Skip to content

Advertisement

You're viewing the new version of our site. Please leave us feedback.

Learn more

BMC Cancer

Open Access
Open Peer Review

This article has Open Peer Review reports available.

How does Open Peer Review work?

Proteomic analysis identifies MMP-9, DJ-1 and A1BG as overexpressed proteins in pancreatic juice from pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma patients

  • Mei Tian1,
  • Ya-Zhou Cui1,
  • Guan-Hua Song1,
  • Mei-Juan Zong1,
  • Xiao-Yan Zhou1,
  • Yu Chen1 and
  • Jin-Xiang Han1Email author
Contributed equally
BMC Cancer20088:241

https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2407-8-241

Received: 21 January 2008

Accepted: 16 August 2008

Published: 16 August 2008

Abstract

Background

There is an urgent need to discover more sensitive and specific biomarkers to improve early diagnosis and screen high-risk patients for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). Pancreatic juice is an ideal specimen for PDAC biomarkers discovery, because it is an exceptionally rich source of proteins released from pancreatic cancer cells.

Methods

To identify novel potential biomarkers for PDAC from pancreatic juice, we carried out difference gel electrophoresis (DIGE) and tandem mass spectrometry (MS/MS) to compare the pancreatic juice profiling from 9 PDAC patients and 9 cancer-free controls. Of the identified differently expressed proteins, three up-regulated proteins in pancreatic cancer juice, matrix metalloproteinase-9 (MMP-9), oncogene DJ1 (DJ-1) and alpha-1B-glycoprotein precursor (A1BG), were selected for validation by Western blot and immunohistochemistry. Serum MMP-9 levels were also detected by enzyme linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA).

Results

Fourteen proteins were up-regulated and ten proteins were down-regulated in cancerous pancreatic juice compared with cancer-free controls. Increased MMP-9, DJ-1 and A1BG expression in cancerous pancreatic juice were confirmed by Western blot. Immunohistochemical study showed MMP-9, DJ-1 and A1BG positively expressed in 82.4%, 72.5% and 86.3% of pancreatic cancer tissues, significantly higher than that in normal pancreas tissues. Up-regulation of DJ-1 was associated with better differentiation (p < 0.05). Serum MMP-9 levels were significantly higher in PDAC (255.14 ng/ml) than those in chronic pancreatitis (210.22 ng/ml, p = 0.009) and healthy control (203.77 ng/ml, p = 0.027).

Conclusion

The present proteome analysis revealed MMP-9, DJ-1 and A1BG proteins as elevated in pancreatic juice from PDAC, which suggest their further utility in PDAC diagnosis and screening. This is the first time A1BG was identified as a potential biomarker in pancreatic cancer associated samples. The measurement of serum MMP-9 might be clinically useful for PDAC diagnosis.

Background

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is the fourth or fifth most common cause of cancer-related mortality worldwide. Because of late presentation and rapid aggressiveness, most PDAC cases are diagnosed at late stage, and its prognosis is accordingly poor. So detection of PDAC at an early disease stage is critical for successful clinical therapy. Carbohydrate antigen (CA) 19-9 is the most commonly used tumor marker for PDAC, but it lacks satisfactory sensitivity and specificity, especially in early diagnosis [1, 2]. There is an urgent need to discover more sensitive and specific biomarkers to improve early diagnosis and screen high-risk patients for PDAC [3].

The proteomic approach is a powerful tool to identify novel biomarkers or therapeutic targets from cancer-associated samples. Pancreatic juice is an ideal specimen in proteomic studies, because it is an exceptionally rich source of proteins which are released from pancreatic cells in the physiological state and in pathological conditions [4]. It is reasonable that biomarkers identified in pancreatic juice could subsequently be measured in more accessible specimens such as serum. Therefore, mining pancreatic juice proteome might help to identify novel protein markers for pancreatic diseases such as pancreatic cancer.

Recently, many efforts have been made to analyze pancreatic juice by proteomic methods. Rosty et al. [5] identified hepatocarcinoma-intestine-pancreas/pancreatitis-associated protein I (HIP/PAP-I) as a biomarker for PDAC by surface enhanced laser desorption ionization (SELDI) techonology. Chen et al. [6] used isotope-code affinity tag (ICAT) technology to compare the pancreatic juice protein profiling from pancreatitis patients and normal controls. Gronborg et al. [3] used one-dimensional electrophoresis combined with liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry (1-DE-LC-MS/MS) to identify a total of 170 unique proteins in pancreatic juices from 3 cases of PDAC patients, and confirmed PAP-2 as a novel marker for PDAC.

