Free
Eye Movements, Strabismus, Amblyopia and Neuro-ophthalmology  |   January 2014
Tear Proteomic Analysis of Patients With Type 2 Diabetes and Dry Eye Syndrome by Two-Dimensional Nano-Liquid Chromatography Coupled With Tandem Mass Spectrometry
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Bing Li
    Department of Ophthalmology, Shanghai Tenth People's Hospital, Tongji University, Shanghai, People's Republic of China
  • Minjie Sheng
    Department of Ophthalmology, Shanghai Tenth People's Hospital, Tongji University, Shanghai, People's Republic of China
  • Liqi Xie
    Department of Chemistry & Research Center of Proteome, Fudan University, Shanghai, People's Republic of China
  • Feng Liu
    Chinese National Human Genome Center at Shanghai, Shanghai, People's Republic of China
  • Guoquan Yan
    Department of Chemistry & Research Center of Proteome, Fudan University, Shanghai, People's Republic of China
  • Weifang Wang
    Department of Ophthalmology, Shanghai Tenth People's Hospital, Tongji University, Shanghai, People's Republic of China
  • Anjuan Lin
    Department of Ophthalmology, Shanghai Tenth People's Hospital, Tongji University, Shanghai, People's Republic of China
  • Fei Zhao
    Department of Ophthalmology, Shanghai Tenth People's Hospital, Tongji University, Shanghai, People's Republic of China
  • Yihui Chen
    Department of Ophthalmology, Shanghai Tenth People's Hospital, Tongji University, Shanghai, People's Republic of China
  • Correspondence: Yihui Chen, Department of Ophthalmology, Shanghai Tenth People's Hospital, Yanchangzhong Road 301, Shanghai, China 200092; cyh80h@163.com
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science January 2014, Vol.55, 177-186. doi:10.1167/iovs.13-12080
  • Views
  • PDF
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Bing Li, Minjie Sheng, Liqi Xie, Feng Liu, Guoquan Yan, Weifang Wang, Anjuan Lin, Fei Zhao, Yihui Chen; Tear Proteomic Analysis of Patients With Type 2 Diabetes and Dry Eye Syndrome by Two-Dimensional Nano-Liquid Chromatography Coupled With Tandem Mass Spectrometry. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2014;55(1):177-186. doi: 10.1167/iovs.13-12080.

      Download citation file:


      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Purpose.: Diabetesmellitus has been shown to be associated with and complicated by dry eye syndrome. We sought to examine and compare the tear film proteome of type 2 diabetic patients with or without dry eye syndrome and normal subjects using two-dimensional nano-liquid chromatography coupled with tandem mass spectrometry (MS)–based proteomics.

Methods.: Tears were collected from eight type 2 diabetes patients with dry eye syndrome, eight type 2 diabetes patients without dry eye syndrome, and eight normal subjects. Tear breakup time (BUT) was determined, and tear proteins were prepared and analyzed using two-dimensional strong cation-exchange/reversed-phase nano-scale liquid chromatography MS. All MS/MS spectra were identified by using SEQUEST against the human International Protein Index (IPI) database and the relative abundance of individual proteins was assessed by spectral counting.

Results.: Tear BUT was significantly lower in patients with diabetes and dry eye syndrome than in patients with diabetes only and normal subjects. Analysis of spectral counts of tear proteins showed that, compared to healthy controls, patients with diabetes and dry eye syndrome had increased expression of apoptosis-related proteins, like annexin A1, and immunity- and inflammation-related proteins, including neutrophil elastase 2 and clusterin, and glycometabolism-related proteins, like apolipoprotein A-II.

Conclusions.: Dry eye syndrome in diabetic patients is associated with aberrant expression of tear proteins, and the findings could lead to identification of novel pathways for therapeutic targeting and new diagnostic markers.

Introduction
Dry eye syndrome is a multifactorial condition characterized by eye irritation symptoms, blurred and fluctuating vision, tear film instability, increased tear osmolarity, and ocular surface epithelial syndrome. 14 Diabetes mellitus has been shown to be associated with and complicated by dry eye syndrome. Diabetic patients frequently complain of symptoms typical of dry eye syndrome, such as burning and foreign body sensation. 5,6 The manifestations of diabetes mellitus resultant from lacrimal gland and ocular surface dysfunctions appear to be related to dry eye syndrome. 7,8 Manaviat et al. 9 showed that approximately half (54.3%, 108/199) of diabetic patients suffered from dry eye syndrome, and there was a significant association between dry eye syndrome and duration of diabetes. Jin et al. 10 also showed that patients with type 2 diabetes tend to have tear film dysfunction. Dry eye can lead to vision deficit, scarring and perforation of the cornea, and secondary bacterial infection. If this syndrome is diagnosed at the early stage and treated promptly, undesirable complications can be avoided or minimized. Therefore, early diagnosis and treatment of dry eye syndrome in type 2 diabetic patients is very important. 
Tears contain a variety of substances, including proteins, lipids, mucins, salts, and other organic molecules, and tear proteins are believed to have key roles in protecting the ocular surface from external insults, such as pathogenic infections, and promoting ocular wound healing. Recently, electrospray ionization (ESI) mass spectrometry (MS)/MS was used to identify some novel species in the tears. 1114 The number of proteins found in the tear film continues to grow, and Fung et al. 15 reported that approximately 500 proteins were detected and unambiguously identified by liquid chromatography (LC)/MS/MS However, there still is lack of agreement in the literature regarding the number of proteins in the tear film and the functions of individual proteins. Lactoperoxidase, lysozyme C, and elastase 2 are found to protect the ocular surface against antimicrobial infection or inflammation, and some other proteins, like cathepsin B, are related to ocular surface wound healing, or stability promoting through interaction with other ligands. 16,17 In our study, we sought to examine and compare the tear film proteome of type 2 diabetic patients with or without dry eye syndrome and normal subjects using two-dimensional nano-LC coupled with tandem MS (2D-LC-nano-MS/MS)–based proteomics. 
Subjects and Methods
Subjects
We included in our study eight patients with type 2 diabetes with dry eye syndrome and eight patients with type 2 diabetes without dry eye syndrome. Type 2 diabetes was diagnosed according to the criteria of the World Health Organization (WHO). 18 Dry eye syndrome was diagnosed by a modified Dry Eye Workshop classification 19 and was considered present if Shirmer I test < 5 mm and tear breakup time (BUT) < 5 seconds, and absent if Shirmer I test > 10 mm and BUT > 10 seconds. A subject was included if he or she was aged between 50 and 60 years, and if he or she had type 2 diabetes of more than 5 years. A subject was excluded if he or she used eye drops within one month before the study, had a history of ocular surgery, had systemic immunologic syndromes, or had any ocular syndromes other than dry eye syndrome. In addition, eight age- and sex-matched healthy subjects were included as normal controls. The study protocol was approved by the Institutional Review Board of Shanghai Tenth People's Hospital and all study participants provided written informed consent. The study was carried out in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. 
Tear Sample Collection and Preparation
Tears were collected by placing a Schirmer strip over the lower lid approximately 6 mm from the lateral canthus. The lid was not anesthetized. The subjects were instructed to keep eyes closed during the 5-minute test. After wet length was recorded, the strip was placed in a 1-mL amber Eppendorf tube. The samples were placed immediately in ice transport tanks for transfer to the Chinese National Human Genome Center at Shanghai, where the samples were stored at −80°C until processed. Proteins were extracted from the Schirmer strip by incubation in 1 mL Tris buffer (pH = 8.3, 7 M urea, 5 mM ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid [EDTA], 1 mM phenylmethylsulfonyl fluoride [PMSF], and 0.5 mM dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane [DTT]) at 4°C for 10 hours. After centrifugation at 12,000g for 10 minutes, the supernatants from all patients within each group were pooled and precipitated by acetone as described previously. 20 Precipitated proteins were resuspended in 100 μL Tris buffer and quantitated using the BCA assay kit (Pierce, Rockford, IL). The normalized protein content in the tear samples was calculated using the following formula:    
Then, 12.5 μg protein from each group were incubated with 25 mM ammonium bicarbonate and 10 mM DTT for 60 minutes at 56°C followed by incubation with 25 mM indoleacetic acid (IAA) for 30 minutes in the dark at room temperature. Trypsin digestion was done at 37°C for 12 hours. The resultant peptides were dried and saved at −80°C. 
Two-Dimensional Strong Cation-Exchange/Reversed-Phase Nano-Scale LC MS
Extracted peptides were desalted using a 1.3 mL C18 solid phase extraction column (Sep-Pak Cartridge; Waters, Milford, MA) and dried using a vacuum centrifuge (Eppendorf, Westbury, NY), and then resuspended with loading buffer (5 mM ammonium formate containing 5% acetonitrile, pH 3.0), separated, and analyzed by 2D-LC-nano-MS/MS. The experiments were performed on a Nano Aquity UPLC system (Waters) connected to an LTQ Orbitrap XL mass spectrometer (Thermo Electron, Bremen, Germany) equipped with an online nano-electrospray ion source (Michrom Bioresources, Auburn, CA). A 180 μm × 2.4 cm SCX column (Waters), which was packed with a 5-μm PolySULFOETHYL Aspartamide (PolyLC, Columbia, MD) was used for the first dimension. For recovery of hydrophobic peptides retained on the SCX column after a conventional salt step gradient, an RP step gradient from 15% to 50% acetonitrile was applied to the SCX column. 19 A 9-μL plug was injected each time to form the step gradients (Table 1). The SCX column finally was cleaned with 1 M ammonium formate (NH4FA) twice. The plugs were loaded onto the SCX column with a loading buffer at a 4 μL/min flow rate for 4 minutes. A 9-μL peptide sample was loaded onto the SCX column before the gradient plugs were injected. Eluted peptides were captured by a trap column (Waters), while salts were diverted to waste. The trap column (2 cm × 180 μm) was packed with a 5-μm Symmetry C18 material (Waters). The RP analytical column (20 cm × 75 μm) was packed with a 1.7-μm Bridged Ethyl Hybrid (BEH) C18 material (Waters), and was used for the second dimension separation. 
Table 1
 
