Background: Urine is a useful source of protein for biomarker discovery and assessment because it is readily available, can be obtained by noninvasive collection methods, and enables monitoring of a wide range of physiologic processes and diseases. Urine aliquots provide enough protein for multiple analyses, combining current protocols with new techniques.

Conclusions: Standardized collection and processing protocols are now being established and new methods for protein detection and quantification are emerging to complement traditional immunoassays. The current state of urine collection, specimen processing, and storage is reviewed with regard to discovery and quantification of protein biomarkers for cancer. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 19(4); 953–9. ©2010 AACR.

Protein in urine originates from glomerular filtration of plasma, excretion from epithelial cells in the urinary tract, sloughing of epithelial cells and casts, and formation of urinary exosomes (1). Changes in urine protein components and concentrations, therefore, may report directly on dysfunction of cells within the urinary tract, whereas other diseases may be detectable through the transmission of analytes from blood into urine. Although blood plasma is strictly governed by homeostatic mechanisms, protein accumulation in urine is not. As a consequence, the proteome of urine seems to be significantly different from blood plasma in terms of protein composition; for example, albumin comprises ∼50% (by weight) of the total plasma proteome but only 7% of the protein excreted in urine (1). Urine is a complex and diverse source of candidate protein biomarkers; >1,500 proteins were identified in a study using liquid chromatography coupled to tandem mass spectrometry peptide sequencing (LC-MS/MS) for the identification of urinary proteins separated by SDS-PAGE and reverse-phase liquid chromatography before tryptic digestion (2). Another study using capillary electrophoresis coupled to mass spectrometry resulted in the identification of as many as 4,094 peptides in unfractionated and undigested samples (3).

Potential urinary protein biomarkers have been reported for several types of cancer (Table 1). Assays for bladder-tumor–associated antigen (4) and nuclear matrix protein, NMP22 (5-7), in urine have already been approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for bladder cancer screening. Urinary cathepsin D has been reported as a potential prognostic biomarker for renal cell carcinoma, correlating well with survival in studies using mass spectrometry and immunoassays (8). Additional candidate biomarkers (9-23) for diagnosis, prognosis, and selection of treatment listed in Table 1 are in the development pipeline. Biomarker panels are also under investigation to improve positive predictive value with the goal of using molecular information to tailor treatment regimens to each patient (24).

Table 1.

Protein biomarkers in urine investigated for detection and staging cancer

CancerPotential biomarkersComment (Reference)
Bladder Bladder-tumor–associated antigen FDA-approved immunoassay (4) 
NMP22 FDA-approved immunoassay (5) 
Calreticulin Partially Validated through Western blot (15) 
Clusterin Diagnostic/prognostic (13) 
Cystatin B Partially Validated through IHC and Western blot (11) 
Proepithelin Partially validated through IHC and ELISA (18) 
UHRF1 Observed through IHC (22) 
α-1B-Glycoprotein Discovered using lectin affinity chromatography (17) 
Renal Cathepsin D Correlated with survival (8) 
NMP22 FDA-approved for bladder cancer (16) 
Prostate Collagen α-1(III) peptide Collagen α-1(I) peptide MMP substrate (21) 
Psoriasis susceptibility 1 candidate gene 2 protein peptide CE-MS detection, decreased in cancer (21) 
Sodium/potassium-transporting ATPase γ peptide CE-MS detection (21) 
PCA3 mRNA detection in urine (14) 
Ovarian Eosinophil-derived neurotoxin COOH-terminal osteopontin fragments Glycosylated fragment (62) 
Bcl-2 ELISA (9) 
Breast MMP9 Detected by zymography (56) 
ADAM12 Detected by Western blot (56) 
Colorectal Cystatin SN Tissue IHC and RT-PCR: ELISA with Urinary Protein (23) 
Multiple myeloma IL-6, MMP9 Index for Bone Disease (19) 
Antibodies Diagnostic/Prognostic (10, 12, 20) 
CancerPotential biomarkersComment (Reference)
Bladder Bladder-tumor–associated antigen FDA-approved immunoassay (4) 
NMP22 FDA-approved immunoassay (5) 
Calreticulin Partially Validated through Western blot (15) 
Clusterin Diagnostic/prognostic (13) 
Cystatin B Partially Validated through IHC and Western blot (11) 
Proepithelin Partially validated through IHC and ELISA (18) 
UHRF1 Observed through IHC (22) 
α-1B-Glycoprotein Discovered using lectin affinity chromatography (17) 
Renal Cathepsin D Correlated with survival (8) 
NMP22 FDA-approved for bladder cancer (16) 
Prostate Collagen α-1(III) peptide Collagen α-1(I) peptide MMP substrate (21) 
Psoriasis susceptibility 1 candidate gene 2 protein peptide CE-MS detection, decreased in cancer (21) 
Sodium/potassium-transporting ATPase γ peptide CE-MS detection (21) 
PCA3 mRNA detection in urine (14) 
Ovarian Eosinophil-derived neurotoxin COOH-terminal osteopontin fragments Glycosylated fragment (62) 
Bcl-2 ELISA (9) 
Breast MMP9 Detected by zymography (56) 
ADAM12 Detected by Western blot (56) 
Colorectal Cystatin SN Tissue IHC and RT-PCR: ELISA with Urinary Protein (23) 
Multiple myeloma IL-6, MMP9 Index for Bone Disease (19) 
Antibodies Diagnostic/Prognostic (10, 12, 20) 

