Gonzalez_edit.qxp 8/2/08 03:20 Page 10
protein of human keratinocytes,
matrix metalloproteinase-2 biomarkers of urological cancer are promising, but no useful biomarkers
(MMP-2), MMP-9 and fibronectin
and fibrinopeptide A.
have yet been obtained as the results have shown poor reproducibility.
Rasmussen et al. detected psoriasin in the urine of SCC patients.
These results were later confirmed by immunoblotting, and psoriasin, Cadieux et al. analysed 25 patients with kidney stones and 25 normal
the major abundant protein in keratinocytes, was found to be present individuals using SELDI-TOF.
The protein profiles obtained revealed a
only in SCC urine and not in TCC or normal urine.
Vlahou et al. used relationship between protein peak intensities at 67 and 24kDa that
SELDI-TOF MS to study the urine of patients with TCC, obtaining differed between the two groups. Sensitivity and specificity were
72 and 100%, respectively, with a negative predictive value of 78%.
No other study applying proteomic methods to the urine analysis of
Proteomic approaches to the search of
patients with urolithiasis has been published to determine the clinical
utility of this approach.
biomarkers of urological cancer are
promising, but no useful biomarkers
Tantipaiboonwong et al. analysed the urine proteome using 2D-PAGE
have yet been obtained as the results
in normal and lung-cancer patients.
The differentially expressed
have shown poor reproducibility. proteins were CD59 glycoprotein, transthyretin, GM2 activator protein
and Ig-free light chain. These urinary biomarkers may be useful as lung
cancer markers that are needed for further pre-clinical diagnostic and
several biomarkers and clusters that gave a sensitivity of 87% with a therapeutic applications.
specificity of 66% in the detection of TCC.
They also identified
defensin as being present in the urine of TCC patients. Conclusions and Future Perspectives
The proteomic testing of urine is progressing very rapidly as it has huge
Rogers et al. used SELDI-TOF MS to study the urine of 48 patients with potential in the diagnosis and management of renal diseases. Currently,
RCC, normal individuals and patients with other urological diseases.
we have a very complete map of the ‘normal’ urinary proteome, which
Using a neural-network analysis they obtained sensitivity and specificity can be used as a template for comparison with urinary proteomes in
values of 98.3–100% for the presence/absence of peaks or peak intensity renal diseases. Thus, proteomic analyses for large-scale studies of urinary
values. Recently, Theodorescu et al. used capillary electrophoresis-coupled proteins may represent an important step forwards in the non-invasive
MS to obtain polypeptide patterns from patients with urothelial carcinoma diagnosis and monitoring of renal diseases. ■
(n=31), healthy subjects (n=11) and patients with non-malignant genito-
urinary diseases (n=138).
Using these patterns, the correct classification Acknowledgements
of patients with urothelial carcinoma from those with other genito-urinary This work was partly supported by the Gerencia Regional de Salud of the
diseases ranged from 86 to 100%. Proteomic approaches to the search of Junta de Castilla y León, Spain (grant no. 55/2005).
1. Anderson NL, Anderson NG, Proteome and proteomics: New 13. Schaub S, Wilkins J, Weiler T, et al., Urine protein profiling with J Am Soc Nephrol, 2004;15:219–27.
technologies, new concepts and new words, Electrophoresis, surface-enhanced laser-desorption/ionisation time-of-flight mass 24. Schaub S, Wilkins JA, Antonovici M, et al., Proteomic-based
1998;19:1853–61. spectrometry, Kidney Int, 2004;65:323–32. identification of cleaved urinary _
microglobulin as a potential
2. LaBaer J, So, you want to look for biomarkers?, J Proteome Res, 14. Pisitkun T, Shen RF, Knepper MA, Identification and proteomic marker of acute tubular injury in renal allograft, Am J Transplant,
2005;4:1053–9. profiling of exosomes in human urine, Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 2005;5:729–38.
3. Hanash S, Disease proteomics, Nature, 2003;422:226–32. 2004;101:13368–73. 25. Rasmussen HH, Orntoff TF, Wolf H, Celis JE, Towards a
4. González-Buitrago JM, Ferreira L, Lorenzo I, Urinary proteomics, 15. Sun W, Li F, Wu S, et al., Human urine proteome analysis by comprehensive database of proteins from the urine of patients
Clin Chim Acta, 2007;375:49–56. three separation approaches, Proteomics, 2005;5:4994–5001. with bladder cancer, J Urol, 1996;155:2113–19.
5. Aebersold R, Mann M, Mass-spectrometry-based proteomics, 16. Adachi J, Kumar C, Zhang Y, et al., The human urinary 26. Vlahou A, Schellhammer PF, Mendrinos S, et al., Development
Nature, 2003;422:198–207. proteome contains more than 1,500 proteins, including a large of a novel proteomic approach for the detection of transitional
6. Domon B, Aebersold R, Mass spectrometry and protein analysis, proportion of membrane proteins, Genome Biology, 2006;7: cell carcinoma of the bladder in urine, Am J Pathol,
Science, 2006;312:212. R80. 2001;158:1491–1502.