In the current study, we characterized the pancreatic juice protein profiling in PDAC compared with cancer-free controls using difference gel electrophoresis (DIGE) and tandem mass spectrometry (MS/MS), and identified a number of novel protein markers in pancreatic juice which might be a promising target for pancreatic cancer diagnosis and screening.

Methods

Patients and samples

The study was approved by the Ethical Commitee of Shandong Academy of Medical Science. Fresh pancreatic juice samples were collected with informed consent from 9 PDAC patients and 9 cancer-free controls undergoing endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in Qilu Hospital and Qianfoshan Hospital of Shandong University. Clinical data of the patients included were summarized in Table 1. After collection, the pancreatic juice samples were centrifuged at 10,000 rpm for 20 min at 4°C and supernatant of each was aliquoted and stored at -80°C until used.
Table 1

Clinicopathological data of PDAC patients and cancer-free controls in proteomic analysis

No. of samples

Sex

Age

Histology*

Tumor location

Metastases

PDAC

     

1

female

55

Moderately differentiated ductal adenocarcinoma

Tail of pancreas

Yes

2

male

65

Well differentiated ductal adenocarcinoma

Head of pancreas

No

3

male

38

Well differentiated ductal adenocarcinoma

Head of pancreas

Yes

4

male

57

Moderately differentiated ductal adenocarcinoma

Body of pancreas

Yes

5

female

53

Poorly differentiated ductal adenocarcinoma

Head of pancreas

No

6

male

59

Moderately differentiated ductal adenocarcinoma

Head of pancreas

Yes

7

female

44

Moderately differentiated ductal adenocarcinoma

Tail of pancreas

Yes

8

female

51

Well differentiated ductal adenocarcinoma

Head of pancreas

No

9

male

48

Moderately differentiated ductal adenocarcinoma

Tail of pancreas

No

Cancer-free

 

Clinical diagnosis

  

1

male

53

Chronic pancreatitis

  

2

female

66

benign cystic neoplasm of pancreas

  

3

male

49

Gallstone pancreatitis

  

4

male

50

Chronic pancreatitis

  

5

female

52

benign cystic neoplasm of pancreas

  

6

female

57

benign cystic neoplasm of pancreas

  

7

male

46

Chronic pancreatitis

  

8

female

47

cystic fibrosis of pancreas

  

9

male

60

Chronic pancreatitis

  

* PDAC differentiation was classified according to the WHO standard (2nd edition, 1996).

Pancreatic juice protein extraction

Pancreatic juice samples were first precipitated with acetone. Briefly, 1.2 mL cold acetone (Fluca) was added to 300 μL pancreatic juice and kept at -20°C for 2 hours, then centrifuged at 13,000 rpm for 10 min at 4°C. Supernatant was discarded and pellet was dissolved in 500 μL of lysis buffer containing 30 mM Tris, 8 M urea, 2 M thiourea, 2% 3-[(3-cholamidopropyl) dimethylammonio]-1-propanesulfonate (CHAPS), 18 mM dithiothreitol (DTT) and 0.5% IPG Buffer (GE Healthcare). The mixture was then centrifuged at 12,000 rpm for 10 min at 4°C, and the supernatant was collected and stored at -80°C. Protein concentration was determined using a 2-D Quant Kit according to the manufacturer's instruction (GE Healthcare).

Two-dimensional gel electrophoresis (2-DE)

Cancerous or control pancreatic juice protein extracts were first pooled for traditional 2-DE. Two hundred micrograms of each pooled protein sample was diluted in 450 μL rehydration buffer (7 M urea, 2 M thiourea, 4% CHAPS, 0.5% IPG buffer, 0.002% bromophenol blue). Isoelectric focusing was performed on Ettan IPGphor (GE Healthcare) with 24 cm IPG strips (pH 3–10 NL, GE Healthcare). The IPG strips were first rehydrated at 30 V for 12 hours, then focused at 500 V for 1 hour, 1,000 V for 1 hour, and maintained at 8,000 V until a total of 65,000 Vhr was arrived. After isoelectric focusing, the strips were equilibrated with 0.375 M Tris-HCl (pH 8.8), 6 M urea, 20% glycerol, 2% sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS), and 0.2% bromophenol blue. IEF strips were first treated with 130 mM DTT for 10 min, followed by 135 mM iodoacetamide for 10 min with constant shaking. The equilibrated strips were transferred to 12.5% SDS polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (SDS-PAGE) on Ettan DALT twelve system (GE Healthcare) with constant power (0.2 W/gel, 1 hour; 1.7 W/gel, 4.5 hours) at 20°C. All gels were stained with Coomassie blue R350 (GE Healthcare), and scanned using a PowerLook 2100 XL scanner system (Umax USA).