NOTE: This table includes two protein immunoassays have FDA approval for detection of bladder cancer. Additional entries describe other candidates that are in various stages of the development pipeline. Several methods can be used for protein assessment, including ELISA, immunohistochemistry of tumor tissue (IHC), real-time PCR (RT-PCR), or capillary electrophoresis coupled to mass spectrometry (CE-MS).

Abbreviations: MMP, matrix metalloproteinase; IL-6, interleukin-6.

Urine specimens show a high degree of variability in volume; protein concentration (particularly in the case of kidney damage or dysfunction); total protein excreted pH (ranges from 4-8); as well as variability in urine components due to age, health, diet, or other factors; proteolysis while the urine is stored in the bladder; and degradation of collected urine samples upon storage (25). The range of values observed for these properties is high not only from person to person (26, 27) but also within each individual. As an example, urine was collected in our laboratory over the course of 10 days from a single subject; protein concentrations were measured by Bradford assay for each individual sample and pooled 24-hour collections. Individual and average protein concentration values are plotted in Fig. 1. Relative SDs were lowest for the 24-hour collection (39%) and first morning collections (41%), whereas the second urine samples of the day (54%) and spot collection (61%) exhibited higher variability. Average concentrations were similar, ranging from 26 mg/mL for 24 h, random spot, and second morning urine to 34 mg/mL for first morning urine. The purpose of this comparison is to illustrate that high variability is observed with each collection method; practical considerations often limit studies to random spot collection.

Figure 1.

Variability in protein concentration of urine over a 10-d collection from a single healthy volunteer. Protein concentrations for each collected aliquot were determined through the Bradford assay following ultrafiltration using 3-kDa molecular weight cutoff membranes. Spot urine values represent all aliquots and 24-h values are calculated for specimens acquired beginning with the second urine void of the day and ending with first morning urine of the following day. For first morning, second morning, spot collections, and 24-h accumulations, individual protein concentration values (diamonds) and averages are plotted with error bars representing SD. Each method indicates high variability in sample collection.

Figure 1.

Variability in protein concentration of urine over a 10-d collection from a single healthy volunteer. Protein concentrations for each collected aliquot were determined through the Bradford assay following ultrafiltration using 3-kDa molecular weight cutoff membranes. Spot urine values represent all aliquots and 24-h values are calculated for specimens acquired beginning with the second urine void of the day and ending with first morning urine of the following day. For first morning, second morning, spot collections, and 24-h accumulations, individual protein concentration values (diamonds) and averages are plotted with error bars representing SD. Each method indicates high variability in sample collection.

Close modal

For proteomics and protein biomarker experiments, normalization of the amount or concentration of protein is critical. One method for standardization uses the ratio of each protein's expression to the total protein in the sample (28). However, more precise normalization of data may be performed by calculating ratios to other excreted small molecules or proteins. Creatinine (28), collagen (28), albumin, cystatin C (29-32), and N-acetyl-β-d-glucosaminidase (33) have all been suggested as potential standards for normalization of protein quantification (28). Each of these potential normalization factors should be carefully examined regarding their stability under different disease conditions.

