Tumor Biology

, Volume 36, Issue 2, pp 561–567 | Cite as

Comparative proteomic analysis of fibrosarcoma and skin fibroblast cell lines

Research Article


Comparative proteomic analysis of normal and cancer cell lines provides for a better understanding of the molecular mechanism of cancer development and is essential for developing more effective strategies for new biomarker or drug target discovery. The purpose of this study is to compare protein expression levels between fibrosarcoma and fibroblast cell lines. In our study, two-dimensional polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (2-D PAGE) and liquid chromatography coupled with tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) techniques were carried out to compare the protein profile between fibrosarcoma and fibroblast cell lines. We prepared cell lysate samples to analyze intracellular proteins and secretome samples to analyze extracellular proteins in both cell lines. Our results revealed 13 upregulated proteins and 1 downregulated protein of which all of them identified in fibrosarcoma cell line after the comparison with fibroblast cell line cell lysates. When comparing secretome profiles of both cell lines, we found and identified 13 proteins only expressed in fibrosarcoma cell line. These identified proteins have common functions such as cell proliferation, cell differentiation, invasion, metastasis, and apoptosis in cancer. The data obtained from this study indicates that these proteins have importance on understanding the molecular mechanism of fibrosarcoma. These proteins may serve as candidate biomarkers and drug targets for future clinical studies.


2-D PAGE Fibrosarcoma Fibroblast LC-MS/MS Proteomics 



The authors thank Dr. Tarik Baykal from Medipol University for the assistance with LC-MS/MS analysis and Dr. Mert Pekcan from Ankara University for providing technical assistance and suggestions. This study was supported by Ankara University Scientific Research Grant (grant no. 12B3338001).

