The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
2D Differential In-gel Electrophoresis for the Identification of Esophageal Scans Cell Cancer-specific Protein Markers
Open accessAbstract
The reproducibility of conventional two-dimensional (2D) gel electrophoresis can be improved using differential in-gel electrophoresis (DIGE), a new emerging technology for proteomic analysis. In DIGE, two pools of proteins are labeled with 1-(5-carboxypentyl)-1'-propylindocarbocyanine halide (Cy3) N-hydroxy-succinimidyl ester and 1-(5-carboxypentyl)-1'-methylindodi-carbocyanine halide (Cy5) N-hydroxysuccinimidyl ester fluorescent dyes, respectively. The labeled proteins are mixed and separated in the same 2D gel. 2D DIGE was applied to quantify the differences in protein expression between laser capture microdissection-procured esophageal carcinoma cells and normal epithelial cells and to define cancer-specific and normal-specific protein markers. Analysis of the 2D images from protein lysates of approximately 250,000 cancer cells and normal cells identified 1038 protein spots in cancer cell lysates and 1088 protein spots in normal cell lysates. Of the detected proteins, 58 spots were up-regulated by >3-fold and 107 were down-regulated by >3-fold in cancer cells. In addition to previously identified down-regulated protein annexin I, tumor rejection antigen (gp96) was found up-regulated in esophageal squamous cell cancer. Global quantification of protein expression between laser capture-microdissected patient-matched cancer cells and normal cells using 2D DIGE in combination with mass spectrometry is a powerful tool for the molecular characterization of cancer progression and identification of cancer-specific protein markers.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Vassilev, A., Kaneko, K. J., Shu, H., Zhao, Y., & DePamphilis, M. L. (2001) · Genes & Development · doi:10.1101/gad.888601 · Cited by 719
Self-citation
Cited by
Ong, S.-E., Blagoev, B., Kratchmarova, I., Kristensen, D. B., Steen, H., Pandey, A., & Mann, M. (2002) · Molecular & Cellular Proteomics · doi:10.1074/mcp.m200025-mcp200 · Cited by 5,574
Comparing protein abundance and mRNA expression levels on a genomic scale
Greenbaum, D. (2003) · Genome biology · doi:10.1186/gb-2003-4-9-117 · Cited by 1,692
Metadata
- Authors
- Zhou, G., Li, H., DeCamp, D., Chen, S., Shu, H., Gong, Y., Flaig, M., Gillespie, J. W., Hu, N., Taylor, P. R., Emmert-Buck, M. R., Liotta, L. A., Petricoin, E. F., & Zhao, Y.
- Venue
- Molecular & Cellular Proteomics
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2002-02
- Volume
- 1
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 117-123
- ISSN
- 1535-9476 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2139574601
- Cited by
- 388
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 22.63
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: 2D Differential In-gel Electrophoresis for the Identification of Esophageal Scans Cell Cancer-specific Protein Markers. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1074/mcp.m100015-mcp200
- The paper
- Zhou, G., Li, H., DeCamp, D., Chen, S., Shu, H., Gong, Y., Flaig, M., Gillespie, J. W., Hu, N., Taylor, P. R., Emmert-Buck, M. R., Liotta, L. A., Petricoin, E. F., & Zhao, Y. (2002). 2D Differential In-gel Electrophoresis for the Identification of Esophageal Scans Cell Cancer-specific Protein Markers. Molecular & Cellular Proteomics. https://doi.org/10.1074/mcp.m100015-mcp200
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.