4.6 Article

Identification of galectin-7 as a potential biomarker for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma by proteomic analysis

Journal

BMC CANCER
Volume 10, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/1471-2407-10-290

Keywords

-

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) is one of the most common malignancies. Early diagnosis is critical for guiding the therapeutic management of ESCC. It is imperative to find more effective biomarkers of ESCC. Methods: To identify novel biomarkers for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC), specimens from 10 patients with ESCC were subjected to a comparative proteomic analysis. The proteomic patterns of ESCC samples and normal esophageal epithelial tissues (NEETs) were compared using two-dimensional gel electrophoresis. And differentially expressed proteins were identified using MALDI-TOF-MS/MS. For further identification of protein in selected spot, western blotting and immunohistochemistry were employed. Results: Twelve proteins were up-regulated and fifteen proteins were down-regulated in the ESCC samples compared with the NEET samples. Up-regulation of galectin-7 was further confirmed by western blotting and immunohistochemistry. Furthermore, immunohistochemical staining of galectin-7 was performed on a tissue microarray containing ESCC samples (n = 50) and NEET samples (n = 10). The expression levels of galectin-7 were markedly higher in the ESCC samples than in the NEET samples (P = 0.012). In addition, tissue microarray analysis also showed that the expression level of galectin-7 was related to the differentiation of ESCC. Conclusions: The present proteomics analysis revealed that galectin-7 was highly expressed in ESCC tissues. The alteration in the expression of galectin-7 was confirmed using a tissue microarray. These findings suggest that galectin-7 could be used as a potential biomarker for ESCC.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available