Step Gradients for Peptide Recovery
Table 1
 
Step Gradients for Peptide Recovery
SCX Gradients NH4FA, mM, and ACN, %
1 5, 5% (sample loading)
2 100, 5%
3 200, 5%
4 250, 5%
5 300, 5%
6 400, 5%
7 500, 5%
8 500, 15%
9 500, 30%
10 500, 50%
11 1000
12 1000
Peptides on the RP analytical column were eluted with a three-step linear gradient, starting from 5% B to 45% B in 40 minutes (A, water with 0.1% formic acid; B, acetonitrile with 0.1% formic acid), increased to 80% B in 3 minutes, and then to 5% B in 2 minutes. The column was reequilibrated at initial conditions for 15 minutes. The column flow rate was maintained at 300 nL/min and column temperature was maintained at 35°C. The electrospray voltage of 1.1 kV versus the inlet of the mass spectrometer was used. 
An LTQ Orbitrap XL mass spectrometer (Thermo Electron) was operated in the data-dependent mode to switch automatically between MS and MS/MS acquisition. Survey full-scan MS spectra with two microscans (m/z 300–1800) were acquired in the Obitrap with a mass resolution of 60,000 at 400 m/z, followed by 10 sequential LTQ-MS/MS scans. Dynamic exclusion was used with two repeat counts, 10-second repeat duration, and 60-second exclusion duration. For MS/MS, precursor ions were activated using 35% normalized collision energy at the default activation q of 0.25. 
Data Analyses
All MS/MS spectra were identified by using SEQUEST (v.28 [revision 12]; Thermo Electron) against the human International Protein Index (IPI) database (IPI human v3.45 fasta with 71983 entries). To reduce false-positive identification results, a decoy database containing the reverse sequences was appended to the database. The searching parameters were set up as follows: partial trypsin (KR) cleavage with two missed cleavages was considered, the variable modification was oxidation of methionine, peptide mass tolerance was 20 parts per million (ppm), and fragment ion tolerance was 1 Da. The Trans Proteomic Pipeline software (revision 4.0; Institute of Systems Biology, Seattle, WA) then was used to identify proteins based upon corresponding peptide sequences with ≥95% confidence. The peptides results were filtered by the Peptide Prophet 21 with a P value over 0.95 and a Protein Prophet 22 probability of 0.95 was used for the protein identification results. Spectral counts (SC) correlate with protein abundance. 23 The relative abundance of individual proteins was assessed by spectral counting, in which we counted how many times the unlabeled version of a protein was identified by the fragmentation spectra of its peptides. Additionally, we normalized SC using the following formula:    
For analysis of the difference of abundance among the proteomes, proteins were divided into three groups according to SC: the high-abundance group (SC ≥ 50), the medium-abundance group (20 < SC < 49), and the low-abundance group (SC < 20). Significant upregulation was defined as an SC ratio ≥3 and SC distance ≥5; significant downregulation was defined as an SC ratio ≤0.33 and SC distance ≤−5. The SC ratio was calculated from the equation  and SC distance was calculated using the following formula:    
Statistical Analysis
The χ2 tests and Student's t-tests were performed using the SPSS statistical software (SPSS, Inc., Chicago, IL) and a P value of 0.05 or less was considered significant. 
Results
Demographic and Baseline Characteristics of the Study Subjects
Demographic and baseline characteristics of the study subjects are summarized in Table 2. The subjects of the three groups were matched in age and sex. Patients with diabetes and dry eye syndrome had a median duration of diabetes of 11.37 (range, 7–20) years, which was markedly longer than that of patients with diabetes only (median, 9.25 years; range, 5–15 years, P < 0.01). The best corrected visual acuity in patients with diabetes and dry eye syndrome (OD, 0.38 ± 0.25; OS, 0.53 ± 0.38) was markedly lower than that of patients with diabetes only (OD, 0.78 ± 0.32; OS, 0.78 ± 0.34, P < 0.01). Tear BUT was significantly lower in both eyes in patients with diabetes and dry eye syndrome (OD, 3.38 ± 3.07; OS, 2.75 ± 3.24) than that of patients with diabetes only (OD, 9.25 ± 5.52; OS, 8.25 ± 5.73, P < 0.01). Tear secretion as revealed by the Schirmer I test also was markedly reduced in patients with diabetes and dry eye syndrome (OD, 2.5 ± 2.39; OS, 4.0 ± 6.70) compared to that of patients with diabetes only (OD, 7.0 ± 5.24; OS, 0.63 ± 0.74, P < 0.01). 
Table 2
 
Demographic and Baseline Characteristics of the Study Subjects
Table 2
 
Demographic and Baseline Characteristics of the Study Subjects
Healthy Subjects, n = 8 Patients With Diabetes, n = 8 Patients With Diabetes and Dry Eye Syndrome, n = 8
Age, y
 Median 61.75 ± 6.61 59.75 ± 6.23 62.87 ± 5.72
 Range 51–68 51–68 50–67
Sex
 Male 4 4 4
Tear breakup time, s
 OD 11.75 ± 3.85 9.25 ± 5.52* 3.38 ± 3.07†
 OS 13.0 ± 3.93 8.25 ± 5.73* 2.75 ± 3.24†
Schirmer I test, mm/5 min
 OD 15.0 ± 6.55 7.0 ± 5.24* 2.5 ± 2.39†
 OS 13.88 ± 6.60 6.38 ± 3.54* 4.0 ± 6.70†
Fluorescent test
 OD 0.00 ± 0.00 0.75 ± 0.87* 9.63 ± 4.01†
 OS 0.00 ± 0.00 0.63 ± 0.74* 11.63 ± 4.24†
Best corrected visual acuity
 OD 0.96 ± 0.17 0.78 ± 0.32* 0.38 ± 0.25†
 OS 0.85 ± 0.28 0.78 ± 0.34* 0.53 ± 0.38†
Duration of diabetes, y
 Median 0 9.25 ± 5.34 11.37 ± 6.05
 Duration 0 5–15 7–20
Blood glucose, mmol/L 4.80 ± 0.31 7.88 ± 1.36* 8.69 ± 1.22†
Patients With Diabetes and Dry Eye Syndrome Have Increased Normalized Protein Content in Tears
We determined further the normalized protein content in tear samples. The normalized tear protein content in patients with diabetes and dry eye syndrome was 1.19 ± 0.7, which was markedly higher than that of patients with diabetes only (0.27 ± 0.13, P = 0.001) and normal healthy subjects (0.20 ± 0.14, P = 0.001, Fig. 1). 
Figure 1
 