Two-dimensional difference gel electrophoresis (DIGE)

Fifty micrograms of each of cancerous and cancer-free control pancreatic juice protein extracts was minimally labeled with 400 pmol Cy3 or 400 pmol Cy5 fluorescent dye (GE Healthcare). An internal standard pool generated by combining equal amounts of extracts from all the samples was labeled with 400 pmol Cy2. The labeling reaction was carried out in the dark on ice for 30 min, and quenched with 10 mM lysine for 10 min. 2-DE was performed as described above, except that low-fluorescent glass plates were used. The Cy2, Cy3, and Cy5-labeled images were acquired on a Typhoon Trio scanner (GE Healthcare) at the excitation/emission of 488/520 nm, 532/580 nm and 633/670 nm, respectively.

Trypsin digestion and MALDI-TOF-MS and MS/MS

Spots of interest were excised from gels stained by Coomassie Blue R350, and were digested with sequencing grade modified porcine trypsin (Promega) as described previously [7]. Subsequent protein identification was carried out on the ABI 4700 Proteomic Analyzer MALDI-TOF-MS/MS mass spectrometry (Applied Biosystems, USA) on a reflective mode. Peptide mass fingerprint (PMF) was acquired between 800–3500 Da. The strongest five peaks from PMF were selected to obtain MS/MS spectra. PMF and MS/MS data were then searched against a human subset of the Swiss-Prot database using GPS explorer software (Applied Biosystems, USA).

Western blot

Thirty micrograms of pancreatic juice protein extracts from 6 PDAC and 6 cancer-free controls were used for SDS-PAGE. The separated proteins were transferred to nitrocellulose membranes (GE Healthcare). The membranes were blocked for 1 hour and incubated with anti-DJ-1 antibody (1:1000 dilutions, MBL international corporation, MA), anti-MMP-9 antibody (1:1000 dilutions, Santa Cruz Biotechnology) and anti-A1BG antibody (1:1000 dilutions, Aviva System Biology, San Diego, CA) overnight at 4°C. After peroxidase-conjugated secondary antibody was added, proteins were detected using an ECL Plus kit (GE Healthcare).

Immunohistochemical analysis (IHC)

To study the tissue compartment for DJ-1, MMP-9 and A1BG, a tissue array (Chaoying Biotechnology co. Xian, China) containing 51 cases of PDAC and 8 adjacent normal pancreas tissues was used in immunohistochemical analysis. Clinicopathological data of the tissue array were summarized (Table 2). Paraffin-embedded tissue array slides were processed for antigen retrieval using microwave heating in citrate buffer, and immunohistochemically stained with the same antibodies used in Western blot analysis at 1:100 dilution. Visualization was performed using ABC kit according to the manufacturer's recommendation (Zhongshan Bio co., Beijing, China).
Table 2

