into an era of validation of urinary biomarkers in larger prospective studies. Although mainly due to the site of production of urine, the majority of these studies apply to the kidney and the urinary tract, but recent data show that analysis of the urinary proteome can also be highly informative on non-urogenital diseases and used in their classification. Despite this progress in urinary biomarker discovery, the contribution of urinary proteomics to the understanding of the pathophysiology of disease upon analysis of the urinary proteome is still modest mainly because of problems associated to sequence identification of the biomarkers. Until now, research has focused on the highly abundant urinary proteins and peptides, but analysis of the less abundant and naturally existing urinary proteins and peptides still remains a challenge. In conclusion, urine has evolved as one of the most attractive body fluids in clinical proteomics with potentially a rapid application in the clinic. Molecular & Cellular Proteomics 7: 1850-1862, 2008.

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