Myriad protocols exist for urine collection and processing (selected examples are given in Table 2) and there are advantages to 24-h, first morning urine, and spot urine collection. Twenty-four–hours collection, which is our current standard clinical protocol for antibody measurements in myeloma, is awkward for the patient and may lead to degradation and contamination of urine protein, particularly through the lysis of suspended cells, because the samples are stored at 4°C and transported under ambient conditions. Single sample collection is more convenient for patients, is more easily standardized, and enables quicker processing and storage of samples. Among single-sample collections, first morning urine provides the least variability in protein concentration; second morning and random spot urine collection display somewhat higher variability, but such collection minimizes the amount of time spent in the bladder, in which increased proteolysis may occur. Additionally, random spot collection facilitates coordination between patients, clinicians, and researchers.

Table 2.

Selected strategies for urine protein collection and analysis

StudyNMP-22 immunoassay (7)Ovarian cancer biomarker discovery (62)Urine protein cataloguing (2)HUPO Kidney and Urine Proteome Project (50)
Collection Spot urine Spot urine Single/pooled samples Midstream 2nd or spot urine 
Additive(s) Protease inhibitor None Protease inhibitor Sodium azide/boric acid 
Processing Centrifuge Stored at −80°C within 8 h Centrifuge after thawing Centrifuge 2,000 × g (10 min) Centrifuge 10,000 × g (10 min) 
Protein cleanup Buffer exchange Protein precipitation Ultrafiltration NA 
Separation NA Two-dimensional Gel RPLC, SDS-PAGE NA 
Detection Immunoassay MALDI-TOF-MS LC-MS/MS IP and ELISA LC-MS/MS NA 
Result Detection of bladder cancer 81% sensitivity, 87% specificity Targets identified by MS and verified with ELISA 1,500 proteins identified in urine  
StudyNMP-22 immunoassay (7)Ovarian cancer biomarker discovery (62)Urine protein cataloguing (2)HUPO Kidney and Urine Proteome Project (50)
Collection Spot urine Spot urine Single/pooled samples Midstream 2nd or spot urine 
Additive(s) Protease inhibitor None Protease inhibitor Sodium azide/boric acid 
Processing Centrifuge Stored at −80°C within 8 h Centrifuge after thawing Centrifuge 2,000 × g (10 min) Centrifuge 10,000 × g (10 min) 
Protein cleanup Buffer exchange Protein precipitation Ultrafiltration NA 
Separation NA Two-dimensional Gel RPLC, SDS-PAGE NA 
Detection Immunoassay MALDI-TOF-MS LC-MS/MS IP and ELISA LC-MS/MS NA 
Result Detection of bladder cancer 81% sensitivity, 87% specificity Targets identified by MS and verified with ELISA 1,500 proteins identified in urine  

NOTE: Workflows are presented for antibody-based quantification techniques as well as proteome cataloging experiments. The recommendations of the HUPO Human Kidney and Urine Proteome Project are also included.

Abbreviations: NA, not applicable; RPLC, reverse-phase liquid chromatography; MALDI-TOF-MS, matrix assisted laser desorption ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometry; IP, immunoprecipitation.

Midstream collection of urine minimizes problems with bacterial contamination and preservatives such as sodium azide and boric acid have been used to prevent bacterial growth in stored urine (34). Although protease inhibitors are often added to biological samples to preserve intact protein forms, their value in urine samples is unknown due to pH, dilution, and denaturation of proteases in the urine (35, 36). Experiments to quantify the activity of different proteases would add significantly to the existing literature. Despite significant variability in urine pH (37), most publications do not report pH modification for proteomic analyses. Centrifugation performed within 20 to 30 minutes of collection minimizes contamination of the urine due to lysis of suspended cells (38). Ultrafiltration (34, 39-45) has been reported to be the best method for concentration and cleanup of peptide and protein components from urine (45) and facilitates collection of lower molecular weight analytes and buffer exchange for downstream processing. Alternatively, protein precipitation using organic solvents (34, 40, 44-47), dialysis (34, 39, 46, 48), lyophilization (34, 39, 46), and ultracentrifugation (34) may be used.

After initial processing, samples must be stored in a way that preserves the analytes for downstream processing. Typically, clinical specimens are frozen as soon as possible following collection. Although freezing and thawing should be avoided, minimal loss has been observed, through SDS-PAGE and LC-MS/MS, with up to five freeze-thaw cycles (49). However, one cannot conclude that a specific individual protein will be preserved.

The Human Kidney and Urine Proteome Project, associated with the Human Proteome Organisation (HUPO), has tentatively recommended the following steps for processing urine (50): midstream collection of random or second morning urine, freezing within 4 hours of collection or addition of sodium azide or boric acid to sample before freezing, centrifugation at 10,000 × g for 10 minutes to remove cells and debris, and minimization of freezing and thawing. They have also suggested the collection of 19 sample identifiers describing the patient, processing conditions, storage, and data generated from other methods of urinalysis.

