4.7 Article

Proteomic patterns established with capillary electrophoresis and mass spectrometry for diagnostic purposes

期刊

KIDNEY INTERNATIONAL
卷 65, 期 6, 页码 2426-2434

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1111/j.1523-1755.2004.00659.x

关键词

proteomics; nephritis; capillary electrophoresis-mass spectometry

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background. Proteomics applied in large scale may provide a useful diagnostic tool. Methods. We developed an online combination of capillary electrophoresis with mass spectrometry, allowing fast and sensitive evaluation of polypeptides found in body fluids. Utilizing this technology, polypeptide patterns from urine are established within 45 minutes. About 900 to 2500 polypeptides as well as their concentrations are detected in individual urine samples without the need for specific reagents such as antibodies. To test this method for clinical application, we examined spot urine samples from 57 healthy individuals, 16 patients with minimal change disease (MCD), 18 patients with membranous glomerulonephritis (MGN), and 10 patients with focal segmental glomerulosclerosis (FSGS). Results. One-hundred seventy-three polypeptides were present in more than 90% of the urine samples obtained from healthy individuals, while 690 polypeptides were present with more than 50% probability. These data permitted the establishment of a normal polypeptide pattern in healthy individuals. Polypeptides found in the urine of patients differed significantly from the normal controls. These differences allowed the distinction of specific protein spectra in patients with different primary renal diseases. Abnormal pattern of proteins were found even in urine from patients in clinical remission. Conclusion. The data indicate that capillary electrophoresis with mass spectrometry coupling provides a promising tool that permits fast and accurate identification and differentiation of protein patterns in body fluids of healthy and diseased individuals, thus enabling diagnosis based on these patterns.

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