Radiotherapy changes the salivary proteome in head and neck cancer patients: evaluation before, during, and after treatment.

OBJECTIVES: Salivary glands are affected during radiotherapy in the head and neck region, leading to a reduction in salivary flow and changes its composition. Besides negatively affecting the oral soft tissues, this can also lead to dental impairment. Thus, we evaluated the effect of radiotherapy in the proteomic profile of the saliva in patients with head and neck cancer (HNC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: HNC patients had their saliva collected before (BRT), during (2-5 weeks; DRT), and after (3-4 months; ART) radiotherapy. Saliva was also collected from healthy volunteers (control; C). Samples were processed for proteomic analysis. RESULTS: In total, 1055 proteins were identified, among which 46 were common to all groups, while 86, 86, 286, and 395 were exclusively found in C, BRT, DRT, and ART, respectively. Remarkably, alpha-enolase was increased 35-fold DRT compared with BRT, while proline-rich proteins were decreased. ART there was a 16-fold increase in scaffold attachment factor-B1 and a 3-fold decrease in alpha-enolase and several cystatins. When compared with C, salivary proteins of BRT patients showed increases cystatin-C, lysozyme C, histatin-1, and proline-rich proteins CONCLUSION/CLINICAL REVELANCE: Both HNC and radiotherapy remarkably change the salivary protein composition. Altogether, our results, for the first time, suggest investigating alpha-enolase levels in saliva DRT in future studies as a possible biomarker and strategy to predict the efficiency of the treatment. Moreover, our data provide important insights for designing dental products that are more effective for these patients and contribute to a better understanding of the progressive changes in salivary proteins induced by radiotherapy. Graphical abstract.

Is there difference in the comparative and quantitative salivary proteome between stimulated and unstimulated saliva in head and neck cancer patients treated by radiotherapy?

Stimulation of saliva production is an alternative to improve the quality of life of patients treated by radiotherapy. However, there is no information about changes in the salivary proteome of stimulated and unstimulated saliva in these patients. OBJECTIVES: Thus, we evaluated the difference in the proteomic profile of stimulated and unstimulated saliva in patients with head and neck cancer (HNC) treated by radiotherapy. METHODS: Stimulated and unstimulated saliva were collected from 9 patients with HNC before (BRT), during (DRT; 2-5 weeks) and after (ART; 3-4 months) treatment. Healthy patients paired by age and gender also had their saliva collected (C; control group). The stimulated and unstimulated salivary flow were evaluated (p < 0.05). Salivary proteins were extracted and processed for shotgun proteomic analysis. RESULTS: Significant differences were observed between stimulated and unstimulated salivary flows for C and BRT (p greater than 0.001), but not for DRT and ART. Proteins involved with apoptosis, antibacterial and acid-resistance were decreased in stimulated saliva in comparison to unstimulated saliva DRT and ART. Isoforms of keratins were not identified in control and BRT. CONCLUSION: there is a marked difference in the protein profile of stimulated and unstimulated salivary flows in HNC patients treated by radiotherapy. In addition, saliva stimulation in patients with HNC decreases important proteins involved with dental protection. The unstimulated salivary flow seems to be the best alternative to search for biomarkers. Our results contribute in an unprecedented way to understand the changes in the salivary proteome of different flows in HNC patients undergoing radiotherapy treatment.

