Comparative Proteomic Profiles of Meningioma Subtypes

Abstract

Meningiomas are classified into three groups (benign, atypical, and anaplastic) based on morphologic characteristics. Atypical meningiomas, which are WHO grade 2 tumors, and anaplastic meningiomas, which are WHO grade 3 tumors, exhibit an increased risk of recurrence and premature death compared with benign WHO grade 1 tumors. Although atypical and anaplastic meningiomas account for <10% of all of meningiomas, it can be difficult to distinguish them from benign meningiomas by morphologic criteria alone. We used selective tissue microdissection to examine 24 human meningiomas and did two-dimensional gel electrophoresis to determine protein expression patterns. Proteins expressed differentially by meningiomas of each WHO grade were identified and sequenced. Proteomic analysis revealed protein expression patterns unique to WHO grade 1, 2, and 3 meningiomas and identified 24 proteins that distinguish each subtype. Fifteen proteins showed significant changes in expression level between benign and atypical meningiomas, whereas nine distinguished atypical from anaplastic meningiomas. Differential protein expression was confirmed by Western blotting and immunohistochemistry. We established differential proteomic profiles that characterize and distinguish meningiomas of increasing grades. The proteins and proteomic profiles enhance understanding of the pathogenesis of meningiomas and have implications for diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment.

Prohibitin as a novel target protein of luteinizing hormone in ovarian epithelial carcinogenesis

“…Protein preparation and 2DGE were performed as described previously [10,11]. Briefly, cell pellets after gonadotropin stimulations for 2DGE were dissolved into Extraction Buffer II containing 8 M urea, 4% (w/v) Bio-Lyte 4/7, and 2 mM tributyl phosphine (Bio-Rad, Hercules, CA), vigorously vortexed and centrifuged.…”

Targeting cerebrospinal fluid for discovery of brain cancer biomarkers

“…Recent studies have shown that specific proteomic patterns can differentiate subtypes or grades of human brain tumors. [27][28][29][30] Modern technological advancements in protein quantification which Highly specific [12][13][14]16] Low sensitivity and false negative results are common [3,13,20,23,24] Flow cytometry analysis:…”

“…These techniques have the ability to detect genetic aberrations as a sign of malignancy location [26] Low sensitivity [26] Detection of biochemical molecules secreted by cancers to the CSF CSF proteomic analysis: Systematic identification and quantification of the complete complement of proteins in the CSF Specific proteomic patterns can differentiate subtypes or grades of specific brain tumors [27][28][29][30] Limited sensitivity and specificity [31] CSF microRNAs analysis: Measuring microRNA Profiling of CSF High specificity and chemical stability [60,101] Only small amounts of CSF samples are required for the detection of miRNAs in the CSF offers the advantage of convenient repetitive monitoring of molecular events happening in cancer in the response to treatment [76] The unknown origin and factors influence their level of expression might impact their specificity as biomarkers [76,[102][103][104][105][106] CSF: cerebrospinal fluid provide rapid screening, low sample consumption, and accurate protein identification, have enhanced the precision of proteomic analyses and are anticipated to accelerate brain tumor biomarker discovery. [31] Research work on traditional sampling sources for proteomic profiling, such as blood [31,32] and tissue lysates, [33] have yielded asubstantial amount of information on potential brain cancer biomarkers.…”

Oncoproteomics

“…Tissue obtained from human meningiomas by selective tissue microdissection was examined by 2D GE to determine protein expression patterns (Okamoto et al 2006 ). Proteomic analysis revealed protein expression patterns unique to WHO grade 1, 2, and 3 meningiomas and identifi ed 24 proteins that distinguish each subtype.…”