4.3 Article

Tear proteomic profile in three distinct ocular surface diseases: keratoconus, pterygium, and dry eye related to graft-versus-host disease

Journal

CLINICAL PROTEOMICS
Volume 17, Issue 1, Pages -

Publisher

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/s12014-020-09307-5

Keywords

Keratoconus; Dry eye; Pterygium; Tear film; Proteomics

Funding

  1. Fundacao de Amparo a Pesquisa do Estado de Sao Paulo (FAPESP) [2014/19138-5]
  2. Fundo de Apoio ao Ensino, a Pesquisa e a Extensao (FAEPEX) [3001/19]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background Diseases of the anterior segment of the eye may present different mechanisms, intensity of symptoms, and impact on the patients' quality of life and vision. The tear film is in direct contact with the ocular surface and cornea and can be easily accessed for sample collection, figuring as a promising source of potential biomarkers for diagnosis and treatment control. This study aimed to evaluate tear proteomic profile in 3 distinct ocular diseases: keratoconus (corneal ectasia), severe dry eye related to graft-versus-host-disease (tear film dysfunction and ocular inflammatory condition) and pterygium (conjunctival fibrovascular degenerative disease). Methods Tear samples were collected from patients of each condition and a control group. By using mass spectrometric analysis combined with statistics and bioinformatics tools, a detailed comparison of protein profile was performed. Results After Student's t-test analyses comparing each condition to the control group, we found the following number of differentially expressed proteins: 7 in keratoconus group, 29 in pterygium group, and 79 in GVHD group. Following multivariate analyses, we also report potential candidates as biomarkers for each disease. Conclusions We demonstrated herein that mass spectrometry-based proteomics was able to indicate proteins that differentiate three distinct ocular conditions, which is a promising tool for the diagnosis of ocular diseases.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available