Copyright
©2007 Baishideng Publishing Group Co.
World J Gastroenterol. Nov 28, 2007; 13(44): 5813-5821
Published online Nov 28, 2007. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v13.i44.5813
Published online Nov 28, 2007. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v13.i44.5813
Table 1 Advantages and disadvantages of proteomic technologies for protein profiling
| Technique | Methods | Advantages | Disadvantages | ||
| 2D | Separation on a gel of the protein content of a sample in two dimensions according to mass and charge; gels are stained and spot intensities in samples are compared among different gels | High separation (thousands of proteins per gel) | Low throughput laborious (one samples per gel); poor resolution for extreme masses and extremely acidic or basic proteins; no direct protein identification; large amount of starting material compared with other techniques | ||
| 2D-DIGE | Measuring three samples per gel; each of them is labelled with a different fluorescent dye, and the intensities of each gel spot for each sample are measured at a wavelength specific for the label | Direct comparison of samples on one gel: better reproductibility | Low throughput (three samples per gel) | ||
| Protein microarrays | Binding of a targeted protein in one sample to spotted probes on a ‘forward’ microarray; conversely, binding of specific probes to a targeted protein in spotted samples on a ‘reverse’ microarray; detection of bound proteins by direct labelling or by labelled secondary antibodies | High throughput in terms of number of probes per (forward) array or number of samples per (reverse) array; biomarker identity or class readily known | Synthesis of many different probes necessary; identity or class of targeted proteins must be known; limited to detection of proteins targeted by the probes | ||
| SELDI-TOF MS | Selected part of a protein mixture is bound to a specific chromatographic surface and the rest washed away | High throughput; direct application of whole sample (fast on-chip sample cleanup); small amount of starting material | Unsuitable for high molecular weight proteins; limited to detection of bound proteins; lower resolution and mass accuracy than MALDI-TOF | ||
| MALDI-TOF MS | Application of a protein mixture onto a gold plate; desorption of proteins from the plate by laser energy and measurement of the protein masses; comparison of peak intensities between multiple samples | High throughput | Need for sample fractionation of complex samples; more starting material needed for sample fractionation; unsuitable for high molecular weight proteins | ||
| LC-MS-MS | Separation of a mixture of peptides (resulting from protein digestion with trypsin) by one-, two-or three-dimensional LC and measurement of peptide masses by MS-MS | Direct identification of several hundred proteins per sample by MS-MS of peptides | Low throughput; time consuming; detection by MS–MS often not comprehensive, tus complicating comparison of different samples | ||
| ICAT | Chemical tagging of proteins on cysteine residues with a heavy or light stable isotopic; after labelling samples are mixed, proteins are digested with trypsin, and labelled peptides isolated by affinity chromatography; both samples are analysed concomitantly by LC-MS-MS | Direct identification of biomarkers by MS-MS of peptides; relative quantitation; less sample complexity than with iTRAQe; MS-MS of only differentially expressed proteins | Low throughput; tagging of only cysteine-containing peptides | ||
| iTRAQ | Chemical tagging of proteins on their amine groups with stable isotopic labels of identical mass (‘isobaric’); four different labels are available for four different samples; after labelling, samples are mixed, proteins digested with trypsin and analysed concomitantly by LC-MS-MS | Direct identification of biomarkers by MS-MS of peptides; owing to isobaric labels, selection for MS-MS of the same peptide in all four samples in the same single MS run | Low throughput (four samples per run); for generating signature ion, MS-MS of all peptides in a sample is necessary; high sample complexity and limited resolution of LC (even three dimensional), confounding by co-eluting isobaric peptides |
Table 2 Proteomic analysis in human colorectal cancer tissues
| Up-regulated | Down-regulated | |
| Annexin IV | NCF2 | |
| MTA-1 | PMM2 | |
| SSX5 protein | Serpin 1 | |
| Dynein heavy chain | CNRC | |
| Cytochrome P450 | Annexin V | |
| CPT1 | APC | |
| Keratin 10 | VAV3 protein | |
| Keratin 8 | RSP 4 | |
| Keratin 19 | SPARC like protein 1 | |
| Vimentin | PDI | |
| β-actin | GN6ST | |
| REL1 | Cathepsin D | |
| HSP60 | Calreticulin | |
| Mortalin | Cathepsin fragment | SM31 |
| PDA6 | ||
| Proteasome subunit a type 6 | ApoA1 precursor | |
| Cytochrome P450 enzymes (in cancer tissues and metastatic tissues) | ATP synthase b chain | |
| Triosephosphate isomerase 14-3-3 proteins | Albumin | |
| Liver fatty acid-binding protein | ||
| HSP70 | GST-P | Actin-binding protein/smooth muscle protein 22-a |
| S100A9 | ||
| S100A8 | P13693 translationally controlled tumor protein | Cyclooxygenase 2 |
| S100A11 | ||
| S100A6 | Puromycin-sensitive aminopeptidase | |
| Nucleoside diphosphate kinase A | ||
| NADH-ubiquinone oxidoreductase | ||
| Adenosyl homocysteinase | Calgranulin B; S100 A9 | |
| Leukocyte elastase inhibitor, claude B | Succinate dehydrogenase subunit A | |
| Macrophage capping protein | ||
| Biliverdin reductase A | Aldehyde dehydrogenase, cytosolic, class I | |
| Annexin 1 fragment | ||
| α-tubulin | ||
| Elongation factor 1-d | Selenium-binding protein | |
| Tropomyosin a1 | Creatin kinase B chain | |
| Tropomyosin a4 chain | Placental thrombin inhibitor | |
| Actin fragment | Vimentin | |
| Annexin 5 | Desmin | |
| Microtuble-associated protein RP/EB | Tubulin b 5 chain | |
| Pyridoxal kinase | Carbonic anhydrase I | |
| Annexin 3 | Myosin regulatory light chain 2 | |
| Annexin 4 | ||
- Citation: Bitarte N, Bandrés E, Zárate R, Ramirez N, Garcia-Foncillas J. Moving forward in colorectal cancer research, what proteomics has to tell. World J Gastroenterol 2007; 13(44): 5813-5821
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/1007-9327/full/v13/i44/5813.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v13.i44.5813