Based on the existing resources describing sample collection and processing, we have developed the following protocol to accrue samples for diagnostic biomarker discovery and verification experiments in bladder cancer patients and healthy controls. Deidentified random spot urine (∼60 mL midstream) is collected into sterile containers for processing within 20 minutes; the samples are placed on ice for transfer to the laboratory and all subsequent processing steps. After transfer to a 50-mL conical centrifuge tube, the urine samples are spun at 1,500 × g for 10 minutes in a refrigerated centrifuge to pellet any cells. Smaller aliquots (10 mL) are spun at 10,000 × g to remove particulates and aliquoted for proteomics and metabolomics. Protein in the urine supernatant is concentrated using 3,000 Dalton molecular weight cutoff filters (Ultra-15, Amicon); the buffer is exchanged to 100 mmol/L ammonium bicarbonate by washing the membrane. All processed samples are frozen at −80°C within 2 hours of collection.

Validation of biomarkers is routinely achieved through immunoassays, e.g., ELISA, which recognize an epitope within the protein sequence for detection and quantification. Peptide-based proteomics offers an analogous technology using proteome catalogs generated with LC-MS/MS to supply candidate biomarkers for targeted detection and quantification with liquid chromatography coupled to multiple reaction monitoring mass spectrometry (LC-MRM; ref. 51) An example workflow is illustrated for the development of an assay for osteopontin detected in urine (Fig. 2). Because of the ability to create highly multiplexed assays (52), LC-MRM can be applied to a large number of potential targets informed by the existing literature, gene expression profiles, protein cataloguing experiments, among others, Multiplexed LC-MRM assays for several potential protein biomarkers in urine are currently under development in our laboratory; peptide targets have been successfully detected for cathepsins B and D (8, 53, 54), matrix metalloproteases 9 and 13 (55-58), HBGF (59), IGFBP7 (60, 61), and osteopontin (62) from unfractionated urine protein extracts. Due to the high variability of protein concentration, the inclusion of two different stable isotope-labeled peptide standards at different concentrations may be desirable or necessary for protein quantification with LC-MRM.

Figure 2.

Translation of a peptide candidate for detection and quantification of osteopontin in urine from an LC-MS/MS catalog to an LC-MRM assay. An example base peak chromatogram from LC-MS/MS is shown to illustrate the complexity of the data (A); individual ion signals can be extracted for initial quantification (inset). The tandem mass spectra (B) are used to identify the peptide sequence (and consequently the protein of origin) and they can also be useful for indicating which fragment ions should be selected for monitoring in LC-MRM assays (C).

Figure 2.

Translation of a peptide candidate for detection and quantification of osteopontin in urine from an LC-MS/MS catalog to an LC-MRM assay. An example base peak chromatogram from LC-MS/MS is shown to illustrate the complexity of the data (A); individual ion signals can be extracted for initial quantification (inset). The tandem mass spectra (B) are used to identify the peptide sequence (and consequently the protein of origin) and they can also be useful for indicating which fragment ions should be selected for monitoring in LC-MRM assays (C).

Close modal

Successful LC-MRM assays for 47 abundant proteins in plasma have been reported by Anderson and Hunter (63), with detection down to 0.67 μg/mL without fractionation; similar performance should be expected for urine protein analysis. Increased sensitivity can be achieved using immunodepletion (64), fractionation (65), or antibody-based enrichment in a Stable Isotope Standards and Capture by Antipeptide Antibodies approach. A Stable Isotope Standards and Capture by Antipeptide Antibodies–LC-MS/MS assay for serum thyroglobulin, a marker for thyroid carcinoma that has proven difficult to quantitate by immunoassay, has been developed with a reported limit of detection of 2.6 μg/L (4 pmol/L; ref. 66). Building on these early successes, the generation of standardized assays and reagents for quantification of numerous potential biomarkers has been proposed (67).

A standardized method for urine collection and processing has yet to be adopted by the proteomics or biomarker assessment community. Thus far, each study uses a protocol devised specifically for the analyte(s) of interest in their experiments. Common themes are found for collection, cell removal, processing, storage, and downstream analysis that can guide the development of a standard method. The HUPO guidelines for data recording offer the best suggestions to date, including details about the patient as well as collection and processing. However, additional background research is necessary to determine the value of additives, such as protease inhibitors, and to understand the effects of different processing steps and time scales.

