4.7 Review

Deciphering the disease-related molecular networks using urine proteomics

期刊

TRAC-TRENDS IN ANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY
卷 94, 期 -, 页码 200-209

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.trac.2017.07.018

关键词

Protein profiling; Bioinformatics; Cancer; Cardiovascular diseases; Autoimmune; Inflammation

资金

  1. Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology (FCT)
  2. European Union
  3. QREN
  4. FEDER
  5. COMPETE [UID/BIM/04501/2013, UID/IC/00051/2013, PEst-C/QUI/UI0062/2013, BM1305, IF/00286/2015]
  6. DOCnet [NORTE-01-0145-FEDER-000003]
  7. Norte Portugal Regional Operational Programme (NORTE), under PORTUGAL through European Regional Development Fund (ERDF)
  8. NETDIAMOND [POCI-01-0145-FEDER-016385]
  9. European Structural and Investment Funds
  10. PFCT
  11. European Commission [FP7-Health-2010, MEDIA-261409]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Despite the large number of studies focused on the impact of diseases on urine proteome, few outputs with clinical meaning were retrieved so far. The goal of this study was to identify the biological processes modulated in urine by distinct diseases to better understand disease pathogenesis and to identify urinary proteins with potential diagnosis value. We searched PubMed and SCOPUS databases for mass spectrometry-based experimental papers and pooled differentially expressed proteins by disease and target organic system. A total of 2572 differentially expressed proteins or peptides were pooled from 89 studies focused on 57 diseases. Data analysis highlighted inflammation as a biological process modulated by all diseases. However, specific inflammatory signatures are associated with specific diseases and/or aetiologies. Moreover, specific biological processes were identified for specific groups of pathologies and unique proteins identified. Overall, integrative data analysis from urine proteomics/peptidomics reinforces the clinical potential of this body fluid for the clinical management of distinct diseases. (C) 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据