Mean normalized protein concentration in tears in healthy subjects (group A), patients with diabetes (group B), and patients with diabetes and dry eye syndrome (group C).
Figure 1
 
Mean normalized protein concentration in tears in healthy subjects (group A), patients with diabetes (group B), and patients with diabetes and dry eye syndrome (group C).
Tear Proteomic Characteristics of Patients With Diabetes and Dry Eye Syndrome
The 2D-nano-LC-MS/MS identified a total of 357 unique proteins from 4004 peptides from the tear samples, including 210 (58.8%) proteins in healthy subjects, 180 (50.4%) proteins in patients with diabetes, and 219 (61.4%) proteins in patients with diabetes and dry eye syndrome (Fig. 2A). The MS/MS spectra of complement C3 by 2D-nano-LC-MS/MS are shown in Figure 3. Of the proteins, 91 (25.5%) were shared among healthy subjects, patients with diabetes, and patients with diabetes and dry eye syndrome. In addition, 6 (1.7%) proteins were found in healthy subjects and patients with diabetes only, 12 (3.4%) proteins were present in patients with diabetes only, and patients with diabetes and dry eye syndrome, including β2-microglobin and superoxide dismutase (Table 3), and 50 (14.0%) proteins were shared by healthy subjects and patients with diabetes and dry eye syndrome. There were 63 (17.7%) proteins unique to healthy subjects, 71 (19.9%) proteins to patients with diabetes, and 66 (18.5%) to patients with diabetes and dry eye syndrome. The percentage of high and low abundance proteins was comparable among healthy subjects, patients with diabetes, and patients with diabetes and dry eye syndrome (P > 0.05, Fig. 2B). Meanwhile, the percentage of medium abundance proteins in patients with diabetes and dry eye syndrome (12%) was markedly higher than that of healthy subjects (7%, P < 0.05). 
Figure 2
 
Integrated analyses of tear proteome data from groups A to C. (A) The diagram shows the proteins identified from the groups A to C tear samples. The numbers of proteins identified in the three samples are shown in the circles. (B) The distribution of high-, medium-, and low-abundance proteins in tear film. The medium-abundance proteins in group C samples obviously increased than those in group A samples (*P < 0.05). (C) Molecule function categorizations of tear proteins identified. CK, cytoskeleton; EI, enzyme inhibitor.
Figure 2
 
Integrated analyses of tear proteome data from groups A to C. (A) The diagram shows the proteins identified from the groups A to C tear samples. The numbers of proteins identified in the three samples are shown in the circles. (B) The distribution of high-, medium-, and low-abundance proteins in tear film. The medium-abundance proteins in group C samples obviously increased than those in group A samples (*P < 0.05). (C) Molecule function categorizations of tear proteins identified. CK, cytoskeleton; EI, enzyme inhibitor.
Figure 3
 
The MS/MS spectrum of peptide KVLLDGVQNPR from complement C3 in tear samples.
Figure 3
 
The MS/MS spectrum of peptide KVLLDGVQNPR from complement C3 in tear samples.
Table 3
 
Shared Proteins in the Tear Samples of Patients With Diabetes Only and Patients With Diabetes Plus Dry Eye Syndrome
Table 3
 
Shared Proteins in the Tear Samples of Patients With Diabetes Only and Patients With Diabetes Plus Dry Eye Syndrome
Description SC Normalized SC
A B C A B C
Isoform 1 of protein wiz 0 45 19 0 0.0088635 0.0031799
Putative uncharacterized protein DKFZP686C15213 0 25 18 0 0.0049242 0.0030126
β-2-microglobulin 0 7 12 0 0.0013788 0.0020084
Fibrinogen β chain precursor 0 3 11 0 0.0005909 0.001841
IGHM protein 0 3 22 0 0.0005909 0.003682
Fatty acid-binding protein, epidermal 0 3 3 0 0.0005909 0.0005021
Isoform A 1 of ACYL-COA-binding protein 0 2 7 0 0.0003939 0.0011715
PDZ and LIM domain protein 1 0 2 3 0 0.0003939 0.0005021
Myosin regulatory light chain 0 2 2 0 0.0003939 0.0003347
IGL@ protein 0 2 37 0 0.0003939 0.0061925
Superoxide dismutase 0 1 1 0 0.000197 0.0001674
Isoform 2 of calpastatin 0 1 2 0 0.000197 0.0003347
The functions of the proteins identified by the 2D-nano-LC-MS/MS technique were interpreted using the gene ontology tool available in the public domain at http://david.abcc.ncifcrf.gov/ (Fig. 2C). The 10 most upregulated and downregulated proteins in the tear samples from each group are shown in Table 4. Analysis of spectral counts of tear proteins showed that, compared to healthy controls, patients with diabetes and dry eye syndrome had increased expression of apoptosis-related proteins, immunity- and inflammation-related proteins, and glycometabolism-related proteins (Table 5). The interconnection of these proteins is shown in Figure 4
Figure 4
 
Interactive map of proteins in the tear samples of patients with diabetes and dry eye syndrome.
Figure 4
 
Interactive map of proteins in the tear samples of patients with diabetes and dry eye syndrome.
Table 4
 
The 10 Most Upregulated and 10 Most Downregulated Proteins in Tear Samples
Table 4
 