No potential conflicts of interest were disclosed.

Grant Support: The Moffitt Proteomics Facility is supported by the U.S. Army Medical Research and Materiel Command under award no. DAMD17-02-2-0051 for a National Functional Genomics Center, the National Cancer Institute under award no. P30-CA076292 as a Cancer Center Support Grant, and the Moffitt Foundation. This work is also supported by the National Cancer Institute by awards: R21-CA141285 (J. Koomen) and R01-CA106414 (R. Sutphen).

1
Barratt
J
,
Topham
P
. 
Urine proteomics: the present and future of measuring urinary protein components in disease
.
CMAJ
2007
;
177
:
361
8
.
2
Adachi
J
,
Kumar
C
,
Zhang
Y
,
Olsen
JV
,
Mann
M
. 
The human urinary proteome contains more than 1500 proteins, including a large proportion of membrane proteins
.
Genome Biol
2006
;
7
:
R80
.
3
Coon
JJ
,
Zürbig
P
,
Dakna
M
, et al
. 
CE-MS analysis of the human urinary proteome for biomarker discovery and disease diagnostics
.
Proteomics—Clinical Applications
2008
;
2
:
964
73
.
4
Ellis
WJ
,
Blumenstein
BA
,
Ishak
LM
,
Enfield
DL
,
The Multi Center Study Group
. 
Clinical evaluation of the BTA TRAK assay and comparison to voided urine cytology and the Bard BTA test in patients with recurrent bladder tumors
.
Urology
1997
;
50
:
882
7
.
5
Grossman
HB
,
Messing
E
,
Soloway
M
, et al
. 
Detection of bladder cancer using a point-of-care proteomic assay
.
JAMA
2005
;
293
:
810
6
.
6
Grossman
HB
,
Soloway
M
,
Messing
E
, et al
. 
Surveillance for recurrent bladder cancer using a point-of-care proteomic assay
.
JAMA
2006
;
295
:
299
305
.
7
Saad
A
,
Hanbury
DC
,
McNicholas
TA
,
Boustead
GB
,
Morgan
S
,
Woodman
AC
. 
A study comparing various noninvasive methods of detecting bladder cancer in urine
.
BJU Int
2002
;
89
:
369
73
.
8
Vasudev
NS
,
Sim
S
,
Cairns
DA
, et al
. 
Pre-operative urinary cathepsin D is associated with survival in patients with renal cell carcinoma
.
Br J Cancer
2009
;
101
:
1175
82
.
9
Anderson
NS
,
Bermudez
Y
,
Badgwell
D
, et al
. 
Urinary levels of Bcl-2 are elevated in ovarian cancer patients
.
Gynecol Oncol
2009
;
112
:
60
7
.
10
Corso
A
,
Zappasodi
P
,
Pascutto
C
, et al
. 
Urinary proteins in multiple myeloma: correlation with clinical parameters and diagnostic implications
.
Ann Hematol
2003
;
82
:
487
91
.
11
Feldman
AS
,
Banyard
J
,
Wu
CL
,
McDougal
WS
,
Zetter
BR
. 
Cystatin B as a tissue and urinary biomarker of bladder cancer recurrence and disease progression
.
Clin Cancer Res
2009
;
15
:
1024
31
.
12
Goranova
V
,
Spassov
E
. 
Prognostic significance of the immunological variant in patients with multiple myeloma
.
Folia Med (Plovdiv)
1999
;
41
:
164
7
.
13
Hazzaa
SM
,
Elashry
OM
,
Afifi
IK
. 
Clusterin as a diagnostic and prognostic marker for transitional cell carcinoma of the bladder
.
Pathol Oncol Res
2009
.
Online Publication Only. PMID: 19757199. SpringerLink ISSN 1219-4956 (Print) 1532-2807 (Online) doi
.
14
Hessels
D
,
Schalken
JA
. 
The use of PCA3 in the diagnosis of prostate cancer
.
Nat Rev Urol
2009
;
6
:
255
61
.
15
Kageyama
S
,
Isono
T
,
Iwaki
H
, et al
. 
Identification by proteomic analysis of calreticulin as a marker for bladder cancer and evaluation of the diagnostic accuracy of its detection in urine
.
Clin Chem
2004
;
50
:
857
66
.
16
Kaya
K
,
Ayan
S
