Methods: In this present study, two protein extractions methods were performed to analyze female Ae. aegyti proteome, via TCA acetone precipitation extraction method and a commercial protein extraction reagent CytoBusterTM. Then, protein identification was performed by LC-ESI-MS/MS and followed by functional protein annotation analysis.
Results: The CytoBusterTM reagent gave the highest protein yield with a mean of 475.90 µg compared to TCA acetone precipitation extraction showed 283.15 µg mean of protein. LC-ESI-MS/MS identified 1,290 and 890 proteins from the CytoBusterTM reagent and TCA acetone precipitation, respectively. When comparing the protein class categories in both methods, there were three additional categories for proteins identified using CytoBusterTM reagent. The proteins were related to scaffold/adaptor protein (PC00226), protein binding activity modulator (PC00095) and intercellular signal molecule (PC00207). In conclusion, the CytoBusterTM protein extraction reagent showed a better performance for the extraction of proteins in term of the protein yield, proteome coverage and extraction speed.
Aim: To evaluate the nephroprotective activity of CAE and its fractions in cisplatin-induced nephrotoxicity and to assess whether they compromise the anticancer efficacy of cisplatin.
Materials and methods: Cisplatin-induced renal damage was induced in Ehrlich Ascites Carcinoma (EAC) bearing mice during mild phase of tumor growth. CAE and its butanol (BF) and aqueous (AF) fractions were administered orally from the 5th day for five days. Nephroprotective potential (serum urea, creatinine, renal histology) and effect of VC on cisplatin anticancer efficacy (tumor volume, viable tumor cells, percentage increase in life span (% ILS)) were calculated.
Result: CAE and its fractions significantly reversed the cisplatin-induced renal damage. CAE and BF treated animals showed regeneration of 50%-75% of proximal tubular cells. Compared to EAC control mice, the % ILS of the cisplatin-treated group was 244% and it was further extended to 379% after CAE administration. The % ILS in the CAE treated group was 1.6 times higher than the cisplatin alone treated group. GC-MS study showed the presence of astaxanthin and betulin.
Conclusion: CAE of VC reverses cisplatin-induced kidney damage as well as regenerates proximal tubular epithelial cells, without compromising the anticancer effect of cisplatin. When CAE was further fractionated, the nephroprotective activity was retained, but the beneficial anticancer effect of cisplatin was compromised.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: An e-mail invitation to participate in an online survey was sent to hospital laboratories in Malaysia (n=140). Questions regarding methods for measuring creatinine, equations for calculating eGFR, eGFR reporting, the terminology used in reporting urine albumin, types of samples and the cut-off values used for normal albuminuria.
RESULTS: A total of 42/140 (30%) laboratories answered the questionnaire. The prevalent method used for serum creatinine measurement was the Jaffé method (88.1%) traceable to isotope-dilution mass spectrometry. eGFR was reported along with serum creatinine by 61.9% of laboratories while 33.3% of laboratories report eGFR on request. The formula used for eGFR reporting was mainly MDRD (64.3%) and results were reported as exact numbers even when the eGFR was <60 ml/min/1.73m2. The term microalbumin is still used by 83.3% of laboratories. There is a large heterogeneity among the labs regarding the type of sample recommended for measuring urine albumin, reference interval and reporting units.
CONCLUSION: It is evident that the laboratory assessment of chronic kidney disease in Malaysia is not standardised. It is essential to provide a national framework for standardised reporting of eGFR and urine albumin. Recommendations developed by the MACB CKD Task Force, if adopted by all laboratories, will lead to a reduction in this variability.