Radiotherapy changes acquired enamel pellicle proteome in head and neck cancer patients.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate in vivo the proteomic profile of the acquired enamel pellicle (AEP) in patients with head and neck cancer (HNC) before, during and after radiotherapy. METHODS: Nine patients, after prophylaxis, had their AEPs collected before (BRT), during (DRT; 2-5 weeks) and after (ART; 3-4 months) radiotherapy. AEP was also collected from nine healthy patients (Control). The proteins were extracted in biological triplicate and processed by label-free proteomics. RESULTS: Statherin was increased more than 9-fold and several hemoglobin subunits were increased more than 5-fold DRT compared to BRT, while lactotransferrin, proline-rich proteins, cystatins, neutrophil defensins 1 and 3 and histatin-1 were decreased. ART, there was an increase in lactotransferrin and several isoforms of histones, while statherin and alpha-amylase proteins were decreased. MOAP-1 was exclusively found ART in comparison to BRT. When compared to Control, AEP of patients BRT showed an increase in proteins related to the perception of bitter taste, mucin-7 and alpha-amylases, while cystatin-S was decreased. CONCLUSIONS: HNC and radiotherapy remarkably altered the proteome of the AEP. Antibacterial and acid-resistant proteins were decreased during radiotherapy. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Our results provide important information for designing more effective dental products for these patients, in addition to contributing to a better understanding of the differential protective roles of the AEP proteins during radiotherapy. Moreover, some proteins identified in the AEP after radiotherapy may serve as prognostic markers for survival of HNC patients.

Standardization of a protocol for shotgun proteomic analysis of saliva.

INTRODUCTION: Saliva contains numerous proteins and peptides, each of them carries a number of biological functions that are very important in maintaining the oral cavity health and also yields information about both local and systemic diseases. Currently, proteomic analysis is the basis for large-scale identification of these proteins and discovery of new biomarkers for distinct diseases. OBJECTIVE: This study compared methodologies to extract salivary proteins for proteomic analysis. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Saliva samples were collected from 10 healthy volunteers. In the first test, the necessity for using an albumin and IgG depletion column was evaluated, employing pooled samples from the 10 volunteers. In the second test, the analysis of the pooled samples was compared with individual analysis of one sample. Salivary proteins were extracted and processed for analysis by LC-ESI-MS/MS. RESULTS: In the first test, we identified only 35 proteins using the albumin and IgG depletion column, while we identified 248 proteins without using the column. In the second test, the pooled sample identified 212 proteins, such as carbonic anhydrase 6, cystatin isoforms, histatins 1 and 3, lysozyme C, mucin 7, protein S100A8 and S100A9, and statherin, while individual analysis identified 239 proteins, among which are carbonic anhydrase 6, cystatin isoforms, histatin 1 and 3, lactotransferrin, lyzozyme C, mucin 7, protein S100A8 and S100A9, serotransferrin, and statherin. CONCLUSIONS: The standardization of protocol for salivary proteomic analysis was satisfactory, since the identification detected typical salivary proteins, among others. The results indicate that using the column for depletion of albumin and IgG is not necessary and that performing individual analysis of saliva samples is possible.

Standardization of a protocol for shotgun proteomic analysis of saliva

Abstract Saliva contains numerous proteins and peptides, each of them carries a number of biological functions that are very important in maintaining the oral cavity health and also yields information about both local and systemic diseases. Currently, proteomic analysis is the basis for large-scale identification of these proteins and discovery of new biomarkers for distinct diseases. Objective This study compared methodologies to extract salivary proteins for proteomic analysis. Material and Methods Saliva samples were collected from 10 healthy volunteers. In the first test, the necessity for using an albumin and IgG depletion column was evaluated, employing pooled samples from the 10 volunteers. In the second test, the analysis of the pooled samples was compared with individual analysis of one sample. Salivary proteins were extracted and processed for analysis by LC-ESI-MS/MS. Results In the first test, we identified only 35 proteins using the albumin and IgG depletion column, while we identified 248 proteins without using the column. In the second test, the pooled sample identified 212 proteins, such as carbonic anhydrase 6, cystatin isoforms, histatins 1 and 3, lysozyme C, mucin 7, protein S100A8 and S100A9, and statherin, while individual analysis identified 239 proteins, among which are carbonic anhydrase 6, cystatin isoforms, histatin 1 and 3, lactotransferrin, lyzozyme C, mucin 7, protein S100A8 and S100A9, serotransferrin, and statherin. Conclusions The standardization of protocol for salivary proteomic analysis was satisfactory, since the identification detected typical salivary proteins, among others. The results indicate that using the column for depletion of albumin and IgG is not necessary and that performing individual analysis of saliva samples is possible.