,
Gokce
G
,
Kilicarslan
H
,
Yildiz
E
,
Gultekin
EY
. 
Urinary nuclear matrix protein 22 for diagnosis of renal cell carcinoma
.
Scand J Urol Nephrol
2005
;
39
:
25
9
.
17
Kreunin
P
,
Zhao
J
,
Rosser
C
,
Urquidi
V
,
Lubman
DM
,
Goodison
S
. 
Bladder cancer associated glycoprotein signatures revealed by urinary proteomic profiling
.
J Proteome Res
2007
;
6
:
2631
9
.
18
Lovat
F
,
Bitto
A
,
Xu
SQ
, et al
. 
Proepithelin is an autocrine growth factor for bladder cancer
.
Carcinogenesis
2009
;
30
:
861
8
.
19
Sfiridaki
A
,
Miyakis
S
,
Tsirakis
G
, et al
. 
Systemic levels of interleukin-6 and matrix metalloproteinase-9 in patients with multiple myeloma may be useful as prognostic indexes of bone disease
.
Clin Chem Lab Med
2005
;
43
:
934
8
.
20
Sirohi
B
,
Powles
R
,
Kulkarni
S
, et al
. 
Comparison of new patients with Bence-Jones, IgG and IgA myeloma receiving sequential therapy: the need to regard these immunologic subtypes as separate disease entities with specific prognostic criteria
.
Bone Marrow Transplant
2001
;
28
:
29
37
.
21
Theodorescu
D
,
Schiffer
E
,
Bauer
HW
, et al
. 
Discovery and validation of urinary biomarkers for prostate cancer
.
Proteomics—Clinical Applications
2008
;
2
:
556
70
.
22
Unoki
M
,
Kelly
JD
,
Neal
DE
,
Ponder
BA
,
Nakamura
Y
,
Hamamoto
R
. 
UHRF1 is a novel molecular marker for diagnosis and the prognosis of bladder cancer
.
Br J Cancer
2009
;
101
:
98
105
.
23
Yoneda
K
,
Iida
H
,
Endo
H
, et al
. 
Identification of cystatin SN as a novel tumor marker for colorectal cancer
.
Int J Oncol
2009
;
35
:
33
40
.
24
Koomen
JM
,
Haura
EB
,
Bepler
G
, et al
. 
Proteomic contributions to personalized cancer care
.
Mol Cell Proteomics
2008
;
7
:
1780
94
.
25
Parekh
RS
,
Kao
WH
,
Meoni
LA
, et al
. 
Reliability of urinary albumin, total protein, and creatinine assays after prolonged storage: the Family Investigation of Nephropathy and Diabetes
.
Clin J Am Soc Nephrol
2007
;
2
:
1156
62
.
26
Crosley
LK
,
Duthie
SJ
,
Polley
AC
, et al
. 
Variation in protein levels obtained from human blood cells and biofluids for platelet, peripheral blood mononuclear cell, plasma, urine and saliva proteomics
.
Genes Nutr
2009
;
4
:
95
102
.
27
Goligorsky
MS
,
Addabbo
F
,
O'Riordan
E
. 
Diagnostic potential of urine proteome: a broken mirror of renal diseases
.
J Am Soc Nephrol
2007
;
18
:
2233
9
.
28
Jantos-Siwy
J
,
Schiffer
E
,
Brand
K
, et al
. 
Quantitative urinary proteome analysis for biomarker evaluation in chronic kidney disease
.
J Proteome Res
2009
;
8
:
268
81
.
29
Lankisch
P
,
Wessalowski
R
,
Maisonneuve
P
,
Haghgu
M
,
Hermsen
D
,
Kramm
CM
. 
Serum cystatin C is a suitable marker for routine monitoring of renal function in pediatric cancer patients, especially of very young age
.
Pediatr Blood Cancer
2006
;
46
:
767
72
.
30
Conti
M
,
Moutereau
S
,
Esmilaire
L
, et al
. 
Should kidney tubular markers be adjusted for urine creatinine? The example of urinary cystatin C
.
Clin Chem Lab Med
2009
;
47
:
1553
6
.
31
Conti
M
,
Zater
M
,
Lallali
K
, et al
. 
Absence of circadian variations in urine cystatin C allows its use on urinary samples
.
Clin Chem
2005
;
51
:
272
3
.
32
Roos
JF
,
Doust
J
,
Tett
SE
,
Kirkpatrick
CMJ
. 
Diagnostic accuracy of cystatin C compared to serum creatinine for the estimation of renal dysfunction in adults and children-A meta-analysis
