4.5 Article

Monitoring of circulating amino acids in patients with pancreatic cancer and cancer cachexia using capillary electrophoresis and contactless conductivity detection

Journal

ELECTROPHORESIS
Volume 42, Issue 19, Pages 1885-1891

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/elps.202100174

Keywords

Branched chain amino acids; Cancer cachexia; Capillary electrophoresis; Contactless conductivity detection; Insulin

Funding

  1. Ministry of Health of the Czech Republic [AZV NU19-01-00101]
  2. Charles University [260 531/SVV/2020, PROGRES Q36]
  3. AstraZeneca

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In this study, capillary electrophoresis with contactless conductivity detection was used to determine branched chain amino acids, alanine and glutamine in human plasma. Patients with pancreatic cancer and cancer cachexia syndrome were found to have lower levels of circulating BCAAs and glutamine, as well as the loss of their insulin-dependent suppression.
Branched chain amino acids (BCAAs), alanine and glutamine are determined in human plasma by capillary electrophoresis with contactless conductivity detection (CE/(CD)-D-4). The baseline separation of five amino acids from other plasma components is achieved on the short capillary effective length of 18 cm in 3.2 mol/L acetic acid with addition of 13% v/v methanol as background electrolyte. Migration times range from 2.01 min for valine to 2.84 min for glutamine, and LODs for untreated plasma are in the interval 0.7-0.9 mu mol/L. Sample treatment is based on the addition of acetonitrile to only 15 mu L of plasma and supernatant is directly subjected to CE/(CD)-D-4. Circulating amino acids are measured in patients with pancreatic cancer and cancer cachexia during oral glucose tolerance test. It is shown that patients with pancreatic cancer and cancer cachexia syndrome exhibit low basal circulating BCAAs and glutamine levels and loss of their insulin-dependent suppression.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available