Data of tissue array included in immunohistochemical analysis

No. of samples

Age

Sex

Histology

Grade

1

64

Male

Moderately differentiated ductal adenocarcinoma

II

2

64

Male

Poorly differentiated ductal adenocarcinoma

III

3

64

Male

Moderately differentiated ductal adenocarcinoma

II

4

62

Female

Poorly differentiated ductal adenocarcinoma

III

5

62

Female

Poorly differentiated ductal adenocarcinoma

III

6

62

Female

Poorly differentiated ductal adenocarcinoma

III

7

12

Female

Normal pancreatic tissue

-

8

12

Female

Normal pancreatic tissue

-

9

12

Female

Normal pancreatic tissue

-

10

49

Male

Poorly differentiated ductal adenocarcinoma

III

11

49

Male

Moderately differentiated ductal adenocarcinoma

II

12

49

Male

Moderately differentiated ductal adenocarcinoma

II

13

69

Female

Moderately differentiated carcinoma

II

14

69

Female

Moderately differentiated carcinoma

II

15

69

Female

Well differentiated Mucinous adenocarcinoma

I

16

73

Female

Poorly differentiated ductal adenocarcinoma

III

17

73

Female

Poorly differentiated ductal adenocarcinoma

III

18

73

Female

Poorly differentiated carcinoma

III

19

49

Male

Moderately differentiated ductal adenocarcinoma

II

20

49

Male

Moderately differentiated ductal adenocarcinoma

II

21

49

Male

Moderately differentiated ductal adenocarcinoma

II

22

67

Male

Poorly differentiated ductal adenocarcinoma

III

23

67

Male

Poorly differentiated ductal adenocarcinoma

III

24

67

Male

Poorly differentiated ductal adenocarcinoma

III

25

68

Female

Moderately differentiated ductal adenocarcinoma

II

26

68

Female

Moderately differentiated ductal adenocarcinoma

II

27

68

Female

Moderately differentiated ductal adenocarcinoma

II

28

51

Female

Moderately differentiated ductal adenocarcinoma

II

29

51

Female

Poorly differentiated ductal adenocarcinoma

III

30

51

Female

Poorly differentiated ductal adenocarcinoma

III

31

45

Male

Well differentiated ductal adenocarcinoma

I

32

45

Male

Well differentiated ductal adenocarcinoma

I

33

45

Male

Well differentiated ductal adenocarcinoma

I

34

60

Male

Poorly differentiated ductal adenocarcinoma

III

35

60

Male

Poorly differentiated ductal adenocarcinoma

III

36

60

Male

Moderately differentiated ductal adenocarcinoma

II

37

65

Male

Poorly differentiated ductal adenocarcinoma

III

38

65

Male

Poorly differentiated ductal adenocarcinoma

III

39

65

Male

Moderately differentiated ductal adenocarcinoma

II

40

55

Male

Poorly differentiated ductal adenocarcinoma

III

41

55

Male

Poorly differentiated ductal adenocarcinoma

III

42

55

Male

Poorly differentiated ductal adenocarcinoma

III

43

70

Male

Well differentiated ductal adenocarcinoma

I

44

70

Male

Moderately differentiated ductal adenocarcinoma

II

45

70

Male

Well differentiated ductal adenocarcinoma

I

46

30

Male

Normal pancreatic tissue

-

47

30

Male

Normal pancreatic tissue

-

48

51

Female

Well differentiated ductal adenocarcinoma

I

49

51

Female

Well differentiated ductal adenocarcinoma

I

50

51

Female

Well differentiated ductal adenocarcinoma

I

51

62

Female

Moderately differentiated papillary carcinoma

II

52

62

Female

Moderately differentiated ductal adenocarcinoma

II

53

62

Female

Moderately differentiated ductal adenocarcinoma

II

54

50

Male

Poorly differentiated ductal adenocarcinoma

III

55

50

Male

Poorly differentiated ductal adenocarcinoma

III

56

50

Male

Poorly differentiated ductal adenocarcinoma

III

57

33

Female

Normal pancreatic tissue

-

58

14

Female

Normal pancreatic tissue

-

59

38

Female

Normal pancreatic tissue

-

Enzyme linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA)

Serum from 8 PDAC patients, 9 chronic pancreatitis patients and 8 healthy controls not included in the proteomic analysis were collected for MMP-9 ELISA analysis. Serum levels of human MMP-9 were analyzed with a commercially available kit (Biotrak) according to the manufacturer's recommendation. Serum samples were diluted at 1:100; all assays were done in duplicate. The sensitivity limit of MMP-9 ELISA was 0.08 ng/ml.

Data analysis

DIGE images were analyzed by ImageMaster 6.0 DIGE-enable software (GE Healthcare). The best internal standard image was assigned as the master reference. The protein spots on the remaining internal standard images were matched to the master reference to ensure that the same protein spots were compared between gels. Spot intensity was normalized by dividing each Cy3 or Cy5 spot volume with the corresponding Cy2 (internal standard) spot volume. Statistical analyses were performed using SPSS 13.0 software. The relationships with DJ-1, MMP-9 and A1BG expression and clinicopathological parameters were analyzed using Chi-square or Fisher's exact tests. The differences of MMP-9 levels in serum among the various groups were analyzed using independent-samples t-test. p < 0.05 was considered to be statically significant.

Results

Differentially expressed Proteins in pancreatic juice from PDAC and cancer-free controls

Given the limited amount of pancreatic juice sample available, we first made sample pools of all cancerous and cancer-free control pancreatic juice protein extracts separately to identify the differently expressed proteins by traditional 2-DE. Each pool was repeated three times. Coomassie blue R350 staining was applied to visualize the protein spots, because of its compatibility with protein identification by MS. Moreover, we carried out DIGE on each individual sample to verify differential protein expression found by the traditional 2-DE. Most spot changes in DIGE analysis were consistent with those found in Coomassie blue stained 2-DE analysis (Figure 1). Twenty four proteins with more than two-fold expression change between pancreatic cancer juice and cancer-free pancreatic juice were identified (Table 3). Fourteen proteins were significantly up-regulated and ten proteins were significantly down-regulated in pancreatic cancer juice compared with the cancer-free controls (Figure 2). Three up-regulated proteins MMP-9, DJ-1 and A1BG were further confirmed by Western blot and immunohistochemistry.
Table 3

Differentially expressed proteins in pancreatic juice from PDAC patients and cancer-free controls (with and without pancreatitis)

Spot position

Protein Name

MW(Da)

PI

Mascot PMF Score

Sequence Coverage (%)

Protein Species Score (C.I.%)

Fold change

       