.
Clin Biochem
2007
;
40
:
383
91
.
33
Lemm
G
,
Kuppers
J
,
Frey
R
,
Wingender
W
,
Kuhlmann
J
. 
Monitoring of proteinuria in phase I studies in healthy male subjects
.
Eur J Clin Pharmacol
1998
;
54
:
287
94
.
34
Thongboonkerd
V
,
Chutipongtanate
S
,
Kanlaya
R
. 
Systematic evaluation of sample preparation methods for gel-based human urinary proteomics: quantity, quality, and variability
.
J Proteome Res
2005
;
5
:
183
91
.
35
Zhou
H
,
Yuen
PS
,
Pisitkun
T
, et al
. 
Collection, storage, preservation, and normalization of human urinary exosomes for biomarker discovery
.
Kidney Int
2006
;
69
:
1471
6
.
36
Havanapan
PO
,
Thongboonkerd
V
. 
Are protease inhibitors required for gel-based proteomics of kidney and urine?
J Proteome Res
2009
;
8
:
3109
17
.
37
Thongboonkerd
V
,
Mungdee
S
,
Chiangjong
W
. 
Should urine pH be adjusted prior to gel-based proteome analysis?
J Proteome Res
2009
;
8
:
3206
11
.
38
Thongboonkerd
V
. 
Practical points in urinary proteomics
.
J Proteome Res
2007
;
6
:
3881
90
.
39
Castagna
A
,
Cecconi
D
,
Sennels
L
, et al
. 
Exploring the hidden human urinary proteome via ligand library beads
.
J Proteome Res
2005
;
4
:
1917
30
.
40
Nabi
G
,
N'Dow
J
,
Hasan
TS
,
Booth
IR
,
Cash
P
. 
Proteomic analysis of urine in patients with intestinal segments transposed into the urinary tract
.
Proteomics
2005
;
5
:
1729
33
.
41
Pieper
R
,
Gatlin
CL
,
McGrath
AM
, et al
. 
Characterization of the human urinary proteome: a method for high-resolution display of urinary proteins on two-dimensional electrophoresis gels with a yield of nearly 1400 distinct protein spots
.
Proteomics
2004
;
4
:
1159
74
.
42
Rehman
I
,
Azzouzi
AR
,
Catto
JW
, et al
. 
Proteomic analysis of voided urine after prostatic massage from patients with prostate cancer: a pilot study
.
Urology
2004
;
64
:
1238
43
.
43
Ru
QC
,
Katenhusen
RA
,
Zhu
LA
, et al
. 
Proteomic profiling of human urine using multi-dimensional protein identification technology
.
J Chromatogr A
2006
;
1111
:
166
74
.
44
Sun
W
,
Li
F
,
Wu
S
, et al
. 
Human urine proteome analysis by three separation approaches
.
Proteomics
2005
;
5
:
4994
5001
.
45
Tantipaiboonwong
P
,
Sinchaikul
S
,
Sriyam
S
,
Phutrakul
S
,
Chen
S-T
. 
Different techniques for urinary protein analysis of normal and lung cancer patients
.
Proteomics
2005
;
5
:
1140
9
.
46
Oh
J
,
Pyo
JH
,
Jo
EH
, et al
. 
Establishment of a near-standard two-dimensional human urine proteomic map
.
Proteomics
2004
;
4
:
3485
97
.
47
Soldi
M
,
Sarto
C
,
Valsecchi
C
, et al
. 
Proteome profile of human urine with two-dimensional liquid phase fractionation
.
Proteomics
2005
;
5
:
2641
7
.
48
Smith
G
,
Barratt
D
,
Rowlinson
R
,
Nickson
J
,
Tonge
R
. 
Development of a high-throughput method for preparing human urine for two-dimensional electrophoresis
.
Proteomics
2005
;
5
:
2315
8
.
49
Lee
RS
,
Monigatti
F
,
Briscoe
AC
,
Waldon
Z
,
Freeman
MR
,
Steen
H
. 
Optimizing sample handling for urinary proteomics
.
J Proteome Res
2008
;
7
:
4022
30
.
50
HKUPP
.
Standard Protocol for Urine Collection and Storage. [cited; Available from: http://www.hkupp.org/Urine%20collectiion%20Documents.htm
.
51
Stahl-Zeng
J
,
Lange
V
,
Ossola
R
, et al
. 
High sensitivity detection of plasma proteins by multiple reaction monitoring of N-glycosites
