Skip to main content
Advertisement

Main menu

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current Issue
    • Fast Forward
    • Latest Articles
    • Archive
  • Information
    • Instructions to Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • For Subscribers
    • For Advertisers
    • Terms & Conditions of Use
    • Permissions
  • Editorial Board
  • Alerts
    • Alerts
    • RSS Feeds
  • Virtual Issues
  • Feedback
  • Other Publications
    • Drug Metabolism and Disposition
    • Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics
    • Molecular Pharmacology
    • Pharmacological Reviews
    • Pharmacology Research & Perspectives
    • ASPET

User menu

  • My alerts
  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
Drug Metabolism & Disposition
  • Other Publications
    • Drug Metabolism and Disposition
    • Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics
    • Molecular Pharmacology
    • Pharmacological Reviews
    • Pharmacology Research & Perspectives
    • ASPET
  • My alerts
  • Log in
Drug Metabolism & Disposition

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current Issue
    • Fast Forward
    • Latest Articles
    • Archive
  • Information
    • Instructions to Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • For Subscribers
    • For Advertisers
    • Terms & Conditions of Use
    • Permissions
  • Editorial Board
  • Alerts
    • Alerts
    • RSS Feeds
  • Virtual Issues
  • Feedback
  • Visit dmd on Facebook
  • Follow dmd on Twitter
  • Follow ASPET on LinkedIn
Rapid CommunicationShort Communication

An Optimized Method for Protein Extraction from OCT-Embedded Human Kidney Tissue for Protein Quantification by LC-MS/MS Proteomics

Marc Vrana, Anne Goodling, Maryam Afkarian and Bhagwat Prasad
Drug Metabolism and Disposition October 2016, 44 (10) 1692-1696; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1124/dmd.116.071522
Marc Vrana
Department of Pharmaceutics (M.V., B.P.) and Kidney Research Institute and Division of Nephrology, Department of Medicine (A.G., M.A.), University of Washington, Seattle, Washington
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Anne Goodling
Department of Pharmaceutics (M.V., B.P.) and Kidney Research Institute and Division of Nephrology, Department of Medicine (A.G., M.A.), University of Washington, Seattle, Washington
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Maryam Afkarian
Department of Pharmaceutics (M.V., B.P.) and Kidney Research Institute and Division of Nephrology, Department of Medicine (A.G., M.A.), University of Washington, Seattle, Washington
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Bhagwat Prasad
Department of Pharmaceutics (M.V., B.P.) and Kidney Research Institute and Division of Nephrology, Department of Medicine (A.G., M.A.), University of Washington, Seattle, Washington
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters
  • PDF + SI
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

The existing biobanks of remnant tissue from clinically indicated kidney biopsies are attractive potential reservoirs for quantification of clinically relevant human tissue proteins by quantitative proteomics. However, a significant caveat of this strategy is that the tissues are often preserved in optimal cutting temperature (OCT) medium. Although OCT is an effective method of preserving the morphologic and immunohistological characteristics of tissues for later study, it significantly impacts efforts to quantify protein expression by liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry methods. We report here a simple, reproducible, and cost-effective procedure to extract proteins from OCT-embedded tissue samples. Briefly, the excess frozen OCT medium was scraped before thawing from the tissue specimens stored at –80°C for ∼3 months. The tissue samples were homogenized and diethyl ether/methanol extraction was performed to remove the remaining OCT medium. The recovered protein was denatured, reduced, and alkylated. The second step of protein extraction and desalting was performed by chloroform/methanol/water extraction of denatured proteins. The resultant protein pellet was trypsin-digested and the marker proteins of various kidney cellular compartments were quantified by targeted selective reaction monitoring proteomics. Upon comparison of peptide signals from OCT-embedded tissue and flash-frozen tissue from the same donors, both individual protein quantities, and their interindividual variabilities, were similar. Therefore, the approach reported here can be applied to clinical reservoirs of OCT-preserved kidney tissue to be used for quantitative proteomics studies of clinically relevant proteins expressed in different parts of the kidney (including drug transporters and metabolizing enzymes).

