The use of proteomics for the assessment of clinical samples in research

Proteomics, the analysis of expressed proteins, has been an important developing area of research for the past two decades [Anderson, NG, Anderson, NL. Twenty years of two-dimensional electrophoresis: past, present and future. Electrophoresis 1996;17:443-53]. Advances in technology have led to a rapid increase in applications to a wide range of samples; from initial experiments using cell lines, more complex tissues and biological fluids are now being assessed to establish changes in protein expression. A primary aim of clinical proteomics is the identification of biomarkers for diagnosis and therapeutic intervention of disease, by comparing the proteomic profiles of control and disease, and differing physiological states. This expansion into clinical samples has not been without difficulties owing to the complexity and dynamic range in plasma and human tissues including tissue biopsies. The most widely used techniques for analysis of clinical samples are surface-enhanced laser desorption/ionisation mass spectrometry (SELDI-MS) and 2-dimensional gel electrophoresis (2-DE) coupled to matrix-assisted laser desorption ionisation [Person, MD, Monks, TJ, Lau, SS. An integrated approach to identifying chemically induced posttranslational modifications using comparative MALDI-MS and targeted HPLC-ESI-MS/MS. Chem. Res. Toxicol. 2003;16:598-608]-mass spectroscopy (MALDI-MS). This review aims to summarise the findings of studies that have used proteomic research methods to analyse samples from clinical studies and to assess the impact that proteomic techniques have had in assessing clinical samples. © 2004 The Canadian Society of Clinical Chemists. All rights reserved.

Area summation and masking

At detection threshold, sensitivity improves as the area of a test grating increases, but not when the test is placed on a pedestal and the task becomes contrast discrimination (G. E. Legge, & J. M. Foley, 1980). This study asks whether the abolition of area summation is specific to the situation where mask and test stimuli have the same spatial frequency and orientation ("within-channel" masking) or is more general, also occurring when mask and test stimuli are very different ("cross-channel" masking). Threshold versus contrast masking functions were measured where the test and mask were either both small (SS), both large (LL), or small and large, respectively (SL). For within-channel masking, facilitation and area summation were found at low mask contrasts, but the results for SS and LL converged at intermediate contrasts and above, replicating Legge and Foley (1980). For all three observers, less facilitation was found for SL than for SS. For cross-channel masking, area summation occurred across the entire masking function and results for SS and SL were identical. The results for the entire data set were well fit by an extended version of a contrast masking model (J. M. Foley, 1994) in which the weights of excitatory and suppressive surround terms were free parameters. I conclude that (i) there is no empirical abolition of area summation for cross-channel masking, (ii) within-channel area summation can be abolished empirically without being disabled in the model, (iii) observers are able to restrict the area of spatial integration, but not suppression, (iv) extending a cross-channel mask to the surround has no effect on contrast detection, and (v) there is a formal similarity between area summation and contrast adaptation. © 2004 ARVO.