The 10 Most Upregulated and 10 Most Downregulated Proteins in Tear Samples
Description SC Normalized SC Up/Down Regulated
A B C A B C
Diabetes vs. controls, △B–A
 Isoform 1 of serum albumin precursor 1304 177 1308 0.22 0.0349 0.2189 Down
 Cystatin-S precursor 128 22 58 0.0216 0.0043 0.0097 Down
 Putative uncharacterized protein 76 0 0 0.0128 0 0 Down
 Proline-rich protein 1 precursor 67 21 24 0.0113 0.0041 0.004 Down
 Proline rich 4, lacrimal isoform 1 52 2 7 0.0088 0.0004 0.0012 Down
 Keratin, type I cytoskeletal 19 51 12 72 0.0086 0.0024 0.0121 Down
 Putative uncharacterized protein 36 0 0 0.0061 0 0 Down
 Isoform 1 of endothelin-1 receptor precursor 32 0 0 0.0054 0 0 Down
 Isoform 1 of ATP-dependent RNA helicase DD×25 21 0 0 0.0035 0 0 Down
 Isoform 3 of PNMA-like protein 2 18 0 0 0.003 0 0 Down
 Lipocalin-1 precursor 796 1383 665 0.1343 0.2724 0.1113 Up
 Keratin 4 79 159 168 0.0133 0.0313 0.0281 Up
 Protein S100-A9 44 100 89 0.0074 0.0197 0.0149 Up
 Isoform 1 of keratin, type I cytoskeletal 13 24 63 7 0.004 0.0124 0.0012 Up
 Protein S100-A8 19 60 42 0.0032 0.0118 0.007 Up
 Isoform α-enolase of α-enolase 12 30 34 0.002 0.0059 0.0057 Up
 Isoform 1 of 14-3-3 protein σ 6 18 21 0.001 0.0035 0.0035 Up
 Isoform er1 of ankyrin-1 0 57 0 0 0.0112 0 Up
 Isoform 1 of protein wiz 0 45 19 0 0.0089 0.0032 Up
 Histone H2A type 1-B 0 43 0 0 0.0085 0 Up
Diabetes plus dry eye syndrome vs. controls, △C–A
 Putative uncharacterized protein 76 0 0 0.0128 0 0 Down
 Proline-rich protein 1 precursor 67 21 24 0.0113 0.0041 0.004 Down
 Proline rich 4, lacrimal isoform 1 52 2 7 0.0088 0.0004 0.0012 Down
 Secretoglobin family 1D member 1 precursor 36 24 16 0.0061 0.0047 0.0027 Down
 Putative uncharacterized protein 36 0 0 0.0061 0 0 Down
 Isoform 1 of endothelin-1 receptor precursor 32 0 0 0.0054 0 0 Down
 Isoform 1 of ATP-dependent RNA helicase DDX25 21 0 0 0.0035 0 0 Down
 Isoform 3 of PNMA-like protein 2 18 0 0 0.003 0 0 Down
 Protein S100-A6 13 0 4 0.0022 0 0.0007 Down
 B2M protein 12 0 0 0.002 0 0 Down
 β-2-microglobulin 0 7 12 0 0.0014 0.002 Up
 Fibrinogen β chain precursor 0 3 11 0 0.0006 0.0018 Up
 IGHM protein 0 3 22 0 0.0006 0.0037 Up
 Isoform a 1 of acyl-CoA-binding protein 0 2 7 0 0.0004 0.0012 Up
 IGL@ protein 0 2 37 0 0.0004 0.0062 Up
 CDNA FLJ78387 0 0 72 0 0 0.0121 Up
 Putative uncharacterized protein DKFZP686O16217 0 0 25 0 0 0.0042 Up
 Keratin 13 isoform B 0 0 22 0 0 0.0037 Up
 α-1-acid glycoprotein 2 precursor 0 0 17 0 0 0.0028 Up
 Isoform 3 of shootin-1 0 0 10 0 0 0.0017 Up
Diabetes plus dry eye syndrome vs. diabetes only, △C–B
 Lipocalin-1 precursor 796 1383 665 0.1343 0.2724 0.1113 Down
 IGHA1 protein 177 111 25 0.0299 0.0219 0.0042 Down
 α-2-glycoprotein 1, zinc 138 175 138 0.0233 0.0345 0.0231 Down
 Isoform 1 of keratin, type I cytoskeletal 13 24 63 7 0.004 0.0124 0.0012 Down
 Isoform ER1 of ankyrin-1 0 57 0 0 0.0112 0 Down
 Histone H2A type 1-B 0 43 0 0 0.0085 0 Down
 Isoform ER1 of ankyrin-1 0 57 0 0 0.0112 0 Down
 Isoform 1 of protein wiz 0 45 19 0 0.0089 0.0032 Down
 Histone H2A type 1-B 0 43 0 0 0.0085 0 Down
 Isoform 4 of collagen α-1, XII chain precursor 0 29 0 0 0.0057 0 Down
 Isoform 1 of serum albumin precursor 1304 177 1308 0.22 0.0349 0.2189 Up
 Cystatin-S precursor 128 22 58 0.0216 0.0043 0.0097 Up
 Proline-rich protein 4 precursor 109 70 126 0.0184 0.0138 0.0211 Up
 Polymeric immunoglobulin receptor precursor 101 60 111 0.017 0.0118 0.0186 Up
 IGL@ protein 0 2 37 0 0.0004 0.0062 Up
 CDNA FLJ78387 0 0 72 0 0 0.0121 Up
 Putative uncharacterized protein DKFZP686O16217 0 0 25 0 0 0.0042 Up
 Leukocyte elastase inhibitor 14 1 25 0.0024 0.0002 0.0042 Up
 Haptoglobin precursor 14 17 42 0.0024 0.0033 0.007 Up
 Heat shock 70 kDa protein 1 7 9 24 0.0012 0.0018 0.004 Up
Table 5
 
Comparison of Proteins Related to Apoptosis, Immunity, Inflammation, and Oxidative Stress in the Tear Samples of Study Subjects
Table 5
 