Introduction

Twenty-six million Americans adults have chronic kidney disease (CKD) (http://www.niddk.nih.gov/health-information/health-statistics/Pages/kidney-disease-statistics-united-states.aspx), and people with CKD are at higher risk for cardiovascular and all-cause mortality (Tonelli et al., 2006). However, development of new diagnostic and therapeutic tools for CKD is hampered by our incomplete understanding of its underlying pathophysiology. In this direction, targeted mass spectrometry is a powerful tool, enabling simultaneous quantification of several prespecified proteins in biologic samples (Hood et al., 2012). Determining the abundance of protein components or targets of a given pathway using quantitative proteomics can generate a snapshot of the pathway status and activity within these samples. More recently, kidney tissue has gained notice as a more informative biologic sample for proteomics studies aiming to understand CKD pathophysiology. However, although kidneys play a critical role in the elimination of many drugs (Feng et al., 2012; Yacovino and Aleksunes, 2012; Moss et al., 2014), we have a limited quantitative understanding of the protein expression of drug transporters and metabolizing enzymes in the kidney tissue. Further, these data are scarcely available from CKD patients. Quantitative characterization of the transporters and enzymes in healthy as well as diseased tissues is indispensable for building pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic models to predict drug disposition and response. As such, both targeted and untargeted, or “shotgun,” proteomics methods have been applied to blood and urine in attempts to gain insight into mechanisms underlying CKD (Rossing et al., 2008; Filip et al., 2014). However, lack of power of such studies owing to the limitation of sample size often leads to inconclusive outcomes.

To overcome the sample-size problem, an attractive potential reservoir for such tissue is the existing biobanks of remnant tissue from clinically indicated kidney biopsies. Unfortunately, a significant caveat of this strategy is that these clinically stored tissues are often preserved in the optimal cutting temperature (OCT) medium, which interferes with mass spectrometry signal. On the other hand, mass spectrometric analyses perform best on protein extracted from flash-frozen tissue. Here, we describe optimization and evaluation of a method for membrane or structural protein extraction and targeted liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS), selective reaction monitoring (SRM) on OCT-embedded kidney tissue and assess the method’s performance compared with the gold-standard samples preserved by flash freezing.

Materials and Methods

Chemicals.

The ProteoExtract Native Membrane Protein Extraction Kit was procured from Calbiochem/MerckMillipore (Darmstadt, Germany). The protein quantification bicinchoninic acid (BCA) assay kit, sequencing-grade trypsin, iodoacetamide, and dithiothreitol were purchased from Pierce Biotechnology (Rockford, IL). Synthetic heavy peptides for all the surrogate peptides (Supplemental Table 1S) were obtained as internal standards from Thermo Fisher Scientific (Rockford, IL). Synthetic light peptides for the renal transporters OAT1, OAT3, OCT2, and P-glycoprotein (P-gp) were obtained as calibrators from New England Peptides (Boston, MA). Chloroform, ethyl ether, high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC)-grade acetonitrile/methanol, and formic acid were purchased from Fischer Scientific (Fair Lawn, NJ). Ammonium bicarbonate (98% purity) and sodium deoxycholate (DOC, 98% purity) were obtained from Thermo Fisher Scientific (Rockford, IL) and MP Biomedicals (Santa Ana, CA), respectively.

Sample Procurement, OCT Removal, and Trypsin Digestion.

