PubMed Health⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 8520702

Methods for urinary testosterone analysis.

E Venturelli·A Cavalleri·G Secreto
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Urinary testosterone analysis requires a multistep procedure to achieve a good degree of sensitivity and specificity in the dosage. Hydrolysis, extraction, purification and quantification are usually performed in sequence, and several options can be chosen for each of them. After introductory remarks on the applications of urinary testosterone measurement and a short description of the metabolic pathway of the hormone, an overview of the techniques most commonly used in each step is presented. Advantages and disadvantages of each of them are outlined, and a procedure for urinary testosterone analysis is suggested. The procedure consists of: enzymatic hydrolysis with Helix pomatia juice, followed by solid-phase extraction of hydrolyzed urine by a C18 cartridge coupled with an NH2 cartridge and high-performance liquid chromatography cleanup of the extract. Then, quantification can be achieved by gas chromatography or radioimmunoassay.

Explore related subjects

Chromatography, AffinityChromatography, GasChromatography, High Pressure LiquidChromatography, Ion ExchangeChromatography, Thin LayerGas Chromatography-Mass SpectrometryHumansHydrolysisRadioimmunoassayTestosteroneJournal ArticleReview

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

E Venturelli, A Cavalleri, G Secreto. 1995-09-15. Methods for urinary testosterone analysis.. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-4347(95)00062-n

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2006

Distinct and overlapping sets of SUMO-1 and SUMO-2 target proteins revealed by quantitative proteomics.

The small ubiquitin-like modifier (SUMO) family in vertebrates includes three different family members that are conjugated as post-translational modifications to target proteins. SUMO-2 and -3 are nearly identical but differ substantially from SUMO-1. We used quantitative proteomics to investigate the target protein preferences of SUMO-1 and SUMO-2. HeLa cells were established that stably express His6-SUMO-1 or His6-SUMO-2. These cell lines and control HeLa cells were labeled with stable arginine isotopes, and His6-SUMOs were enriched from lysates using immobilized metal affinity chromatography. 53 SUMO-conjugated proteins were identified, including 44 novel SUMO targets. 25 proteins were preferentially conjugated to SUMO-1, 19 were preferentially conjugated to SUMO-2, and nine proteins were conjugated to both SUMO-1 and SUMO-2. SART1 was confirmed by immunoblotting to have both SUMO-1- and SUMO-2-linked forms at similar levels. SUMO-1 and SUMO-2 are thus shown to have distinct and overlapping sets of target proteins, indicating that SUMO-1 and SUMO-2 may have both redundant and non-redundant cellular functions. Interestingly, 14 of the 25 SUMO-1-conjugated proteins contain zinc fingers. Although both SUMO family members play roles in many cellular processes, our data show that sumoylation is strongly associated with transcription because nearly one-third of the identified target proteins are putative transcriptional regulators.

Chromatography, Affinity↗
PubMed1997

Human prostate carcinoma cells produce extracellular heparanase.

The degradation of heparan sulfate proteoglycan (HSPG) in basement membranes (BM) has been previously suggested to be accomplished by an endoglycosidase activity called heparanase which has not been isolated outside of platelets. HSPG degradation by heparanase has been associated with tumor cell invasion, angiogenesis, and growth factor function. In this study, we identify heparanase activity biochemically and immunologically in malignant human prostate carcinoma cells (PC-3M), linking platelet heparanase probes with the tumor heparanase activity observed. Concentrated conditioned medium from PC-3M cells was analyzed by a heparin-Sepharose affinity column. Three peaks eluted with 0.15, 0.35, and 0.5 M NaCl. Each peak was analyzed by incubation with 3H-labeled heparin as well as [3H]HSPG from EHS tumor BM. The 0.5 M peak material degraded [3H]-heparin by 17.2%, with little additional degradation by the other peaks in comparison to the conditioned medium from which they were obtained. Likewise, the same amount of the 0.5 M peak accounted for the majority of degradation (30.8%) of 3H-labeled HSPG. Interestingly, for the same amount of 0.5 M peak material, significantly more HSPG was degraded than heparin under the same conditions. In addition, carrageenan-lambda, an inhibitor of glycanase, completely inhibited the degradation of heparin and heparan sulfate proteoglycan by the 0.5 M peak. Using antibody to the N-terminus domain of platelet heparanase, a 60-kDa protein was identified by immunoblot in 0.5 M peak material. Additionally, immunohistochemical staining of human prostate carcinoma specimens showed granular staining at or near the cell membrane and near the luminal surface using antibody to the N-terminus and C-terminus domains of platelet heparanase. In summary, human prostate carcinoma cells show heparanase activity in conditioned medium that degrades heparin and BM HSPG and is detected by antibody to platelet heparanase. In addition, the membrane-associated staining in tissue sections of prostate cancer strongly correlates with the biochemical and immunological detection in conditioned medium of human PC-3M cells.

Chromatography, Affinity↗