.
Mol Cell Proteomics
2007
;
6
:
1809
17
.
52
Kuzyk
MA
,
Smith
D
,
Yang
J
, et al
. 
Multiple reaction monitoring-based, multiplexed, absolute quantitation of 45 proteins in human plasma
.
Mol Cell Proteomics
2009
;
8
:
1860
77
.
53
Eijan
AM
,
Sandes
E
,
Puricelli
L
,
Bal De Kier Joffe
E
,
Casabe
AR
. 
Cathepsin B levels in urine from bladder cancer patients
.
Oncol Rep
2000
;
7
:
1395
9
.
54
Szajda
SD
,
Snarska
J
,
Jankowska
A
,
Roszkowska-Jakimiec
W
,
Puchalski
Z
,
Zwierz
K
. 
Cathepsin D and carcino-embryonic antigen in serum, urine and tissues of colon adenocarcinoma patients
.
Hepatogastroenterology
2008
;
55
:
388
93
.
55
Moses
MA
,
Wiederschain
D
,
Loughlin
KR
,
Zurakowski
D
,
Lamb
CC
,
Freeman
MR
. 
Increased incidence of matrix metalloproteinases in urine of cancer patients
.
Cancer Res
1998
;
58
:
1395
9
.
56
Pories
SE
,
Zurakowski
D
,
Roy
R
, et al
. 
Urinary metalloproteinases: noninvasive biomarkers for breast cancer risk assessment
.
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev
2008
;
17
:
1034
42
.
57
Sherief
MH
,
Low
SH
,
Miura
M
,
Kudo
N
,
Novick
AC
,
Weimbs
T
. 
Matrix metalloproteinase activity in urine of patients with renal cell carcinoma leads to degradation of extracellular matrix proteins: possible use as a screening assay
.
J Urol
2003
;
169
:
1530
4
.
58
Di Carlo
A
,
Terracciano
D
,
Mariano
A
,
Macchia
V
. 
Urinary gelatinase activities (matrix metalloproteinases 2 and 9) in human bladder tumors
.
Oncol Rep
2006
;
15
:
1321
6
.
59
Muir
C
,
Chung
LW
,
Carson
DD
,
Farach-Carson
MC
. 
Hypoxia increases VEGF-A production by prostate cancer and bone marrow stromal cells and initiates paracrine activation of bone marrow endothelial cells
.
Clin Exp Metastasis
2006
;
23
:
75
86
.
60
Lin
J
,
Lai
M
,
Huang
Q
,
Ruan
W
,
Ma
Y
,
Cui
J
. 
Reactivation of IGFBP7 by DNA demethylation inhibits human colon cancer cell growth in vitro
.
Cancer Biol Ther
2008
;
7
:
1896
900
.
61
Akaogi
K
,
Okabe
Y
,
Funahashi
K
, et al
. 
Cell adhesion activity of a 30-kDa major secreted protein from human bladder carcinoma cells
.
Biochem Biophys Res Commun
1994
;
198
:
1046
53
.
62
Ye
B
,
Skates
S
,
Mok
SC
, et al
. 
Proteomic-based discovery and characterization of glycosylated eosinophil-derived neurotoxin and COOH-terminal osteopontin fragments for ovarian cancer in urine
.
Clin Cancer Res
2006
;
12
:
432
41
.
63
Anderson
L
,
Hunter
CL
. 
Quantitative mass spectrometric multiple reaction monitoring assays for major plasma proteins
.
Mol Cell Proteomics
2006
;
5
:
573
88
.
64
Kushnir
MM
,
Mrozinski
P
,
Rockwood
AL
,
Crockett
DK
. 
A depletion strategy for improved detection of human proteins from urine
.
J Biomol Tech
2009
;
20
:
101
8
.
65
Fortin
T
,
Salvador
A
,
Charrier
JP
, et al
. 
Multiple reaction monitoring cubed for protein quantification at the low nanogram/milliliter level in nondepleted human serum
.
Anal Chem
2009
;
81
:
9343
52
.
66
Hoofnagle
AN
,
Becker
JO
,
Wener
MH
,
Heinecke
JW
. 
Quantification of Thyroglobulin, a low-abundance serum protein, by immunoaffinity peptide enrichment and tandem mass spectrometry
.
Clin Chem
2008
;
54
:
1796
804
.
67
Anderson
NL
,
Anderson
NG
,
Pearson
TW
, et al
. 
A human proteome detection and quantitation project
.
Mol Cell Proteomics
2009
;
8
:
883
6
.