Histologically normal sections of kidney tissue from healthy donors (n = 5, 3 male, 2 female, 53–67 years old) undergoing clinically indicated partial nephrectomy (e.g., removal of a kidney mass) were obtained after informed consent (Proteogenex, Culver City, CA). Specimens weighed 450–700 mg and were divided into two equal sections, with one section immediately frozen in liquid nitrogen and stored at –80°C. The second half was embedded in the OCT medium using a protocol followed by the University of Washington Department of Pathology; samples were subsequently transferred to –80°C. After 3 months of storage at –80°C, excess OCT around the tissue block was removed with a scalpel without compromising the embedded tissue. Two milliliters of extraction buffer I and 10 μl of protease inhibitor (Calbiochem ProteoExtract Native Protein Extraction Kit) were added to both sets of tissue samples. The samples were homogenized until completely suspended and then incubated on ice for 20 minutes on a rocker table to prevent the formation of cell clumps. The samples were then sonicated for 60 seconds and centrifuged at 16,000g, 4°C, for 15 minutes. The supernatant (the cytosolic fraction) was removed without disturbing the pellet and transferred to a new tube and set aside. One milliliter of extraction buffer II plus 5 μl of protease inhibitor was added to the pellet, which was then resuspended by pipetting up and down ten times or until the pellet was completely broken apart. The sample was incubated on ice for 30 minutes on a rocker table to prevent cell clumps from forming, then centrifuged at 16,000g, 4°C, for 15 minutes. The supernatant (membrane fraction) was removed without disturbing the pellet and transferred completely to a new tube. Total protein was quantified using BCA assay kit (Pierce Biotechnology) and the sample was diluted to 2 mg/ml before analysis.

To remove OCT contamination a previously developed method was modified (Weston and Hummon, 2013). First, 800 μl of diethyl ether and 200 μl of methanol were added to 50 μl of diluted protein sample (100 μg total protein). The sample was vortexed for 5 minutes and then centrifuged at 10,000g for 10 minutes. The upper and lower liquid layers were removed carefully so as not to disturb the interfacial pellet, and air dried. The pellet was resuspended in 80 μl of ammonium bicarbonate, 20 μl of DOC (3%), and 15 μl of 250 mM dithiothreitol and incubated for 5 minutes at 95°C. iodoacetamide (IAA) (18 μl of 500 mM) was added to the samples, and then they were incubated in the dark for 20 minutes. Beyond the previously reported method, a second cleaning step was added to decrease ion suppression in liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) and to remove any contamination that could affect trypsinization. Five-hundred microliters of methanol, 100 μl of chloroform, and 400 μl of water were added and the samples were vortexed for 1 minute. The samples were centrifuged at 6000g, 4°C, for 5 minutes. The upper and lower liquid layers were removed without disturbing the interfacial layer. The pellet was washed with 1 ml of methanol followed by centrifugation at 6000g for 5 minutes. Then the methanol was completely removed and the sample was air dried. The pellet was completely resuspended in 20 μl of sodium DOC (3%) and 40 μl of 100 mM ammonium bicarbonate. Twenty microliters of 0.16 μg/μl trypsin was added to the sample, which was then incubated for 18 hours at 37°C, with gentle shaking to assist trypsin digestion. The reaction was quenched by adding 30 μl of heavy peptide cocktail in 80% acetonitrile containing 0.1% formic acid. The sample was centrifuged at 3000g for 2 minutes and 100 μl of the supernatant was transferred into LC-MS vials for analysis. The absolute quantification of OAT1, OAT3, OCT2, and P-gp was performed by using light surrogate peptides as calibrators per published protocol (Prasad et al., 2016).

LC-MS/MS Analysis.

LC-MS/MS was performed to quantify 23 structural proteins expressed in different sections of the nephron, the functional unit of the kidney (Table 1). The surrogate peptides of the markers of various cellular compartments of kidney were quantified using triple-quadrupole LC-MS instruments [Xevo TQ-S coupled to ACQUITY UPLC (Waters, Milford, MA)] in positive electrospray ionization mode. Approximately 10 μg of the trypsin digest (5 μl) was injected onto the column (Waters 2.1 μm, C18 100A; 150 × 2.1 mm; Phenomenex, Torrance, CA) and eluted at 0.3 ml/min. A mobile phase consisting of water containing 0.1% formic acid (A) and acetonitrile containing 0.1% formic acid (B) was employed. A flow rate of 0.3 ml/min was used in a gradient manner (Supplemental Table 1S). MS/MS analysis was performed by monitoring the surrogate peptides and the internal standards using instrument parameters provided in Supplemental Table 1S.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
TABLE 1 

Proteins and peptides quantified in the kidney tissue

Data Analysis.