7. Hortin GL, Jortani SA, Ritchie JC, et al., Proteomics: a new 17. Thongboonkerd V, Klein JB, Jevans AW, et al., Urinary 27. Rogers MA, Clarke P, Noble J, et al., Proteomic profiling of
diagnostic frontier, Clin Chem, 2006;52:1218–22. proteomics and biomarker discovery for glomerular diseases, urinary proteins in renal cancer by surface enhanced laser
8. Issaq HJ, Veenstra TD, Conrads TP, Felschow D, The SELDI-TOF Contrib Nephrol, 2004;141:292–307. desorption ionisation of key issues affecting potential clinical
MS approach to proteomics: protein profiling and biomarker 18. Haubitz M, Wittke S, Weissinger EM, et al., Urine protein utility, Cancer Res, 2003;63:6971–83.
identification, Biochem Biphys Res Comm, 2002;292:587–92. patterns can serve as diagnostic tools in patients with IgA 28. Saito M, Kimoto M, Araki T, et al., Proteome analysis of
9. Thongboonkerd V, Chutipongtanate S, Kanlaya R, Systemic nephropathy, Kidney Int, 2005;67:2313–20. gelatin-bound urinary proteins from patients with bladder
evaluation of sample preparation methods for gel-based human 19. Park MR, Wang EH, Jin DC, et al., Establishment of a 2D cancers, Eur Urol, 2005;48:865–71.
urinary proteomics: quantity, quality and variability, J Proteome human urinary proteomic map in IgA nephropathy, Proteomics, 29. Theodorescu D, Wittke S, Ross M, et al., Discovery and
Res, 2006;5:183–91. 2006;6:1066–76. validation of new protein biomarkers for urothelial cancer: a
10. Thongboonkerd V, McLeish KR, Arthus JM, Proteomic analysis 20. Fliser D, Novak J, Thongboonkerd V, et al., Advances in urinary prospective analysis, Lancet Oncol, 2006;7:230–40.
of normal human urinary proteins isolated by acetone proteome analysis and biomarker discovery, J Am Soc Nephrol, 30. Celis JE, Wofl H, Ostergaard M, Bladder squamous cell
precipitation or ultracentrifugation, Kidney Int, 2002;62: 2007;18:1057–71. carcinoma biomarkers derived from proteomics, Electrophoresis,
1461–9. 21. Clarke W, Silverman B, Zhang Z, et al., Characterisation of 2000;21:2115–21.
11. Oh J, Pyo JH, Jo EH, et al., Establishment of a near-standard 2D renal allograft rejection by urinary proteomic analysis, Ann Surg, 31. Cadieux PA, Beiko DT, Watterson JD, et al., Surface-enhanced
human urine proteomic map, Proteomics, 2004;4:3485–97. 2003;5:660–65. laser desorption/ionisation-time of flight-mass spectrometry
12. Pieper R, Gatling CL, McGrath AM, et al., Characterisation of 22. O´Riordan E, Orlova TN, Mei JJ, et al., Bioinformatic analysis of (SELDI-TOF MS): a new proteomic urinary test for patients with
the human urinary proteome: a method for high-resolution the urine proteome of acute allograft rejection, J Am Soc Nephrol, urolithiasis, J Clin Lab Anal, 2004;18:170–75.
display of urinary proteins on 2D electrophoresis gels with a 2004;15:3240–48. 32. Tantipaiboonwong P, Sinchaikul S, Sriyam S, et al., Different
yield of nearly 1,400 distinct proteins spots, Proteomics, 23. Schaub S, Rush D, Wilkins J, et al., Proteomic-based detection techniques for urinary protein analysis of normal and lung
2004;4:1159–74. of urine proteins associated with acute renal allograft rejection, cancer patients, Proteomics, 2005;5:1140–49.
10 EUROPEAN RENAL DISEASE 2007
| Page 2
| Page 3
| Page 4
| Page 5
| Page 6
| Page 7
| Page 8
| Page 9
| Page 10
| Page 11
| Page 12
| Page 13
| Page 14
| Page 15
| Page 16
| Page 17
| Page 18
| Page 19
| Page 20
| Page 21
| Page 22
| Page 23
| Page 24
| Page 25
| Page 26
| Page 27
| Page 28
| Page 29
| Page 30
| Page 31
| Page 32
| Page 33
| Page 34
| Page 35
| Page 36
| Page 37
| Page 38
| Page 39
| Page 40
| Page 41
| Page 42
| Page 43
| Page 44
| Page 45
| Page 46
| Page 47
| Page 48
| Page 49
| Page 50
| Page 51
| Page 52
| Page 53
| Page 54
| Page 55
| Page 56
| Page 57
| Page 58
| Page 59
| Page 60
| Page 61
| Page 62
| Page 63
| Page 64
| Page 65
| Page 66
| Page 67
| Page 68
| Page 69
| Page 70
| Page 71
| Page 72
| Page 73
| Page 74
| Page 75
| Page 76