Protein Signature of Lung Cancer Tissues

Lung cancer remains the most common cause of cancer-related mortality. We applied a highly multiplexed proteomic technology (SOMAscan) to compare protein expression signatures of non small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) tissues with healthy adjacent and distant tissues from surgical resections. In this first report of SOMAscan applied to tissues, we highlight 36 proteins that exhibit the largest expression differences between matched tumor and non-tumor tissues. The concentrations of twenty proteins increased and sixteen decreased in tumor tissue, thirteen of which are novel for NSCLC. NSCLC tissue biomarkers identified here overlap with a core set identified in a large serum-based NSCLC study with SOMAscan. We show that large-scale comparative analysis of protein expression can be used to develop novel histochemical probes. As expected, relative differences in protein expression are greater in tissues than in serum. The combined results from tissue and serum present the most extensive view to date of the complex changes in NSCLC protein expression and provide important implications for diagnosis and treatment

Evaluation of the radiopacity of root canal sealers by digitization of radiographic images Avaliação da radiopacidade de cimentos endodônticos por meio da digitalização de imagens radiográficas

The aim of this study was to evaluate the radiopacity of a zinc oxide and eugenol-based (Endofill), a calcium hydroxide-based (Sealapex), two resin-based (Sealer 26 and AH Plus), and a silicone-based root canal sealer (Roeko Seal). Specimens, measuring 10mm in diameter and 1mm in thickness, were radiographed simultaneously with an aluminum step wedge using occlusal films, according to ISO 6876/2001 standards. Radiographs were digitized, and the radiopacity of sealers was compared to the different thicknesses of the aluminum step wedge, using the VIXWIN 2000 software. Results demonstrated that AH Plus was the most radiopaque sealer, while Sealapex was the least radiopaque (p<0.05). Roeko Seal, Endofill and Sealer 26 presented intermediate radiopacity values. Sealapex presented less radiopacity than the other types of root canal sealers.<br>O objetivo deste trabalho foi avaliar a radiopacidade de cimentos endodônticos à base de óxido de zinco e eugenol (Endofill), hidróxido de cálcio (Sealapex), resina (Sealer 26 e AH Plus) e silicone (Roeko Seal). Os corpos de prova foram padronizados com 10 milímetros de diâmetro e 1 milímetro de espessura e radiografados conjuntamente com uma escala de alumínio empregando-se filmes oclusais, de acordo com as Normas ISO 6876/2001. As radiografias foram digitalizadas e as radiopacidades dos cimentos comparadas à escala de alumínio com diferentes espessuras, utilizando o software VIXWIN 2000. Os resultados demonstraram que o AH Plus foi o cimento mais radiopaco e o Sealapex apresentou menor radiopacidade (p<0,05), sendo intermediários os resultados para os cimentos Roeko Seal, Endofill e Sealer 26. Sealapex apresenta menor radiopacidade que outros tipos de cimentos endodônticos

Radiopacity of restorative materials using digital images Radiopacidade de materiais restauradores utilizando imagens digitais

The radiopacity of esthetic restorative materials has been established as an important requirement, improving the radiographic diagnosis. The aim of this study was to evaluate the radiopacity of six restorative materials using a direct digital image system, comparing them to the dental tissues (enamel-dentin), expressed as equivalent thickness of aluminum (millimeters of aluminum). Five specimens of each material were made. Three 2-mm thick longitudinal sections were cut from an intact extracted permanent molar tooth (including enamel and dentin). An aluminum step wedge with 9 steps was used. The samples of different materials were placed on a phosphor plate together with a tooth section, aluminum step wedge and metal code letter, and were exposed using a dental x-ray unit. Five measurements of radiographic density were obtained from each image of each item assessed (restorative material, enamel, dentin, each step of the aluminum step wedge) and the mean of these values was calculated. Radiopacity values were subsequently calculated as equivalents of aluminum thickness. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) indicated significant differences in radiopacity values among the materials (P<0.0001). The radiopacity values of the restorative materials evaluated were, in decreasing order: TPH, F2000, Synergy, Prisma Flow, Degufill, Luxat. Only Luxat had significantly lower radiopacity values than dentin. One material (Degufill) had similar radiopacity values to enamel and four (TPH, F2000, Synergy and Prisma Flow) had significantly higher radiopacity values than enamel. In conclusion, to assess the adequacy of posterior composite restorations it is important that the restorative material to be used has enough radiopacity, in order to be easily distinguished from the tooth structure in the radiographic image. Knowledge on the radiopacity of different materials helps professionals to select the most suitable material, along with other properties such as biocompatibility, adhesion and esthetic.<br>A radiopacidade dos materiais tem sido valorizada como importante requisito, incrementando o diagnóstico radiográfico. O objetivo deste estudo foi avaliar, no sistema digital Digora, as densidades radiográficas de 06 materiais restauradores comparando-os aos tecidos dentais (esmalte e dentina), expressos em milímetros de alumínio (mm Al). Foram confeccionadas 05 amostras de cada material e três cortes de um molar extraído hígido (incluindo esmalte e dentina), com 2 mm de espessura, e um penetrômetro de alumínio com 09 degraus. Sobre cada placa óptica foram colocados amostras dos diferentes materiais, um corte do dente humano, o penetrômetro e a identificação, e feita a exposição utilizando um aparelho de raios X. Foram obtidas 05 medidas de densidade radiográfica de cada item avaliado (material restaurador, esmalte, dentina e degraus do penetrômetro de alumínio) em cada radiografia, e calculadas as médias destas medidas. A partir destas médias de densidade, foram calculados os valores da radiopacidade destes itens em mm de Al, em cada radiografia. Análise de variância (ANOVA) indicou diferença significante entre os valores de radiopacidade dos materiais (p<0.0001). A radiopacidade dos materiais restauradores avaliados foi em ordem decrescente: TPH, F2000, Synergy, Prisma Flow, Degufill, Luxat. Apenas o Luxat apresentou radiopacidade inferior ao esmalte e dentina. Um material não diferiu estatisticamente do esmalte (Degufill) e quatro apresentaram radiopacidade superior ao esmalte (TPH, F2000, Synergy, Prisma Flow). Portanto, faz-se necessária a avaliação de materiais restauradores disponíveis no mercado, proporcionando aos profissionais informações adicionais sobre os materiais restauradores que eles utilizarão