Comparison of Proteins Related to Apoptosis, Immunity, Inflammation, and Oxidative Stress in the Tear Samples of Study Subjects
Accession No. Protein Name SC Normalized SC Change
A B C A B C
Apoptosis-related proteins
 P04792 Heat shock protein 1, 27 kDa 17 28 35 0.2868 0.5515 0.5858 Up
 P08107 Heat shock protein 1A, 70 kDa 7 9 24 0.1181 0.1773 0.4017 Up
 O43707 α 4-actinin, 6 5 17 0.1012 0.0985 0.2845 Up
 P63104 Tyrosine 3-monooxygenase/tryptophan 5-monooxygenase activation protein 10 8 21 0.1687 0.1576 0.3515 Up
 P04083 Annexin A1 35 52 44 0.5905 1.0242 0.7364 Up
 P09211 Glutathione S-transferase PI 8 7 16 0.135 0.1379 0.2678 Up
 P23528 Cofilin 1, nonmuscle 7 4 14 0.1181 0.0788 0.2343 Up
 P68371 β 2C-tubulin, 0 0 7 0 0 0.1171 Up
 Q96BY2 Modulator of apoptosis 1 0 0 6 0 0 0.1004 Up
 P30101 Protein disulfide isomerase family A, member 3 0 0 5 0 0 0.0836 Up
 P27797 Calreticulin 0 0 4 0 0 0.0669 Up
 P07858 Cathepsin B 3 0 6 0.0506 0 0.1004 Up
 P00747 Plasminogen 0 0 3 0 0 0.0502 Up
 P55072 Valosin-containing protein 0 0 2 0 0 0.0334 Up
 P52565 Rho Gdp dissociation inhibitor, Gdi, α 0 0 2 0 0 0.0334 Up
 P32119 Peroxiredoxin 2 6 2 1 0.1012 0.0394 0.0167 Down
 P31944 Caspase 14, apoptosis-related cysteine peptidase 2 1 1 0.0337 0.0197 0.0167
 P08758 Annexin A5 6 2 5 0.1012 0.0394 0.0837
Immunity and inflammation-related proteins
 P02787 Transferrin 73 91 101 1.2317 1.7924 1.6904 Up
 Q8WUK1 Immunoglobulin heavy locus 0 3 22 0 0.0590 0.3682 Up
 P01024 Complement component 3 21 27 39 0.3543 0.5318 0.6527 Up
 P19652 Orosomucoid 2 0 0 17 0 0 0.2845 Up
 P02763 Orosomucoid 1 11 8 18 0.1856 0.1576 0.3013 Up
 P0C0L4 Complement component 4A 3 2 6 0.0506 0.0394 0.1004 Up
 P05155 Serpin peptidase inhibitor, clade G, C1 inhibitor 1 0 4 0.0168 0 0.0669 Up
 P08246 Elastase 2, neutrophil 0 0 1 0 0 0.0167 Up
 P10909 Clusterin 11 4 2 0.1856 0.0788 0.0334 Down
 P04264 Keratin 1, epidermolytic hyperkeratosis 28 22 28 0.4724 0.4333 0.4686
Oxidative stress-related proteins
 P06727 Apolipoprotein A-IV 6 7 9 0.101232 0.1379 0.150628 Up
 P22079 Lactoperoxidase 3 0 1 0.050616 0 0.016736 Down
 P00441 Superoxide dismutase 1, soluble 3 1 1 0.050616 0.019697 0.016736 Down
 Q99497 Parkinson syndrome, autosomal recessive, early onset 7 6 1 4 0.1012 0.0197 0.0669
Glycometabolism-related proteins
 P02765 α-2-HS-glycoprotein 0 0 2 0 0 0.0334 Up
 P02652 Apolipoprotein A-II 12 13 20 0.2025 0.2561 0.3347 Up
 P52209 Phosphogluconate dehydrogenase 0 0 4 0 0 0.066946 Up
 P40925 Malate dehydrogenase 1, Nad, Soluble 2 0 5 0.033744 0 0.083682 Up
 P09467 Fructose-1,6-bisphosphatase 1 6 0 3 0.101232 0 0.050209
 P00558 Phosphoglycerate kinase 1 7 7 7 0.1181 0.1379 0.1172
 P13929 Enolase 1 1 0 1 0.016872 0 0.016736
Discussion
Schirmer's strip has been used for collecting tears by investigators as it could well retain proteins, especially for tear samples of scant volume, for protein identification and quantification. One drawback is that the samples on the strip may become contaminated by unintentional contact with the conjunctival sac. Despite this drawback, Schirmer's strip still is considered by many investigators as an appropriate approach for collecting tear samples and could capture subtle changes in protein contents in the tear samples. 24,25 In our study, we carried out a systematic comparison of tear proteomic properties of patients with type 2 diabetes and dry eye syndrome, patients with diabetes only, and normal subjects. Our D-LC-MS/MS identified 357 distinct proteins from tear samples of all subjects, and these proteins include proteins identified in a previous study, such aslactoferrin and lipocalin, 26 indicating that 2D-nano-LC-MS/MS is a suitable approach for obtaining rich protein information from biofluid, especially from samples of limited volumes. Approximately one-quarter (25.5%, 91/357) of these proteins were found in all subjects. Patients with diabetes, and patients with diabetes and dry eye syndrome shared an additional 3.4% (12/357) of these proteins. Furthermore, 18.5% (66/357) of the proteins were found only in patients with diabetes and dry eye syndrome. A similar percentage of the proteins (17.7%, 63/357) was present only in normal subjects, suggesting that some proteins present in normal tears are lost with development of diabetes or diabetes with dry eye syndrome. We further found that the expression of some proteins, such as complements, heat shock proteins, and annexins, is increased, while that of some other proteins, such as peroxiredoxin and superoxide proteins, is reduced, implying that changes in the proteome occur in diabetic patients before overt onset of dry eye syndrome. We also observed that patients with diabetes and dry eye syndrome exhibited increased expression of apoptosis-related proteins, immunity- and inflammation-related proteins, and glycometabolism-related proteins. These findings indicated different proteomic profiles in healthy subjects, patients with diabetes only, and patients with diabetes and dry eye syndrome. 
Srinivasan et al. 25 showed that certain proteins, such as ezrin, Ig gamma-3 chain C region, and peroxiredoxin, were upregulated, while other proteins, including cystatin-S, lacritin, lipocalin-1, proline-rich protein-4, lysozyme, polymeric immunoglobulin receptor, and lactotransferrin, were downregulated in patients with moderate to severe dry eye disease. Consistently, we also found that cystatin-S, proline-rich protein-4, and polymeric immunoglobulin receptor were downregulated in dry eye patients without diabetes compared to normal subjects. However, the polymeric immunoglobulin receptor was upregulated in diabetic patients with dry eye disease. Zhou et al. 27 reported that S100A8 and S100A9 upregulation correlated with severity of dry eye symptoms. In our study, we also found that S100A8 and S100A9 in tears of diabetic patients were upregulated compared to normal subjects. It has been reported that lipocalin-1 was downregulated in dry eye disease, 28 while in our study we found apparent upregulation of lipocalin-1 in diabetic patients without dry eye disease, but marked downregulation of the protein was observed in diabetic dry eye patients. We speculated lipocalin-1 downregulation may be an underlying cause of dry eye disease. Meanwhile, β2 microglobulin was downregulated in diabetic patients with or without dry eye, which is consistent with the report by Kim et al., 28 suggesting that B2M may be related to development of diabetes, but not dry eye. We also found IGL@protein and heat shock protein70 (HSP70) were increased in diabetic patients compared to normal subjects, which was even more significantly increased in diabetic patients with dry eye disease. We speculated that IGL@protein and HSP70 may be related to the development of dry eye disease in diabetic patients. However, whether they can serve as markers for diabetic dry eye disease needs further investigation. 
It has been suggested that some initial events, such as chronic hyperglycemia, corneal nerve damage, and impairment of insulin action, may lead to alterations in tear films and the ocular surface of diabetic patients. Those events contribute to tissue injury and may create an environment for inflammation, as nonspecific response could increase and perpetuate ocular injury. Our study also revealed changes in proteins involved in inflammation and immune response. Complement C3, which was upregulated in patients with diabetes and dry eye syndrome, has a central role in the activation of the complement system, and IL-1α, IL-6, and IFN-γ significantly enhance C3 secretion. 29 The C3b interferes with IL-12 and IL-10 production via an ERK MAPK-dependent mechanism. 30 Elastase 2, which was found only in patients with diabetes and dry eye syndrome in our study, belongs to the peptidase S1 family and induces IL-8 expression via an IL-1 receptor-associated kinase signaling pathway; these events involve cell surface membrane–bound toll-like receptor 4 (TLR4). 31 However, elastase 2 activates p38 MAP kinase, which upregulates NF-κB and AP-1 activities, thus, inducing IL-8 mRNA expression and protein synthesis. 32 Secreted orosomucoid proteins, which were upregulated only in tears of patients with diabetes and dry eye syndrome, function in modulating the activity of the immune system during the acute phase reaction. These findings suggest that inflammatory mediators may inhibit neural signals to the lacrimal gland, 33 thus, depriving the gland of trophic stimulation needed for its maintenance and resulting in its progressive destruction. The inflammatory alterations may impair biochemical events, culminating in reduced tear secretion and dry eye syndrome in diabetic patients. 
Recently, increased awareness of oxidative stress damage and its relation with ocular surface damage have prompted researchers to unravel mechanisms in the development of dry eye syndrome. The toxic effect of reactive oxygen species and free radicals can be eliminated by enzymes, such as superoxide dismutase (SOD), which eliminates O2− to produce H2O2. 34 Behndig et al. 35 reported the tears contain little SOD activity. We found that SOD level was reduced in the tear of dry eye syndromes in diabetic patients. We also identified 18 apoptosis-related proteins. Among them, 15 proteins, including heat shock proteins, annexins, modulator of apoptosis 1, were markedly upregulated in diabetic patients with dry eye syndrome compared to healthy controls. 