LC-MS/MS data were processed by integrating the peak areas generated from the reconstructed ion chromatograms for the surrogate peptides and the internal standards using MassLynx 4.1 (Waters, Hertfordshire, UK). The peak response for two to three transitions from each peptide was averaged for quantification of samples or standards. Paired Student’s t test was used to compare peptide recovery between flash-frozen and OCT-embedded samples.

Results

The results of LC-MS/MS quantification of 23 structural proteins expressed in different sections of the nephron are presented as %expression of each protein in the OCT-embedded samples compared with the paired flash-frozen control sample (Fig. 1A). When comparing peptide signal from OCT-embedded tissue to flash frozen tissue, we observed a cumulative peptide signal recovery of 101.1 ± 5.3%. Individual protein quantities in OCT were 92.1–116.2% of that in flash-frozen tissue (Fig. 1A). Interindividual variability of all the targeted proteins was also comparable in OCT-embedded versus flash-frozen tissue (42.7% and 42.9%, respectively; Fig. 1B). At absolute level, OAT1, OAT3, OCT2, and P-gp expression (pmol/mg total protein) was 7.26 ± 3.21, 4.67 ± 0.79, 10.62 ± 3.96, and 2.64 ± 0.83 (control) versus 8.53 ± 4.25, 4.76 ± 0.92, 9.54 ± 2.63, and 2.66 ± 0.87 (OCT-embedded), respectively (Fig. 2). The latter indicates 100% recovery of the proteins from the OCT-embedded kidney samples.

Fig. 1.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig. 1.

Expression levels of selected proteins, shown as percent expression detected in OCT-embedded sample versus expression detected in flash frozen samples (A). The protein signals in OCT-embedded samples were measured at 101.1 ± 5.3% of the signal in flash frozen samples, indicating good recovery of proteins. Interindividual variability (%CV) of tissue protein expression determined in flash-frozen and OCT-embedded samples (B)

Fig. 2.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig. 2.

Absolute protein abundance of OAT1, OAT3, OCT2, and P-gp in control (flash-frozen, solid black) and OCT-embedded (black and white pattern) human kidney samples (n = 5). The protein abundance is expressed as pmol/mg total membrane protein (mean ± standard deviation).

Discussion

The method reported here yields comparable protein quantification by targeted mass spectrometry from OCT-embedded tissue versus the gold standard of flash-frozen tissue and enables the use of clinical stores of OCT-preserved kidney tissue for quantitative proteomics studies. Methods have been reported for protein extraction and mass spectrometry from formalin-fixed and paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tissue; however, a limited number of reports exist on mass spectrometry proteomic analysis of OCT embedded tissue samples (Azimzadeh et al., 2010; Tian et al., 2011; Quesada-Calvo et al., 2015; Zhang et al., 2015). These published reports are mainly discovery proteomics data, which focuses on qualitative appearance of peptide signals rather than absolute peptide quantitation.

OCT and FFPE media are not ideal matrices for mass spectrometry quantification. OCT is mainly composed of polyvinyl alcohol (PVA), polyethylene glycol (PEG), and nonreactive ingredients, which serve as cryopreservative medium and support matrix for tissue sectioning. Unless completely removed, PVA and PEG can suppress ionization of the targeted peptides (Schwartz et al., 2003). Starting from recently developed methods for OCT removal (Tian et al., 2011; Johnson and White, 2014; Zhang et al., 2015), we optimized a simple and cost-effective method to extract proteins from OCT-embedded kidney tissue samples for quantitative mass spectrometry applications. This method can be applied to clinical reservoirs of OCT-preserved kidney tissue for use in quantitative proteomics studies of clinically relevant proteins expressed in different parts of the kidney (including drug transporters and metabolizing enzymes). Differential interindividual variability of proteins was observed, indicating unique regulation (e.g., mediated by individual genetic and epigenetic factors) of these proteins. The highest variability was observed for Tamm-Horsfall protein, consistent with reported values (Fu et al., 2016). However, as the main aim of this report was methodological, unique interindividual variability has no effect on our conclusions. Quantitative characterization of the clinically relevant proteins, including transporters and enzymes, in healthy as well as diseased kidney tissues is indispensable for building better pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic models to predict drug disposition and response.