PDAC/Cancer-free controls

Pancreatitis/No pancreatitis controls

1406

Alpha-1-antitrypsin precursor

46737

5.37

298

39.788

100

3.43

-1.72

1394

Serum albumin precursor

69367

5.92

491

73.493

100

2.67

-1.27

2106

Apolipoprotein A-I precursor

30778

5.56

289

56.054

100

4.83

1.30

1652

Glutathione S-transferase P

32311

5.43

90

68.249

99.998

3.84

-1.36

1312

Alpha-1B-glycoprotein precursor

54273

5.58

124

33.863

100

2.39

-1.37

1471

Vitamin D-binding protein precursor

52964

5.40

300

60.622

100

5.60

-2.03

2193

Cationic antimicrobial protein

26886

9.75

127

38.512

99.997

2.73

-3.90

2196

Superoxide dismutase [Mn], mitochondrial precursor

24722

8.35

109

36.524

100

2.54

2.12

1543

Serotransferrin precursor

77050

6.81

519

76.674

100

5.09

1.03

1971

Ig lambda chain V-IV region Hil

11517

6.04

102

49.056

100

2.66

1.44

1253

matrix metalloproteinase-9

78427

5.69

214

32.458

100

3.67

-1.03

1318

Hemopexin precursor

51676

6.55

213

42.289

100

3.23

1.06

2155

Oncogene DJ1

19891

6.33

114

15.878

100

2.59

-1.25

1739

Fibrinogen beta chain precursor

55928

8.54

247

53.067

100

4.15

-2.56

2048

Trypsin-1 precursor

26558

6.08

121

35.176

100

-2.64

2.80

1807

Carboxypeptidase A2 precursor

46828

5.68

208

52.449

100

-13.00

1.41

2007

Complement C4-B precursor

192793

6.73

123

31.488

100

-2.10

-1.50

2114

Chymotrypsinogen B precursor

27870

6.79

146

36.051

100

-2.43

1.30

2052

Elastase-3A precursor

29475

6.43

143

35.156

100

-5.71

-1.80

2030

Elastase-3B precursor

29293

5.65

157

42.945

100

-2.30

1.12

1967

Fibrinogen-like protein 1 precursor

36392

5.58

196

57.347

100

-2.71

-1.51

1857

Haptoglobin precursor

45205

6.13

163

45.013

100

-2.00

-1.72

2064

Trypsin-3 precursor

32499

7.46

120

27.118

100

-2.82

3.20

2129

Complement C3 precursor

187148

6.02

248

54.849

100

-3.78

4.04

Figure 1

Representative gel images of proteins extracted from pancreatic cancer juice and cancer-free controls juice. Representative 2-DE gel images of pancreatic juice proteins from PDAC (A) and cancer-free controls (B), and representative DIGE overlay image (C). Labeled spots are significantly up-regulated proteins in pancreatic cancer juice (A), in cancer-free controls juice (B) and a total of 24 differentially expressed protein spots (C).

Figure 2

Individual differentially expressed protein spots in pancreatic cancer juice and cancer-free controls juice. Selected areas of 14 up-regulated (A) and 10 down-regulated (B) spots and their corresponding DIGE images.

Western blot analysis of MMP-9, DJ-1 and A1BG

As seen in Figure 3, compared with cancer-free controls, increased MMP-9, DJ-1 and A1BG expression in cancerous pancreatic juice were detected by Western blot. In addition, cancerous pancreatic juice with MMP-9 expression evinced both 92 kDa and 82 kDa bands, corresponding to the latent and activated forms of MMP-9, respectively.
Figure 3

MMP-9, DJ-1 and A1BG expression analysis by Western blot. Increased MMP-9 (A), DJ-1 (B) and A1BG (C) were detected in the cancerous juice samples compared with cancer-free pancreatic juice samples; MMP-9 expression evinced both 92 kDa and 82 kDa bands, corresponding to the latent and activated forms of MMP-9, respectively.

Immunohistochemical validation of MMP-9, DJ-1 and A1BG

The expressions of MMP-9, DJ-1 and A1BG were confirmed by immunohistochemistry in 51 pancreatic cancer and 8 normal pancreas samples that were not included in the proteomic experiment (Table 4; Figure 4). MMP-9 was detected in the malignant ductal epithelia in 82.4% of PDAC tissues, but was barely detectable in normal pancreas. In addition, 9 cases of PDAC demonstrated strong MMP-9 expression in the stroma.
Table 4

Summary of MMP-9, DJ-1 and A1BG immunohistochemical study on PDAC tissue array

PDAC

Negative

Positive

Total

 

MMP-9

DJ-1

A1BG

MMP-9

DJ-1

A1BG

 

Well differentiated

2 (22.2%)

2 (22.2%)

1 (11.1%)

7 (77.8%)

7 (77.8%)

8 (88.9%)

9

Moderately differentiated

2 (10.5%)

3 (15.8%)

2 (10.5%)

17 (89.5%)

16 (84.2%)

17 (89.5%)

19

Poorly differentiated

5 (21.7%)

9 (39.1%)

4 (17.4%)

18 (78.3%)

14 (60.9%)

19 (82.6%)

23

Figure 4

MMP-9, DJ-1 and A1BG expression analysis by Immunohistochemistry (×200). MMP-9 (A), DJ-1 (C) and A1BG (E) over-expressed in PDAC tissues. MMP-9 (B), DJ-1(D) and A1BG (F) were not detectable in normal pancreas tissues.