Conflicts of interest



  1. 1.
    Fletcher CDM, Krishnan Unni K, Mertens F. Pathology and genetics of tumours of soft tissue and bone. 3rd ed. Lyon: IARC; 2006.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Nikitovic D, Kouvidi K, Karamanos NK, Tzanakakis GN. The roles of hyaluronan/RHAMM/CD44 and their respective interactions along the insidious pathways of fibrosarcoma progression. Biomed Res Int. 2013;2013:929531.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hajdu SI. Fibrosarcoma: a historic commentary. Cancer. 1998;82:2081–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Goldblum JR, Folpe AL, Weiss SW. Enzinger and Weiss’s soft tissue tumors. 6th ed. Philadelphia: Elsevier Saunders; 2013.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Song B, Kim B, Choi SH, Song KY, Chung YG, Lee YS, et al. Mesenchymal stromal cells promote tumor progression in fibrosarcoma and gastric cancer cells. Korean J Pathol. 2014;48(3):217–24.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Klijanienko J, Lagace R. Soft tissue tumors: a multidisciplinary, decisional diagnostic approach. 1st ed. Hoboken: Wiley; 2011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Xue H, Lu B, Lai M. The cancer secretome: a reservoir of biomarkers. J Transl Med. 2008;6:52.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Zwickl H, Traxler E, Staettner S, Parzefall W, Grasl-Kraupp B, Karner J, et al. A novel technique to specifically analyze the secretome of cells and tissues. Electrophoresis. 2005;26:2779–85.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Guoqing L, Zhefeng X, Jianping L, Cui L, Feng L, Zhuchu C. Cancer: a proteomic disease. Sci China Life Sci. 2011;54:403–8.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Rubporn A, Srisomsap C, Subhasitanont P, Chokchamnankit D, Chiablaem K, Svasti J, et al. Comparative proteomic analysis of lung cancer cell line and lung fibroblast cell line. Cancer Genomics Proteomics. 2009;6:229–37.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Zang J, Wang P, Gao S, Xiao D, Zhang J, Wang K. Differential proteins expression between gastric cancer and normal cell lines. Life Sci J. 2008;5(4):28–32.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Deng SS, Xing TY, Zhou HY, Xiong RH, Lu YG, Wen B, et al. Comparative proteome analysis of breast cancer and adjacent normal breast tissues in human. Genomics Proteomics Bioinforma. 2006;4(3):165–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Johansson B, Pourian MR, Chuan Y, Byman I, Bergh A, Pang ST, et al. Proteomic comparison of prostate cancer cell lines LNCaP-FGC and LNCaP-r reveals heatshock protein 60 as a marker for prostate malignancy. Prostate. 2006;66:1235–44.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Antharavally BS, Mallia KA, Rangaraj P, Haney P, Bell PA. Quantitation of proteins using a dye-metal-based colorimetric protein assay. Anal Biochem. 2009;385(2):342–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Shen H, Huang J, Pei H, Zeng S, Tao Y, Shen L, et al. Comparative proteomic study for profiling differentially expressed proteins between chinese left and right sided colon cancers. Cancer Sci. 2013;104(1):135–41.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Yang MS, Wang HS, Wang BS, Li WH, Pang ZF, Zou BK, et al. A comparative proteomic study identified calreticulin and prohibitin up-regulated in adenocortical carcinomas. Diagn Pathol. 2013;8:58.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Coghlin C, Carpenter B, Dundas SR, Lawrie LC, Telfer C, Murray GI. Characterization and over-expression of chaperonin t-complex proteins in colorectal cancer. J Pathol. 2006;210:351–57.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Li C, Chen Z, Xiao Z, Wu X, Zhan X, Zhang X, et al. Comparative proteomic analysis of human lung squamous carcinoma. Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 2003;309:253–60.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Wang TH, Chao A, Tsai CL, Chang CL, Chen SH, Lee YS, et al. Stress-induced phosphoprotein 1 as a secreted biomarker for human ovarian cancer promotes cancer cell proliferation. Mol Cell Proteomics. 2010;9(9):1873–84.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Chang HY, Hor SY, Lim KP, Zain RB, Cheong SC, Rahman MA, et al. Oral cancer secretome: identification of cancer associated proteins. Electrophoresis. 2013;34(15):2199–208.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Dos Santos M, Da Cunha Mercante AM, Nunes FD, Leopoldino AM, De Carvalho MB, Gazito D, et al. Prognostic significance of ndrg1 expression in oral and oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma. Mol Biol Rep. 2012;39(12):10157–65.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Pino I, Pio R, Toledo G, Zabalegui N, Vicent S, Rey N, et al. Altered patterns of expression of members of the heterogeneous nuclear ribonucleoprotein (hnRNP) family in lung cancer. Lung Cancer. 2003;41(2):131–43.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Chaker S, Kashat L, Voisin S, Kaur J, Kak I, Macmillan C, et al. Secretome proteins as candidate biomarkers for aggressive thyroid carcinomas. Proteomics. 2013;13(5):771–87.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Ito K, Stannard K, Gabutero E, Clark AM, Neo SY, Onturk S, et al. Galectin-1 as a potent target for cancer therapy: role in the tumor microenvironment. Cancer Metastasis Rev. 2012;31:763–78.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Yin J, Chen G, Liu Y, Liu S, Wang P, Wan Y, et al. Downregulation of SPARC expression decreases gastric cancer cellular invasion and survival. J Exp Clin Cancer Res. 2010;29:59.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Kaneko T, Konno H, Baba M, Tanaka T, Nakamura S. Urokinase-type plasminogen activator expression correlates with tumor angiogenesis and poor outcome in gastric cancer. Cancer Sci. 2003;94(1):43–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Ge S, Mao Y, Yi Y, Xie D, Chen Z, Xiao Z. Comparative proteomic analysis of secreted proteins from nasopharyngeal carcinoma-associated stromal fibroblasts and normal fibroblast. Exp Ther Med. 2012;3:857–60.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Sardana G, Marshall J, Diamandis EP. Discovery of candidate tumor markers for prostate cancer via proteomic analysis of cell culture conditioned medium. Clin Chem. 2007;53(3):429–37.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Sasaki T, Hankins GR, Helm GA. Major vault protein/lung resistance-related protein (MVP/LRP) expression in nervous system tumors. Brain Tumor Pathol. 2002;19(2):59–62.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Diaz-Ramos A, Roig-Borrellas A, Garcia-Melero A, Lopez-Alemany R. α-Enolase, a multifunctional protein: its role on pathophysiological situations. J Biomed Biotechnol. 2012;2012:156795.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© International Society of Oncology and BioMarkers (ISOBM) 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Department of BiochemistryAnkara UniversityAnkaraTurkey

Personalised recommendations