Authorship Contributions

Participated in research design: Vrana, Goodling, Afkarian, Prasad.

Conducted experiments: Vrana, Prasad.

Performed data analysis: Vrana, Afkarian, Prasad.

Wrote or contributed to the writing of the manuscript: Vrana, Goodling, Afkarian, Prasad.

Footnotes

    • Received May 12, 2016.
    • Accepted July 29, 2016.
  • Dr. Afkarian’s effort was supported by the National Institutes of Health National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Disease [K23DK089017 and R01DK104706] and a Norman S. Coplon Extramural Grant from Satellite Healthcare. Dr. Prasad’s effort was funded by Department of Pharmaceutics, University of Washington, Seattle, WA.

  • dx.doi.org/10.1124/dmd.116.071522.

  • ↵Embedded ImageThis article has supplemental material available at dmd.aspetjournals.org.

Abbreviations

CKD
chronic kidney disease
DOC
sodium deoxycholate
LC-MS/MS
liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry
OCT
optimal cutting temperature
OCT2
organic cation transporter 2
P-gp
P-glycoprotein
  • Copyright © 2016 by The American Society for Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics

References

    1. Aires I,
    2. Santos AR,
    3. Bogarin R,
    4. Genc G,
    5. Pratas J,
    6. Ozkaya O,
    7. Carvalho F,
    8. Rueff J,
    9. Nolasco F, and
    10. Calado J
    (2013) Disruption of urate transport in familial renal glucosuria and report on SGLT2 expression in normal and patholocal kidney. Port J Nephrol Hypert 27:261–267.
    OpenUrl
  1. ↵
    1. Azimzadeh O,
    2. Barjaktarovic Z,
    3. Aubele M,
    4. Calzada-Wack J,
    5. Sarioglu H,
    6. Atkinson MJ, and
    7. Tapio S
    (2010) Formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) proteome analysis using gel-free and gel-based proteomics. J Proteome Res 9:4710–4720.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Ernest S,
    2. Rajaraman S,
    3. Megyesi J, and
    4. Bello-Reuss EN
    (1997) Expression of MDR1 (multidrug resistance) gene and its protein in normal human kidney. Nephron 77:284–289.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  2. ↵
    1. Feng B,
    2. El-Kattan AF, and
    3. Radi ZA
    (2012) Renal transporters in drug disposition, drug-drug interactions, and nephrotoxicity. Curr Protoc Toxicol Chapter 23:Unit 23.3:1–15.
    OpenUrl
  3. ↵
    1. Filip S,
    2. Pontillo C,
    3. Peter Schanstra J,
    4. Vlahou A,
    5. Mischak H, and
    6. Klein J
    (2014) Urinary proteomics and molecular determinants of chronic kidney disease: possible link to proteases. Expert Rev Proteomics 11:535–548.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  4. ↵
    1. Fu Q,
    2. Grote E,
    3. Zhu J,
    4. Jelinek C,
    5. Köttgen A,
    6. Coresh J, and
    7. Van Eyk JE
    (2016) An empirical approach to signature peptide choice for selected reaction monitoring: quantification of uromodulin in urine. Clin Chem 62:198–207.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    1. Fujinaka H,
    2. Iida T, and
    3. Yamamoto T
    (2014) The proteome-transcriptome-combined database of specific nephron segment proteins for novel urinary biomarker discovery. J Clinic Nephrol Res 1:1014–1019.
    OpenUrl
    1. Higgins JP,
    2. Wang L,
    3. Kambham N,
    4. Montgomery K,
    5. Mason V,
    6. Vogelmann SU,
    7. Lemley KV,
    8. Brown PO,
    9. Brooks JD, and
    10. van de Rijn M
    (2004) Gene expression in the normal adult human kidney assessed by complementary DNA microarray. Mol Biol Cell 15:649–656.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  5. ↵
    1. Hood LE,
    2. Omenn GS,
    3. Moritz RL,
    4. Aebersold R,
    5. Yamamoto KR,
    6. Amos M,
    7. Hunter-Cevera J,
    8. Locascio L, and
    9. Workshop Participants
    (2012) New and improved proteomics technologies for understanding complex biological systems: addressing a grand challenge in the life sciences. Proteomics 12:2773–2783.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  6. ↵
    1. Johnson H and
    2. White FM
    (2014) Quantitative analysis of signaling networks across differentially embedded tumors highlights interpatient heterogeneity in human glioblastoma. J Proteome Res 13:4581–4593.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Kuusniemi AM,
    2. Kestilä M,
    3. Patrakka J,
    4. Lahdenkari AT,
    5. Ruotsalainen V,
    6. Holmberg C,
    7. Karikoski R,
    8. Salonen R,
    9. Tryggvason K, and
    10. Jalanko H
    (2004) Tissue expression of nephrin in human and pig. Pediatr Res 55:774–781.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Kwon O,
    2. Myers BD,
    3. Sibley R,
    4. Dafoe D,
    5. Alfrey E, and
    6. Nelson WJ
    (1998) Distribution of cell membrane-associated proteins along the human nephron. J Histochem Cytochem 46:1423–1434.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    1. Miyanaka K,