In normal pancreas, DJ-1 was negatively or weakly expressed in duct epithelium, acinar cells and islet cells. In PDAC, 72.5% demonstrated DJ-1 over-expression in cancer cells. In addition, DJ-1 over-expression was related to the differentiation of PDAC. DJ-1 positive stain was observed in 7/9 well differentiated tumors, 16/19 moderately differentiated tumors, and 14/23 poorly differentiated tumors, respectively. There was a significant difference of DJ-1 over-expression between moderately differentiated PDAC with poorly differentiated PDAC (p < 0.05).

No positive A1BG staining was detected in all the normal pancreas tissues. A1BG was over-expressed in the cytoplasma of malignant epithelia in 86.3% of pancreatic cancer tissues, significantly higher than that in normal pancreas tissues (p < 0.01).

Serum MMP-9 levels by ELISA

As shown in Figure 5, serum MMP-9 levels were significantly higher in patients with pancreatic cancer (median = 255.14 ng/ml; quartile range, 125.43 ng/ml) than those with chronic pancreatitis (median = 210.22 ng/ml; quartile range, 12.48 ng/ml; p = 0.009) and normal controls (median = 203.77 ng/ml; quartile range, 17.04 ng/ml; p = 0.027).
Figure 5

Box plot of MMP-9 serum levels for PDAC, chronic pancreatitis and normal controls by ELISA. The serum levels of MMP-9 in PDAC patients were significantly higher than those in chronic pancreatitis patients and in healthy controls (p < 0.05). PDAC: pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma patients; CP: chronic pancreatitis patients; N: healthy controls.

Discussion

PDAC is the most common pathological subgroup of pancreatic cancer. During the development of PDAC, malignant ductal cells preferentially shed into the ductal lumen, making pancreatic juice a rich source of cancer-specific proteins. Therefore, pancreatic juice is an ideal specimen for identifying new tumor markers for PDAC.

We adopted a quantitative proteomic technology (DIGE) to compare the protein profiling of pancreatic juice from PDAC and its cancer-free controls. DIGE technology not only provided reliable quantification, but also can minimize the run-to-run reproducibility of conventional 2-DE [8]. In this study, a total of 24 differentially expressed proteins between pancreatic juice from PDAC and cancer-free controls, including 14 up-regulated proteins and 10 down-regulated proteins, were identified. Half of the up-regulated proteins in PDAC, such as DJ-1, MMP-9, apolipoprotein A-I, A1BG, SOD [Mn], serotransferrin and Ig lambda chain V-IV region were firstly identified in cancerous pancreatic juice. Three up-regulated proteins MMP-9, DJ-1 and A1BG in PDAC pancreatic juice were further validated. Western blot analysis demonstrated elevated protein levels of MMP-9, DJ-1 and A1BG in cancerous pancreatic juice compared with cancer-free pancreatic juice, which is consistent with our proteomic findings.

For the scarcity of cancer-free pancreatic juice specimens, two types of pancreatic juice control subjects, one with pancreatitis and the other without pancreatitis, were included in our study. In a previous proteomic study by Shen et al. [9], it was demonstrated that there are obvious differences in protein profiling between pancreatitis and healthy control tissues. So the protein profiling of pancreatic juice between pancreatitis patients and control subjects without pancreatitis was also compared (Table 3). Seven pancreatic juice proteins, such as trypsin-1 precursor, were demonstrated to be differently expressed between cancer-free controls with and without pancreatitis. In addition, five down-regulated proteins identified in pancreatic cancer juice (carboxypeptidase A2, chymotrypsinogen B, elastase-3A, elastase-3B and trypsin-1) was also down-regulated in pancreatic cancer tissues compared with pancreatitis and normal pancreas tissues as described by Shen et al. [9].

Over-expression of MMP-9 and DJ-1 in pancreatic cancer tissues have been shown in previous studies [10, 11]. It is believed that MMP-9 over-expression results in the degradation of the basement membrane and contributes to local invasion or distant metastases during pancreatic carcinogenesis [12, 13]. DJ-1 is a novel mitogen-dependent oncogene involved in ras-related signal transduction pathway [14]. Recently, several previous studies have shown that DJ-1 is over-expressed in multiple cancer tissues including pancreatic cancer [15, 16]. Our immunohistological study extended the above investigation to larger sample size and revealed that MMP-9 and DJ-1 were expressed in 82.4% and 72.5% of PDAC tissues, significantly higher than that in normal pancreas. Furthermore, DJ-1 over-expression was associated with PDAC differentiation. Moderately differentiated PDAC demonstrated a higher expression level of DJ-1 than poorly differentiated tumor subgroup, which suggests that DJ-1 may be a differentiation related protein.

A1BG, a member of the immunoglobulin superfamily, is believed to be a secreted plasma protein, but its function is unknown [17]. In this study, we first identified and confirmed A1BG as an elevated protein in pancreatic juice and cancer tissues of PDAC. Our immunohistochemical study further validated that A1BG protein over-expression was seen in most PDAC tissues, but not detected in normal pancreas tissues. Using a glycoprotein profiling method, Kreunin et al. [18] recently found that A1BG was detected in urinary samples from bladder cancer patients, but in none of the samples obtained from non-tumor-bearing individuals. Yoon et al. [19] also demonstrated A1BG over-expression in liver cancer cell lines and tissues by semi-quantitative RT-PCR. These findings together with our proteomic results suggest that A1BG might be a cancer-associated gene and a novel tumor marker of cancer, and its possible functions in carcinogenesis deserve further investigation.

The novel protein biomarkers identified in ERCP-obtained pancreatic juice might have enormous potential for use in the diagnosis of PDAC. It is reasonable to believe that proteins indicative of cancer in pancreatic juice are also elevated in blood. Therefore, we measured serum levels of MMP-9 in PDAC, and found that serum MMP-9 had a higher level in PDAC than in chronic pancreatitis and healthy controls. The findings suggest that serum measurement of MMP-9 or other up-regulated proteins in cancerous pancreatic juice might be helpful in the diagnosis of pancreatic adenocarcinoma and deserve further investigation.

Conclusion

In the present study, we carried out a comparative proteomics analysis on pancreatic juice from PDAC and its cancer-free controls. A total of 24 differentially expressed proteins were identified, of which 14 were over-regulated and 10 were under-regulated in pancreatic juice of PDAC. We further confirmed the expression levels of three up-regulated proteins (MMP-9, DJ-1 and A1BG) in pancreatic juice, tissue and serum samples using Western blot, IHC or ELISA. A1BG was firstly identified as a biomarker in cancer-associated samples. Serum MMP-9 measurement might be helpful in discriminating pancreatic adenocarcinoma from chronic pancreatitis and healthy controls. The newly identified proteins in this study might be useful for developing new pancreatic juice-related or serum-related diagnostic markers for PDAC.

Notes

Declarations

Acknowledgements

This study was supported by grants from the Key Project of the Department of Science & Technology of Shandong Province, China (No. 2005GG1102003). We thank Dr. Jinbo Jiang at Qilu Hospital of Shandong University and Dr. Muqian Teng at Shandong Qianfoshan Hospital for the pancreatic juice samples collection.

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
Key Laboratory of Ministry of Health for Biotech-Drug, Key Laboratory for Modern Medicine and Technology of Shandong Province, Shandong Medicinal Biotechnology Center, Shandong Academy of Medical Sciences