We also were interested in whether lipid metabolism, which is important for stabilizing tear films, was dysregulated in dry eye syndrome in diabetic patients. We found that lipid metabolism–related proteins, α-2-HS-glycoprotein, apolipoprotein A II, and A IV, were increased significantly in diabetic patients with dry eye syndrome. The α-2-HS-glycoprotein belongs to the fetuin family, and is associated with insulin-mediated inhibition of lipolysis and stimulation of lipogenesis. 36 Apolipoprotein A IV is a major component of high density lipoprotein (HDL) and chylomicrons, and has a role in chylomicron and VLDL secretion and catabolism. Apolipoprotein A II may be a positional candidate gene for familial type 2 diabetes, 37 and apolipoprotein A II may stabilize HDL structure by associating with lipids and affect HDL metabolism. The findings suggest that lipid metabolism becomes dysregulated in tear films of diabetic patients. 
In conclusion, we have demonstrated that dry eye syndrome in diabetic patients is associated with an altered proteomic profile with dysregulated expression of proteins involved in a variety of important cellular process, including inflammation, immunity, oxidative stress, and lipid and glucose metabolism. These findings suggested broad derangement in tear proteins in diabetic patients with dry eye syndrome. Further characterization of these proteins could provide potential diagnostic markers and therapeutic targets that may lead to better outcomes for these patients. Further studies are needed to elucidate changes in the signaling pathways whose proteins are expressed aberrantly in tear contents in diabetic patients with dry eye syndrome. 
Acknowledgments
Supported by the Shanghai Health Hospital Development Center Foundation Project (SHDC12007104), the Natural Science Foundation of Shanghai (No.11ZR1427900), the Youth Research Project of Shanghai Municipal Health Bureau (No.2010Y164), the Young Talent Training Plan of Tongji University (No.2010KJ018), and the Young Talent Training Plan of Shanghai Tenth People's Hospital (No.11RQ108). 
Disclosure: B. Li, None; M. Sheng, None; L. Xie, None; F. Liu, None; G. Yan, None; W. Wang, None; A. Lin, None; F. Zhao, None; Y. Chen, None 
References
Pflugfelder SC Tseng SC Sanabria O Evaluation of subjective assessments and objective diagnostic tests for diagnosing tear-film disorders known to cause ocular irritation. Cornea . 1998; 17: 38–56. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Musch DC Sugar A Meyer RF. Demographic and predisposing factors in corneal ulceration. Arch Ophthalmol . 1983; 101: 1545–1548. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
de Paiva CS Lindsey JL Pflugfelder SC. Assessing the severity of keratitis sicca with videokeratoscopic indices. Ophthalmology . 2003; 110: 1102–1109. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Goto E Yagi Y Matsumoto Y Tsubota K. Impaired functional visual acuity of dry eye patients. Am J Ophthalmol . 2002; 133: 181–186. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Dogru M Katakami C Inoue M. Tear function and ocular surface changes in noninsulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. Ophthalmology . 2001; 108: 586–592. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Seifart U Strempel I. The dry eye and diabetes mellitus [in German]. Ophthalmologe . 1994; 91: 235–239. [PubMed]
Ramos-Remus C Suarez-Almazor M Russell AS. Low tear production in patients with diabetes mellitus is not due to Sjögren's syndrome. Clin Exp Rheumatol . 1994; 12: 375–380. [PubMed]
Goebbels M. Tear secretion and tear film function in insulin dependent diabetics. Br J Ophthalmol . 2000; 84: 19–21. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Manaviat MR Rashidi M Afkhami-Ardekani M Shoja MR. Prevalence of dry eye syndrome and diabetic retinopathy in type 2 diabetic patients. BMC Ophthalmol . 2008; 8: 10. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Jin J Chen LH Liu XL Jin GS Lou SX Fang FN. Tear film function in non-insulin dependent diabetics [in Chinese]. Zhonghua Yan Ke Za Zhi . 2003; 39: 10–13. [PubMed]
Zhou L Beuerman RW Barathi A Tan D. Analysis of rabbit tear proteins by high-pressure liquid chromatography/electrospray ionization mass spectrometry. Rapid Commun Mass Spectrom . 2003; 17: 401–412. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Fung KY Morris C Sathe S Sack R Duncan MW. Characterization of the in vivo forms of lacrimal-specific proline-rich proteins in human tear fluid. Proteomics . 2004; 4: 3953–3959. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Zhou L Beuerman RW Foo Y Liu S Ang LP Tan DT. Characterisation of human tear proteins using high-resolution mass spectrometry. Ann Acad Med Singapore . 2006; 35: 400–407. [PubMed]
Koo BS Lee DY Ha HS Kim JC Kim CW. Comparative analysis of the tear protein expression in blepharitis patients using two-dimensional electrophoresis. J Proteome Res . 2005; 4: 719–724. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Fung K Morris C Duncan M. Mass spectrometric techniques applied to the analysis of human tears: a focus on the peptide and protein constituents. Adv Exp Med Biol . 2002; 506: 601–605. [PubMed]
Sakata M Sack RA Sathe S Holden B Beaton AR. Polymorphonuclear leukocyte cells and elastase in tears. Curr Eye Res . 1997; 16: 810–819. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
van Haeringen NJ Ensink FT Glasius E. The peroxidase-thiocyanate-hydrogenperoxide system in tear fluid and saliva of different species. Exp Eye Res . 1979; 28: 343–347. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Du J Shi H Lu Y Tagging single nucleotide polymorphisms in the PPAR-γ and RXR-α gene and type 2 diabetes risk: a case-control study of a Chinese Han population. J Biomed Res . 2011; 25: 33–41. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Li Y Jiang Y Wan Y Medroxyprogestogen enhances apoptosis of SKOV-3 cells via inhibition of the PI3K/Akt signaling pathway. J Biomed Res . 2013; 27: 43–50. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Liu H Finch JW Luongo JA Li GZ Gebler JC. Development of an online two-dimensional nano-scale liquid chromatography/mass spectrometry method for improved chromatographic performance and hydrophobic peptide recovery. J Chromatogr A . 2006; 1135: 43–51. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Keller A Nesvizhskii AI Kolker E Aebersold R. Empirical statistical model to estimate the accuracy of peptide identifications made by MS/MS and database search. Anal Chem . 2002; 74: 5383–5392. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Nesvizhskii AI Keller A Kolker E Aebersold R. A statistical model for identifying proteins by tandem mass spectrometry. Anal Chem . 2003; 75: 4646–4658. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Dong MQ Venable JD Au N Quantitative mass spectrometry identifies insulin signaling targets in C. elegans . Science . 2007; 317: 660–663. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Aluru SV Agarwal S Srinivasan B Lacrimal proline rich 4 (LPRR4) protein in the tear fluid is a potential biomarker of dry eye syndrome. PLoS One . 2012; 7: e51979. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Srinivasan S Thangavelu M Zhang L Green KB Nichols KK. iTRAQ quantitative proteomics in the analysis of tears in dry eye patients. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci . 2012; 53: 5052–5059. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Green-Church KB Nichols KK Kleinholz NM Zhang L Nichols JJ. Investigation of the human tear film proteome using multiple proteomic approaches. Mol Vis . 2008; 14: 456–470. [PubMed]
Zhou L Beuerman RW Chan CM Identification of tear fluid biomarkers in dry eye syndrome using iTRAQ quantitative proteomics. J Proteome Res . 2009; 8: 4889–4905. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Kim HJ Kim PK Yoo HS Kim CW. Comparison of tear proteins between healthy and early diabetic retinopathy patients. Clin Biochem . 2012; 45: 60–67. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Andrews E Feldhoff P Feldhoff R Lassiter H. Comparative effects of cytokines and cytokine combinations on complement component C3 secretion by HepG2 cells. Cytokine . 2003; 23: 164–169. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Luo X Liu L Tang N Inhibition of monocyte-derived dendritic cell differentiation and interleukin-12 production by complement iC3b via a mitogen-activated protein kinase signalling pathway. Exp Dermatol . 2005; 14: 303–310. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Devaney JM Greene CM Taggart CC Carroll TP O'Neill SJ McElvaney NG. Neutrophil elastase up-regulates interleukin-8 via toll-like receptor 4. FEBS Lett . 2003; 544: 129–132. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Chen HC Lin HC Liu CY Neutrophil elastase induces IL-8 synthesis by lung epithelial cells via the mitogen-activated protein kinase pathway. J Biomed Sci . 2004; 11: 49–58. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Zoukhri D. Effect of inflammation on lacrimal gland function. Exp Eye Res . 2006; 82: 885–898. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Valentine JS Doucette PA Zittin Potter S. Copper-zinc superoxide dismutase and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Annu Rev Biochem . 2005; 74: 563–593. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Behndig A Svensson B Marklund SL Karlsson K. Superoxide dismutase isoenzymes in the human eye. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci . 1998; 39: 471–475. [PubMed]
Dahlman I Eriksson P Kaaman M Alpha2-Heremans-Schmid glycoprotein gene polymorphisms are associated with adipocyte insulin action. Diabetologia . 2004; 47: 1974–1979. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Elbein SC Chu W Ren Q Wang H Hemphill C Hasstedt SJ. Evaluation of apolipoprotein A-II as a positional candidate gene for familial type II diabetes, altered lipid concentrations, and insulin resistance. Diabetologia . 2002; 45: 1026–1033. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Footnotes
 BL and MS contributed equally to the work presented here and should therefore be regarded as equivalent authors.
Figure 1
 
Mean normalized protein concentration in tears in healthy subjects (group A), patients with diabetes (group B), and patients with diabetes and dry eye syndrome (group C).
Figure 1
 
Mean normalized protein concentration in tears in healthy subjects (group A), patients with diabetes (group B), and patients with diabetes and dry eye syndrome (group C).
Figure 2
 
Integrated analyses of tear proteome data from groups A to C. (A) The diagram shows the proteins identified from the groups A to C tear samples. The numbers of proteins identified in the three samples are shown in the circles. (B) The distribution of high-, medium-, and low-abundance proteins in tear film. The medium-abundance proteins in group C samples obviously increased than those in group A samples (*P < 0.05). (C) Molecule function categorizations of tear proteins identified. CK, cytoskeleton; EI, enzyme inhibitor.
Figure 2
 
Integrated analyses of tear proteome data from groups A to C. (A) The diagram shows the proteins identified from the groups A to C tear samples. The numbers of proteins identified in the three samples are shown in the circles. (B) The distribution of high-, medium-, and low-abundance proteins in tear film. The medium-abundance proteins in group C samples obviously increased than those in group A samples (*P < 0.05). (C) Molecule function categorizations of tear proteins identified. CK, cytoskeleton; EI, enzyme inhibitor.
Figure 3
 
The MS/MS spectrum of peptide KVLLDGVQNPR from complement C3 in tear samples.
Figure 3
 
The MS/MS spectrum of peptide KVLLDGVQNPR from complement C3 in tear samples.
Figure 4
 
Interactive map of proteins in the tear samples of patients with diabetes and dry eye syndrome.
Figure 4
 
Interactive map of proteins in the tear samples of patients with diabetes and dry eye syndrome.
Table 1
 
Step Gradients for Peptide Recovery
Table 1
 
Step Gradients for Peptide Recovery
SCX Gradients NH4FA, mM, and ACN, %
1 5, 5% (sample loading)
2 100, 5%
3 200, 5%
4 250, 5%
5 300, 5%
6 400, 5%
7 500, 5%
8 500, 15%
9 500, 30%
10 500, 50%
11 1000
12 1000
Table 2
 
Demographic and Baseline Characteristics of the Study Subjects
Table 2
 
Demographic and Baseline Characteristics of the Study Subjects
Healthy Subjects, n = 8 Patients With Diabetes, n = 8 Patients With Diabetes and Dry Eye Syndrome, n = 8
Age, y
 Median 61.75 ± 6.61 59.75 ± 6.23 62.87 ± 5.72
 Range 51–68 51–68 50–67
Sex
 Male 4 4 4
Tear breakup time, s
 OD 11.75 ± 3.85 9.25 ± 5.52* 3.38 ± 3.07†
 OS 13.0 ± 3.93 8.25 ± 5.73* 2.75 ± 3.24†
Schirmer I test, mm/5 min
 OD 15.0 ± 6.55 7.0 ± 5.24* 2.5 ± 2.39†
 OS 13.88 ± 6.60 6.38 ± 3.54* 4.0 ± 6.70†
Fluorescent test
 OD 0.00 ± 0.00 0.75 ± 0.87* 9.63 ± 4.01†
 OS 0.00 ± 0.00 0.63 ± 0.74* 11.63 ± 4.24†
Best corrected visual acuity
 OD 0.96 ± 0.17 0.78 ± 0.32* 0.38 ± 0.25†
 OS 0.85 ± 0.28 0.78 ± 0.34* 0.53 ± 0.38†
Duration of diabetes, y
 Median 0 9.25 ± 5.34 11.37 ± 6.05
 Duration 0 5–15 7–20
Blood glucose, mmol/L 4.80 ± 0.31 7.88 ± 1.36* 8.69 ± 1.22†
Table 3
 
Shared Proteins in the Tear Samples of Patients With Diabetes Only and Patients With Diabetes Plus Dry Eye Syndrome
Table 3
 
Shared Proteins in the Tear Samples of Patients With Diabetes Only and Patients With Diabetes Plus Dry Eye Syndrome
Description SC Normalized SC
A B C A B C
Isoform 1 of protein wiz 0 45 19 0 0.0088635 0.0031799
Putative uncharacterized protein DKFZP686C15213 0 25 18 0 0.0049242 0.0030126
β-2-microglobulin 0 7 12 0 0.0013788 0.0020084
Fibrinogen β chain precursor 0 3 11 0 0.0005909 0.001841
IGHM protein 0 3 22 0 0.0005909 0.003682
Fatty acid-binding protein, epidermal 0 3 3 0 0.0005909 0.0005021
Isoform A 1 of ACYL-COA-binding protein 0 2 7 0 0.0003939 0.0011715
PDZ and LIM domain protein 1 0 2 3 0 0.0003939 0.0005021
Myosin regulatory light chain 0 2 2 0 0.0003939 0.0003347
IGL@ protein 0 2 37 0 0.0003939 0.0061925
Superoxide dismutase 0 1 1 0 0.000197 0.0001674
Isoform 2 of calpastatin 0 1 2 0 0.000197 0.0003347
Table 4
 
The 10 Most Upregulated and 10 Most Downregulated Proteins in Tear Samples
Table 4
 
The 10 Most Upregulated and 10 Most Downregulated Proteins in Tear Samples
Description SC Normalized SC Up/Down Regulated
A B C A B C
Diabetes vs. controls, △B–A
 Isoform 1 of serum albumin precursor 1304 177 1308 0.22 0.0349 0.2189 Down
 Cystatin-S precursor 128 22 58 0.0216 0.0043 0.0097 Down
 Putative uncharacterized protein 76 0 0 0.0128 0 0 Down
 Proline-rich protein 1 precursor 67 21 24 0.0113 0.0041 0.004 Down
 Proline rich 4, lacrimal isoform 1 52 2 7 0.0088 0.0004 0.0012 Down
 Keratin, type I cytoskeletal 19 51 12 72 0.0086 0.0024 0.0121 Down
 Putative uncharacterized protein 36 0 0 0.0061 0 0 Down
 Isoform 1 of endothelin-1 receptor precursor 32 0 0 0.0054 0 0 Down
 Isoform 1 of ATP-dependent RNA helicase DD×25 21 0 0 0.0035 0 0 Down
 Isoform 3 of PNMA-like protein 2 18 0 0 0.003 0 0 Down
 Lipocalin-1 precursor 796 1383 665 0.1343 0.2724 0.1113 Up
 Keratin 4 79 159 168 0.0133 0.0313 0.0281 Up
 Protein S100-A9 44 100 89 0.0074 0.0197 0.0149 Up
 Isoform 1 of keratin, type I cytoskeletal 13 24 63 7 0.004 0.0124 0.0012 Up
 Protein S100-A8 19 60 42 0.0032 0.0118 0.007 Up
 Isoform α-enolase of α-enolase 12 30 34 0.002 0.0059 0.0057 Up
 Isoform 1 of 14-3-3 protein σ 6 18 21 0.001 0.0035 0.0035 Up
 Isoform er1 of ankyrin-1 0 57 0 0 0.0112 0 Up
 Isoform 1 of protein wiz 0 45 19 0 0.0089 0.0032 Up
 Histone H2A type 1-B 0 43 0 0 0.0085 0 Up
Diabetes plus dry eye syndrome vs. controls, △C–A
 Putative uncharacterized protein 76 0 0 0.0128 0 0 Down
 Proline-rich protein 1 precursor 67 21 24 0.0113 0.0041 0.004 Down
 Proline rich 4, lacrimal isoform 1 52 2 7 0.0088 0.0004 0.0012 Down
 Secretoglobin family 1D member 1 precursor 36 24 16 0.0061 0.0047 0.0027 Down
 Putative uncharacterized protein 36 0 0 0.0061 0 0 Down
 Isoform 1 of endothelin-1 receptor precursor 32 0 0 0.0054 0 0 Down
 Isoform 1 of ATP-dependent RNA helicase DDX25 21 0 0 0.0035 0 0 Down
 Isoform 3 of PNMA-like protein 2 18 0 0 0.003 0 0 Down
 Protein S100-A6 13 0 4 0.0022 0 0.0007 Down
 B2M protein 12 0 0 0.002 0 0 Down
 β-2-microglobulin 0 7 12 0 0.0014 0.002 Up
 Fibrinogen β chain precursor 0 3 11 0 0.0006 0.0018 Up
 IGHM protein 0 3 22 0 0.0006 0.0037 Up
 Isoform a 1 of acyl-CoA-binding protein 0 2 7 0 0.0004 0.0012 Up
 IGL@ protein 0 2 37 0 0.0004 0.0062 Up
 CDNA FLJ78387 0 0 72 0 0 0.0121 Up
 Putative uncharacterized protein DKFZP686O16217 0 0 25 0 0 0.0042 Up
 Keratin 13 isoform B 0 0 22 0 0 0.0037 Up
 α-1-acid glycoprotein 2 precursor 0 0 17 0 0 0.0028 Up
 Isoform 3 of shootin-1 0 0 10 0 0 0.0017 Up
Diabetes plus dry eye syndrome vs. diabetes only, △C–B
 Lipocalin-1 precursor 796 1383 665 0.1343 0.2724 0.1113 Down
 IGHA1 protein 177 111 25 0.0299 0.0219 0.0042 Down
 α-2-glycoprotein 1, zinc 138 175 138 0.0233 0.0345 0.0231 Down
 Isoform 1 of keratin, type I cytoskeletal 13 24 63 7 0.004 0.0124 0.0012 Down
 Isoform ER1 of ankyrin-1 0 57 0 0 0.0112 0 Down
 Histone H2A type 1-B 0 43 0 0 0.0085 0 Down
 Isoform ER1 of ankyrin-1 0 57 0 0 0.0112 0 Down
 Isoform 1 of protein wiz 0 45 19 0 0.0089 0.0032 Down
 Histone H2A type 1-B 0 43 0 0 0.0085 0 Down
 Isoform 4 of collagen α-1, XII chain precursor 0 29 0 0 0.0057 0 Down
 Isoform 1 of serum albumin precursor 1304 177 1308 0.22 0.0349 0.2189 Up
 Cystatin-S precursor 128 22 58 0.0216 0.0043 0.0097 Up
 Proline-rich protein 4 precursor 109 70 126 0.0184 0.0138 0.0211 Up
 Polymeric immunoglobulin receptor precursor 101 60 111 0.017 0.0118 0.0186 Up
 IGL@ protein 0 2 37 0 0.0004 0.0062 Up
 CDNA FLJ78387 0 0 72 0 0 0.0121 Up
 Putative uncharacterized protein DKFZP686O16217 0 0 25 0 0 0.0042 Up
 Leukocyte elastase inhibitor 14 1 25 0.0024 0.0002 0.0042 Up
 Haptoglobin precursor 14 17 42 0.0024 0.0033 0.007 Up
 Heat shock 70 kDa protein 1 7 9 24 0.0012 0.0018 0.004 Up
Table 5
 
Comparison of Proteins Related to Apoptosis, Immunity, Inflammation, and Oxidative Stress in the Tear Samples of Study Subjects
Table 5
 
Comparison of Proteins Related to Apoptosis, Immunity, Inflammation, and Oxidative Stress in the Tear Samples of Study Subjects
Accession No. Protein Name SC Normalized SC Change
A B C A B C
Apoptosis-related proteins
 P04792 Heat shock protein 1, 27 kDa 17 28 35 0.2868 0.5515 0.5858 Up
 P08107 Heat shock protein 1A, 70 kDa 7 9 24 0.1181 0.1773 0.4017 Up
 O43707 α 4-actinin, 6 5 17 0.1012 0.0985 0.2845 Up
 P63104 Tyrosine 3-monooxygenase/tryptophan 5-monooxygenase activation protein 10 8 21 0.1687 0.1576 0.3515 Up
 P04083 Annexin A1 35 52 44 0.5905 1.0242 0.7364 Up
 P09211 Glutathione S-transferase PI 8 7 16 0.135 0.1379 0.2678 Up
 P23528 Cofilin 1, nonmuscle 7 4 14 0.1181 0.0788 0.2343 Up
 P68371 β 2C-tubulin, 0 0 7 0 0 0.1171 Up
 Q96BY2 Modulator of apoptosis 1 0 0 6 0 0 0.1004 Up
 P30101 Protein disulfide isomerase family A, member 3 0 0 5 0 0 0.0836 Up
 P27797 Calreticulin 0 0 4 0 0 0.0669 Up
 P07858 Cathepsin B 3 0 6 0.0506 0 0.1004 Up
 P00747 Plasminogen 0 0 3 0 0 0.0502 Up
 P55072 Valosin-containing protein 0 0 2 0 0 0.0334 Up
 P52565 Rho Gdp dissociation inhibitor, Gdi, α 0 0 2 0 0 0.0334 Up
 P32119 Peroxiredoxin 2 6 2 1 0.1012 0.0394 0.0167 Down
 P31944 Caspase 14, apoptosis-related cysteine peptidase 2 1 1 0.0337 0.0197 0.0167
 P08758 Annexin A5 6 2 5 0.1012 0.0394 0.0837
Immunity and inflammation-related proteins
 P02787 Transferrin 73 91 101 1.2317 1.7924 1.6904 Up
 Q8WUK1 Immunoglobulin heavy locus 0 3 22 0 0.0590 0.3682 Up
 P01024 Complement component 3 21 27 39 0.3543 0.5318 0.6527 Up
 P19652 Orosomucoid 2 0 0 17 0 0 0.2845 Up
 P02763 Orosomucoid 1 11 8 18 0.1856 0.1576 0.3013 Up
 P0C0L4 Complement component 4A 3 2 6 0.0506 0.0394 0.1004 Up
 P05155 Serpin peptidase inhibitor, clade G, C1 inhibitor 1 0 4 0.0168 0 0.0669 Up
 P08246 Elastase 2, neutrophil 0 0 1 0 0 0.0167 Up
 P10909 Clusterin 11 4 2 0.1856 0.0788 0.0334 Down
 P04264 Keratin 1, epidermolytic hyperkeratosis 28 22 28 0.4724 0.4333 0.4686
Oxidative stress-related proteins
 P06727 Apolipoprotein A-IV 6 7 9 0.101232 0.1379 0.150628 Up
 P22079 Lactoperoxidase 3 0 1 0.050616 0 0.016736 Down
 P00441 Superoxide dismutase 1, soluble 3 1 1 0.050616 0.019697 0.016736 Down
 Q99497 Parkinson syndrome, autosomal recessive, early onset 7 6 1 4 0.1012 0.0197 0.0669
Glycometabolism-related proteins
 P02765 α-2-HS-glycoprotein 0 0 2 0 0 0.0334 Up
 P02652 Apolipoprotein A-II 12 13 20 0.2025 0.2561 0.3347 Up
 P52209 Phosphogluconate dehydrogenase 0 0 4 0 0 0.066946 Up
 P40925 Malate dehydrogenase 1, Nad, Soluble 2 0 5 0.033744 0 0.083682 Up
 P09467 Fructose-1,6-bisphosphatase 1 6 0 3 0.101232 0 0.050209
 P00558 Phosphoglycerate kinase 1 7 7 7 0.1181 0.1379 0.1172
 P13929 Enolase 1 1 0 1 0.016872 0 0.016736
×
×

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.

×