    2. Gotoh T,
    3. Nagasaki A,
    4. Takeya M,
    5. Ozaki M,
    6. Iwase K,
    7. Takiguchi M,
    8. Iyama KI,
    9. Tomita K, and
    10. Mori M
    (1998) Immunohistochemical localization of arginase II and other enzymes of arginine metabolism in rat kidney and liver. Histochem J 30:741–751.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  7. ↵
    1. Moss DM,
    2. Neary M, and
    3. Owen A
    (2014) The role of drug transporters in the kidney: lessons from tenofovir. Front Pharmacol 5:1–14.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Motohashi H,
    2. Nakao Y,
    3. Masuda S,
    4. Katsura T,
    5. Kamba T,
    6. Ogawa O, and
    7. Inui K
    (2013) Precise comparison of protein localization among OCT, OAT, and MATE in human kidney. J Pharm Sci 102:3302–3308.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Motohashi H,
    2. Sakurai Y,
    3. Saito H,
    4. Masuda S,
    5. Urakami Y,
    6. Goto M,
    7. Fukatsu A,
    8. Ogawa O, and
    9. Inui K
    (2002) Gene expression levels and immunolocalization of organic ion transporters in the human kidney. J Am Soc Nephrol 13:866–874.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  8. ↵
    1. Prasad B,
    2. Gaedigk A,
    3. Vrana M,
    4. Gaedigk R,
    5. Leeder JS,
    6. Salphati L,
    7. Chu X,
    8. Xiao G,
    9. Hop CE, and
    10. Evers R
    , et al. (2016) Ontogeny of hepatic drug transporters as quantified by LC-MS/MS proteomics. Clin Pharmacol Ther DOI:10.1002/cpt.409 (published ahead of print).
  9. ↵
    1. Quesada-Calvo F,
    2. Bertrand V,
    3. Longuespée R,
    4. Delga A,
    5. Mazzucchelli G,
    6. Smargiasso N,
    7. Baiwir D,
    8. Delvenne P,
    9. Malaise M,
    10. De Pauw-Gillet MC,
    11. et al.
    (2015) Comparison of two FFPE preparation methods using label-free shotgun proteomics: Application to tissues of diverticulitis patients. J Proteomics 112:250–261.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
    1. Reyes JL,
    2. Lamas M,
    3. Martin D,
    4. del Carmen Namorado M,
    5. Islas S,
    6. Luna J,
    7. Tauc M, and
    8. González-Mariscal L
    (2002) The renal segmental distribution of claudins changes with development. Kidney Int 62:476–487.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  10. ↵
    1. Rossing K,
    2. Mischak H,
    3. Dakna M,
    4. Zürbig P,
    5. Novak J,
    6. Julian BA,
    7. Good DM,
    8. Coon JJ,
    9. Tarnow L,
    10. Rossing P, and
    11. PREDICTIONS Network
    (2008) Urinary proteomics in diabetes and CKD. J Am Soc Nephrol 19:1283–1290.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  11. ↵
    1. Schwartz SA,
    2. Reyzer ML, and
    3. Caprioli RM
    (2003) Direct tissue analysis using matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization mass spectrometry: practical aspects of sample preparation. J Mass Spectrom 38:699–708.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  12. ↵
    1. Tian Y,
    2. Bova GS, and
    3. Zhang H
    (2011) Quantitative glycoproteomic analysis of optimal cutting temperature-embedded frozen tissues identifying glycoproteins associated with aggressive prostate cancer. Anal Chem 83:7013–7019.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  13. ↵
    1. Tonelli M,
    2. Wiebe N,
    3. Culleton B,
    4. House A,
    5. Rabbat C,
    6. Fok M,
    7. McAlister F, and
    8. Garg AX
    (2006) Chronic kidney disease and mortality risk: a systematic review. J Am Soc Nephrol 17:2034–2047.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  14. ↵
    1. Weston LA and
    2. Hummon AB
    (2013) Comparative LC-MS/MS analysis of optimal cutting temperature (OCT) compound removal for the study of mammalian proteomes. Analyst (Lond) 138:6380–6384.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  15. ↵
    1. Yacovino LL and
    2. Aleksunes LM
    (2012) Endocrine and metabolic regulation of renal drug transporters. J Biochem Mol Toxicol 26:407–421.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  16. ↵
    1. Zhang W,
    2. Sakashita S,
    3. Taylor P,
    4. Tsao MS, and
    5. Moran MF
    (2015) Comprehensive proteome analysis of fresh frozen and optimal cutting temperature (OCT) embedded primary non-small cell lung carcinoma by LC-MS/MS. Methods 81:50–55.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
View Abstract
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Drug Metabolism and Disposition: 44 (10)
Drug Metabolism and Disposition
Vol. 44, Issue 10
1 Oct 2016
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • About the Cover
  • Index by author
  • Editorial Board (PDF)
  • Front Matter (PDF)
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for sharing this Drug Metabolism & Disposition article.