References

  1. Garcea G, Neal CP, Pattenden CJ, Steward WP, Berry DP: Molecular prognostic markers in pancreatic cancer: a systematic review. Eur J Cancer. 2005, 41 (15): 2213-2236. 10.1016/j.ejca.2005.04.044.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Steinberg W: The clinical utility of the CA 19-9 tumor-associated antigen. The American journal of gastroenterology. 1990, 85 (4): 350-355.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Gronborg M, Bunkenborg J, Kristiansen TZ, Jensen ON, Yeo CJ, Hruban RH, Maitra A, Goggins MG, Pandey A: Comprehensive proteomic analysis of human pancreatic juice. Journal of proteome research. 2004, 3 (5): 1042-1055. 10.1021/pr0499085.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Chen R, Pan S, Yi EC, Donohoe S, Bronner MP, Potter JD, Goodlett DR, Aebersold R, Brentnall TA: Quantitative proteomic profiling of pancreatic cancer juice. Proteomics. 2006, 6 (13): 3871-3879. 10.1002/pmic.200500702.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Rosty C, Christa L, Kuzdzal S, Baldwin WM, Zahurak ML, Carnot F, Chan DW, Canto M, Lillemoe KD, Cameron JL, Yeo CJ, Hruban RH, Goggins M: Identification of hepatocarcinoma-intestine-pancreas/pancreatitis-associated protein I as a biomarker for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma by protein biochip technology. Cancer research. 2002, 62 (6): 1868-1875.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Chen R, Pan S, Cooke K, Moyes KW, Bronner MP, Goodlett DR, Aebersold R, Brentnall TA: Comparison of pancreas juice proteins from cancer versus pancreatitis using quantitative proteomic analysis. Pancreas. 2007, 34 (1): 70-79. 10.1097/01.mpa.0000240615.20474.fd.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  7. Qi T, Han J, Cui Y, Zong M, Liu X, Zhu B: Comparative proteomic analysis for the detection of biomarkers in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinomas. Journal of clinical pathology. 2008, 61 (1): 49-58. 10.1136/jcp.2006.044735.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Tannu NS, Hemby SE: Two-dimensional fluorescence difference gel electrophoresis for comparative proteomics profiling. Nature protocols. 2006, 1 (4): 1732-1742. 10.1038/nprot.2006.256.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  9. Shen J, Person MD, Zhu J, Abbruzzese JL, Li D: Protein expression profiles in pancreatic adenocarcinoma compared with normal pancreatic tissue and tissue affected by pancreatitis as detected by two-dimensional gel electrophoresis and mass spectrometry. Cancer research. 2004, 64 (24): 9018-9026. 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-04-3262.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Pryczynicz A, Guzinska-Ustymowicz K, Dymicka-Piekarska V, Czyzewska J, Kemona A: Expression of matrix metalloproteinase 9 in pancreatic ductal carcinoma is associated with tumor metastasis formation. Folia histochemica et cytobiologica / Polish Academy of Sciences, Polish Histochemical and Cytochemical Society. 2007, 45 (1): 37-40.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Kuniyasu H, Ellis LM, Evans DB, Abbruzzese JL, Fenoglio CJ, Bucana CD, Cleary KR, Tahara E, Fidler IJ: Relative expression of E-cadherin and type IV collagenase genes predicts disease outcome in patients with resectable pancreatic carcinoma. Clin Cancer Res. 1999, 5 (1): 25-33.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Jones L, Ghaneh P, Humphreys M, Neoptolemos JP: The matrix metalloproteinases and their inhibitors in the treatment of pancreatic cancer. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences. 1999, 880: 288-307. 10.1111/j.1749-6632.1999.tb09533.x.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Ghaneh P, Kawesha A, Evans JD, Neoptolemos JP: Molecular prognostic markers in pancreatic cancer. Journal of hepato-biliary-pancreatic surgery. 2002, 9 (1): 1-11. 10.1007/s005340200000.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Nagakubo D, Taira T, Kitaura H, Ikeda M, Tamai K, Iguchi-Ariga SM, Ariga H: DJ-1, a novel oncogene which transforms mouse NIH3T3 cells in cooperation with ras. Biochemical and biophysical research communications. 1997, 231 (2): 509-513. 10.1006/bbrc.1997.6132.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Melle C, Ernst G, Escher N, Hartmann D, Schimmel B, Bleul A, Thieme H, Kaufmann R, Felix K, Friess HM, Settmacher U, Hommann M, Richter KK, Daffner W, Taubig H, Manger T, Claussen U, von Eggeling F: Protein profiling of microdissected pancreas carcinoma and identification of HSP27 as a potential serum marker. Clinical chemistry. 2007, 53 (4): 629-635. 10.1373/clinchem.2006.079194.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Tillman JE, Yuan J, Gu G, Fazli L, Ghosh R, Flynt AS, Gleave M, Rennie PS, Kasper S: DJ-1 binds androgen receptor directly and mediates its activity in hormonally treated prostate cancer cells. Cancer research. 2007, 67 (10): 4630-4637. 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-06-4556.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Ishioka N, Takahashi N, Putnam FW: Amino acid sequence of human plasma alpha 1B-glycoprotein: homology to the immunoglobulin supergene family. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 1986, 83 (8): 2363-2367. 10.1073/pnas.83.8.2363.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  18. Kreunin P, Zhao J, Rosser C, Urquidi V, Lubman DM, Goodison S: Bladder cancer associated glycoprotein signatures revealed by urinary proteomic profiling. Journal of proteome research. 2007, 6 (7): 2631-2639. 10.1021/pr0700807.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  19. Yoon SY, Kim JM, Oh JH, Jeon YJ, Lee DS, Kim JH, Choi JY, Ahn BM, Kim S, Yoo HS, Kim YS, Kim NS: Gene expression profiling of human HBV- and/or HCV-associated hepatocellular carcinoma cells using expressed sequence tags. International journal of oncology. 2006, 29 (2): 315-327.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Pre-publication history

    1. The pre-publication history for this paper can be accessed here:http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2407/8/241/prepub

Copyright

© Tian et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2008

This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Advertisement