NOTE: We request your email address only to inform the recipient that it was you who recommended this article, and that it is not junk mail. We do not retain these email addresses.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
An Optimized Method for Protein Extraction from OCT-Embedded Human Kidney Tissue for Protein Quantification by LC-MS/MS Proteomics
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from Drug Metabolism & Disposition
(Your Name) thought you would be interested in this article in Drug Metabolism & Disposition.
Citation Tools
Rapid CommunicationShort Communication

Proteomics Analysis of OCT-Embedded Tissue Samples

Marc Vrana, Anne Goodling, Maryam Afkarian and Bhagwat Prasad
Drug Metabolism and Disposition October 1, 2016, 44 (10) 1692-1696; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1124/dmd.116.071522

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Rapid CommunicationShort Communication

Proteomics Analysis of OCT-Embedded Tissue Samples

Marc Vrana, Anne Goodling, Maryam Afkarian and Bhagwat Prasad
Drug Metabolism and Disposition October 1, 2016, 44 (10) 1692-1696; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1124/dmd.116.071522
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Introduction
    • Materials and Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Authorship Contributions
    • Footnotes
    • Abbreviations
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters
  • PDF + SI
  • PDF

Related Articles

Cited By...

More in this TOC Section

  • Preincubation Effects on Inhibition of OCT1 by CsA
  • Carbamazepine Metabolite and Hypersensitivity Reactions
  • SULT4A1 Preserves Mitochondrial Function
Show more Short Communications

Similar Articles

  • Home
  • Alerts
Facebook   Twitter   LinkedIn   RSS

Navigate

  • Current Issue
  • Fast Forward by date
  • Fast Forward by section
  • Latest Articles
  • Archive
  • Search for Articles
  • Feedback
  • ASPET

More Information

  • About DMD
  • Editorial Board
  • Instructions to Authors
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Customized Alerts
  • RSS Feeds
  • Subscriptions
  • Permissions
  • Terms & Conditions of Use

ASPET's Other Journals

  • Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics
  • Molecular Pharmacology
  • Pharmacological Reviews
  • Pharmacology Research & Perspectives
ISSN 1521-009X (Online)

Copyright © 2019 by the American Society for Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics