Concentrations of MUC16 and MUC5AC using three tear collection methods
To determine the optimal tear collection method for analysis of ocular surface mucins MUC5AC and MUC16. Fifteen subjects without ocular surface disease were recruited. Subjects presented for tear collection on three separate days for three different tear collection methods with the order of method r...
Uloženo v:
| Vydáno v: | Molecular vision Ročník 23; s. 529 - 537 |
|---|---|
| Hlavní autoři: | , |
| Médium: | Journal Article |
| Jazyk: | angličtina |
| Vydáno: |
United States
Molecular Vision
28.07.2017
|
| Témata: | |
| ISSN: | 1090-0535, 1090-0535 |
| On-line přístup: | Získat plný text |
| Tagy: |
Přidat tag
Žádné tagy, Buďte první, kdo vytvoří štítek k tomuto záznamu!
|
| Abstract | To determine the optimal tear collection method for analysis of ocular surface mucins MUC5AC and MUC16.
Fifteen subjects without ocular surface disease were recruited. Subjects presented for tear collection on three separate days for three different tear collection methods with the order of method randomized. Methods used to collect tears from right and left eyes included Schirmer's strip, basal tear collection, and flush tear collection. All samples from the right eyes were individually analyzed for MUC5AC whereas the left eye samples were individually analyzed for MUC16. For each individual sample, 10 μg of protein were loaded per lane into a 1% (w/v) agarose gel and run in electrophoresis buffer for 2 h. After overnight capillary transfer, membranes were incubated with either MUC5AC antibody CLH2 or MUC16 antibody OC125 for western blot analysis. Blots were developed with enhanced chemiluminescence (ECL) and signals captured with the Odyssey Fc (LI-COR). The relative amounts of MUC5AC and MUC16 were quantified with densitometry using software and compared for statistically significant differences between tear collection methods using the Kruskal-Wallis test in SPSS 22 and GraphPad Prism 7.02. Dunn's multiple comparisons test was used for pairwise post-hoc comparisons.
Samples containing less than 10 μg of total protein were not used for analysis which left eight samples (out of 45) unusable. The calculated MUC5AC median signal intensities from Schirmer's strip, basal tears, and flush tears were 2.86 (n = 15, the interquartile range [IQR] = 2.54-3.21), 1.65 (n = 14, IQR = 1.34-3.1), and 1.67 (n = 9, IQR = 1.42-1.72), respectively (H = 9.5, p = 0.009). Post-hoc pairwise comparisons showed a statistically significant difference between Schirmer's strip and flush tears (p = 0.01). The calculated MUC16 median signal intensities from Schirmer's strip, basal tears, and flush tears were 1.88 (n = 14, IQR = 1.43-2.61), 5.24 (n = 15, IQR = 4.16-6.21), and 2.45 (n = 7, IQR = 1.85-2.48), respectively (H = 18.1, p = 0.001). Post-hoc pairwise comparison showed statistically significant differences between basal tears and Schirmer's strip (p = 0.0003) and between basal tears and flush tears (p = 0.006).
MUC5AC and MUC16 are present in human tear fluid and can be captured using various tear collection methods. Although basal tear collection yielded the highest relative concentration of MUC16, Schirmer's strip tear collection yielded the highest MUC5AC concentration. Therefore, the tear collection method chosen depends on the mucin of interest. |
|---|---|
| AbstractList | To determine the optimal tear collection method for analysis of ocular surface mucins MUC5AC and MUC16.
Fifteen subjects without ocular surface disease were recruited. Subjects presented for tear collection on three separate days for three different tear collection methods with the order of method randomized. Methods used to collect tears from right and left eyes included Schirmer's strip, basal tear collection, and flush tear collection. All samples from the right eyes were individually analyzed for MUC5AC whereas the left eye samples were individually analyzed for MUC16. For each individual sample, 10 μg of protein were loaded per lane into a 1% (w/v) agarose gel and run in electrophoresis buffer for 2 h. After overnight capillary transfer, membranes were incubated with either MUC5AC antibody CLH2 or MUC16 antibody OC125 for western blot analysis. Blots were developed with enhanced chemiluminescence (ECL) and signals captured with the Odyssey Fc (LI-COR). The relative amounts of MUC5AC and MUC16 were quantified with densitometry using software and compared for statistically significant differences between tear collection methods using the Kruskal-Wallis test in SPSS 22 and GraphPad Prism 7.02. Dunn's multiple comparisons test was used for pairwise post-hoc comparisons.
Samples containing less than 10 μg of total protein were not used for analysis which left eight samples (out of 45) unusable. The calculated MUC5AC median signal intensities from Schirmer's strip, basal tears, and flush tears were 2.86 (n = 15, the interquartile range [IQR] = 2.54-3.21), 1.65 (n = 14, IQR = 1.34-3.1), and 1.67 (n = 9, IQR = 1.42-1.72), respectively (H = 9.5, p = 0.009). Post-hoc pairwise comparisons showed a statistically significant difference between Schirmer's strip and flush tears (p = 0.01). The calculated MUC16 median signal intensities from Schirmer's strip, basal tears, and flush tears were 1.88 (n = 14, IQR = 1.43-2.61), 5.24 (n = 15, IQR = 4.16-6.21), and 2.45 (n = 7, IQR = 1.85-2.48), respectively (H = 18.1, p = 0.001). Post-hoc pairwise comparison showed statistically significant differences between basal tears and Schirmer's strip (p = 0.0003) and between basal tears and flush tears (p = 0.006).
MUC5AC and MUC16 are present in human tear fluid and can be captured using various tear collection methods. Although basal tear collection yielded the highest relative concentration of MUC16, Schirmer's strip tear collection yielded the highest MUC5AC concentration. Therefore, the tear collection method chosen depends on the mucin of interest. To determine the optimal tear collection method for analysis of ocular surface mucins MUC5AC and MUC16.PURPOSETo determine the optimal tear collection method for analysis of ocular surface mucins MUC5AC and MUC16.Fifteen subjects without ocular surface disease were recruited. Subjects presented for tear collection on three separate days for three different tear collection methods with the order of method randomized. Methods used to collect tears from right and left eyes included Schirmer's strip, basal tear collection, and flush tear collection. All samples from the right eyes were individually analyzed for MUC5AC whereas the left eye samples were individually analyzed for MUC16. For each individual sample, 10 μg of protein were loaded per lane into a 1% (w/v) agarose gel and run in electrophoresis buffer for 2 h. After overnight capillary transfer, membranes were incubated with either MUC5AC antibody CLH2 or MUC16 antibody OC125 for western blot analysis. Blots were developed with enhanced chemiluminescence (ECL) and signals captured with the Odyssey Fc (LI-COR). The relative amounts of MUC5AC and MUC16 were quantified with densitometry using software and compared for statistically significant differences between tear collection methods using the Kruskal-Wallis test in SPSS 22 and GraphPad Prism 7.02. Dunn's multiple comparisons test was used for pairwise post-hoc comparisons.METHODSFifteen subjects without ocular surface disease were recruited. Subjects presented for tear collection on three separate days for three different tear collection methods with the order of method randomized. Methods used to collect tears from right and left eyes included Schirmer's strip, basal tear collection, and flush tear collection. All samples from the right eyes were individually analyzed for MUC5AC whereas the left eye samples were individually analyzed for MUC16. For each individual sample, 10 μg of protein were loaded per lane into a 1% (w/v) agarose gel and run in electrophoresis buffer for 2 h. After overnight capillary transfer, membranes were incubated with either MUC5AC antibody CLH2 or MUC16 antibody OC125 for western blot analysis. Blots were developed with enhanced chemiluminescence (ECL) and signals captured with the Odyssey Fc (LI-COR). The relative amounts of MUC5AC and MUC16 were quantified with densitometry using software and compared for statistically significant differences between tear collection methods using the Kruskal-Wallis test in SPSS 22 and GraphPad Prism 7.02. Dunn's multiple comparisons test was used for pairwise post-hoc comparisons.Samples containing less than 10 μg of total protein were not used for analysis which left eight samples (out of 45) unusable. The calculated MUC5AC median signal intensities from Schirmer's strip, basal tears, and flush tears were 2.86 (n = 15, the interquartile range [IQR] = 2.54-3.21), 1.65 (n = 14, IQR = 1.34-3.1), and 1.67 (n = 9, IQR = 1.42-1.72), respectively (H = 9.5, p = 0.009). Post-hoc pairwise comparisons showed a statistically significant difference between Schirmer's strip and flush tears (p = 0.01). The calculated MUC16 median signal intensities from Schirmer's strip, basal tears, and flush tears were 1.88 (n = 14, IQR = 1.43-2.61), 5.24 (n = 15, IQR = 4.16-6.21), and 2.45 (n = 7, IQR = 1.85-2.48), respectively (H = 18.1, p = 0.001). Post-hoc pairwise comparison showed statistically significant differences between basal tears and Schirmer's strip (p = 0.0003) and between basal tears and flush tears (p = 0.006).RESULTSSamples containing less than 10 μg of total protein were not used for analysis which left eight samples (out of 45) unusable. The calculated MUC5AC median signal intensities from Schirmer's strip, basal tears, and flush tears were 2.86 (n = 15, the interquartile range [IQR] = 2.54-3.21), 1.65 (n = 14, IQR = 1.34-3.1), and 1.67 (n = 9, IQR = 1.42-1.72), respectively (H = 9.5, p = 0.009). Post-hoc pairwise comparisons showed a statistically significant difference between Schirmer's strip and flush tears (p = 0.01). The calculated MUC16 median signal intensities from Schirmer's strip, basal tears, and flush tears were 1.88 (n = 14, IQR = 1.43-2.61), 5.24 (n = 15, IQR = 4.16-6.21), and 2.45 (n = 7, IQR = 1.85-2.48), respectively (H = 18.1, p = 0.001). Post-hoc pairwise comparison showed statistically significant differences between basal tears and Schirmer's strip (p = 0.0003) and between basal tears and flush tears (p = 0.006).MUC5AC and MUC16 are present in human tear fluid and can be captured using various tear collection methods. Although basal tear collection yielded the highest relative concentration of MUC16, Schirmer's strip tear collection yielded the highest MUC5AC concentration. Therefore, the tear collection method chosen depends on the mucin of interest.CONCLUSIONSMUC5AC and MUC16 are present in human tear fluid and can be captured using various tear collection methods. Although basal tear collection yielded the highest relative concentration of MUC16, Schirmer's strip tear collection yielded the highest MUC5AC concentration. Therefore, the tear collection method chosen depends on the mucin of interest. Purpose: To determine the optimal tear collection method for analysis of ocular surface mucins MUC5AC and MUC16. Methods: Fifteen subjects without ocular surface disease were recruited. Subjects presented for tear collection on three separate days for three different tear collection methods with the order of method randomized. Methods used to collect tears from right and left eyes included Schirmer’s strip, basal tear collection, and flush tear collection. All samples from the right eyes were individually analyzed for MUC5AC whereas the left eye samples were individually analyzed for MUC16. For each individual sample, 10 μg of protein were loaded per lane into a 1% (w/v) agarose gel and run in electrophoresis buffer for 2 h. After overnight capillary transfer, membranes were incubated with either MUC5AC antibody CLH2 or MUC16 antibody OC125 for western blot analysis. Blots were developed with enhanced chemiluminescence (ECL) and signals captured with the Odyssey Fc (LI-COR). The relative amounts of MUC5AC and MUC16 were quantified with densitometry using software and compared for statistically significant differences between tear collection methods using the Kruskal–Wallis test in SPSS 22 and GraphPad Prism 7.02. Dunn’s multiple comparisons test was used for pairwise post-hoc comparisons. Results: Samples containing less than 10 μg of total protein were not used for analysis which left eight samples (out of 45) unusable. The calculated MUC5AC median signal intensities from Schirmer’s strip, basal tears, and flush tears were 2.86 (n = 15, the interquartile range [IQR] = 2.54–3.21), 1.65 (n = 14, IQR = 1.34–3.1), and 1.67 (n = 9, IQR = 1.42–1.72), respectively (H = 9.5, p = 0.009). Post-hoc pairwise comparisons showed a statistically significant difference between Schirmer’s strip and flush tears (p = 0.01). The calculated MUC16 median signal intensities from Schirmer’s strip, basal tears, and flush tears were 1.88 (n = 14, IQR = 1.43–2.61), 5.24 (n = 15, IQR = 4.16–6.21), and 2.45 (n = 7, IQR = 1.85–2.48), respectively (H = 18.1, p = 0.001). Post-hoc pairwise comparison showed statistically significant differences between basal tears and Schirmer’s strip (p = 0.0003) and between basal tears and flush tears (p = 0.006). Conclusions: MUC5AC and MUC16 are present in human tear fluid and can be captured using various tear collection methods. Although basal tear collection yielded the highest relative concentration of MUC16, Schirmer’s strip tear collection yielded the highest MUC5AC concentration. Therefore, the tear collection method chosen depends on the mucin of interest. |
| Author | Ablamowicz, Anna F Nichols, Jason J |
| Author_xml | – sequence: 1 givenname: Anna F surname: Ablamowicz fullname: Ablamowicz, Anna F organization: School of Optometry, Department of Optometry and Vision Science, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL – sequence: 2 givenname: Jason J surname: Nichols fullname: Nichols, Jason J organization: School of Optometry, Department of Optometry and Vision Science, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL |
| BackLink | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28761326$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed |
| BookMark | eNpdkE1Lw0AQhhep2A_9C7LgxUtgP5PsRSjBqlDxYs_LZjPbpqS7NZsI_ntTWqV6mpeZd16emSka-eDhAk0oUSQhksvRmR6jaYxbQhiVIrtCY5ZnKeUsnaBFEbwF37Wmq4OPODj8uipoio2vDkrOC9zH2q9xt2kBcAemxTY0DdjDAt5BtwlVvEaXzjQRbk51hlaLx_fiOVm-Pb0U82WyZ0p0SemIERVh0hHmHKRcEmkzlkmWM6cq4iwFY2VuGVesNHnGuKtoSUTKOYWhO0MPx9x9X-6gOpI3et_WO9N-6WBq_Xfi641eh08tJRciV0PA_SmgDR89xE7v6mihaYyH0EdNFRtgslyRwXr3z7oNfeuH8zSjPFVEKCYG1-050S_Kz4v5N31NeVM |
| ContentType | Journal Article |
| Copyright | Copyright Molecular Vision 2017 Copyright © 2017 Molecular Vision. 2017 Molecular Vision |
| Copyright_xml | – notice: Copyright Molecular Vision 2017 – notice: Copyright © 2017 Molecular Vision. 2017 Molecular Vision |
| DBID | CGR CUY CVF ECM EIF NPM 7TK K9. 7X8 5PM |
| DatabaseName | Medline MEDLINE MEDLINE (Ovid) MEDLINE MEDLINE PubMed Neurosciences Abstracts ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni) MEDLINE - Academic PubMed Central (Full Participant titles) |
| DatabaseTitle | MEDLINE Medline Complete MEDLINE with Full Text PubMed MEDLINE (Ovid) ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni) Neurosciences Abstracts MEDLINE - Academic |
| DatabaseTitleList | MEDLINE MEDLINE - Academic ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni) |
| Database_xml | – sequence: 1 dbid: NPM name: PubMed url: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed sourceTypes: Index Database – sequence: 2 dbid: 7X8 name: MEDLINE - Academic url: https://search.proquest.com/medline sourceTypes: Aggregation Database |
| DeliveryMethod | fulltext_linktorsrc |
| Discipline | Medicine Anatomy & Physiology |
| EISSN | 1090-0535 |
| EndPage | 537 |
| ExternalDocumentID | PMC5534489 28761326 |
| Genre | Journal Article Comparative Study Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural |
| GrantInformation_xml | – fundername: NEI NIH HHS grantid: P30 EY003039 |
| GroupedDBID | --- 123 29M 2WC 53G ACGFO ADBBV ADRAZ AENEX ALMA_UNASSIGNED_HOLDINGS AOIJS BAWUL BCNDV CGR CUY CVF DIK E3Z EBS ECM EIF EJD EMOBN F5P GROUPED_DOAJ GX1 H13 HH5 HYE KQ8 M48 M~E NPM O5R O5S OK1 P2P RNS RPM TR2 WOQ WOW XSB 7TK K9. OVT ZWISI 7X8 5PM |
| ID | FETCH-LOGICAL-p294t-bf0a4d025f02ffe63505c7275282f9d0fc1eac58c2392ba8723fd1b046331ec23 |
| ISICitedReferencesCount | 25 |
| ISICitedReferencesURI | http://www.webofscience.com/api/gateway?GWVersion=2&SrcApp=Summon&SrcAuth=ProQuest&DestLinkType=CitingArticles&DestApp=WOS_CPL&KeyUT=000406492900001&url=https%3A%2F%2Fcvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com%2F%23%21%2Fsearch%3Fho%3Df%26include.ft.matches%3Dt%26l%3Dnull%26q%3D |
| ISSN | 1090-0535 |
| IngestDate | Thu Aug 21 14:01:02 EDT 2025 Thu Oct 02 11:07:08 EDT 2025 Tue Oct 07 07:00:04 EDT 2025 Wed Feb 19 02:41:59 EST 2025 |
| IsOpenAccess | true |
| IsPeerReviewed | true |
| IsScholarly | true |
| Language | English |
| License | This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, used for non-commercial purposes, and is not altered or transformed. |
| LinkModel | OpenURL |
| MergedId | FETCHMERGED-LOGICAL-p294t-bf0a4d025f02ffe63505c7275282f9d0fc1eac58c2392ba8723fd1b046331ec23 |
| Notes | ObjectType-Article-1 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-2 content type line 14 ObjectType-Article-2 ObjectType-Feature-1 content type line 23 |
| OpenAccessLink | https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/PMC5534489 |
| PMID | 28761326 |
| PQID | 2136904924 |
| PQPubID | 2048181 |
| PageCount | 9 |
| ParticipantIDs | pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_5534489 proquest_miscellaneous_1925287890 proquest_journals_2136904924 pubmed_primary_28761326 |
| PublicationCentury | 2000 |
| PublicationDate | 2017-07-28 |
| PublicationDateYYYYMMDD | 2017-07-28 |
| PublicationDate_xml | – month: 07 year: 2017 text: 2017-07-28 day: 28 |
| PublicationDecade | 2010 |
| PublicationPlace | United States |
| PublicationPlace_xml | – name: United States – name: Atlanta |
| PublicationTitle | Molecular vision |
| PublicationTitleAlternate | Mol Vis |
| PublicationYear | 2017 |
| Publisher | Molecular Vision |
| Publisher_xml | – name: Molecular Vision |
| References | 15219877 - Prog Retin Eye Res. 2004 Jul;23(4):449-74 7322505 - Ophthalmology. 1981 Aug;88(8):858-61 16299150 - Br J Ophthalmol. 2005 Dec;89(12):1655-9 14713002 - Int Rev Cytol. 2003;231:1-49 19556244 - J Biol Chem. 2009 Aug 21;284(34):23037-45 22089171 - Cornea. 2011 Dec;30(12):1346-52 22991688 - Analyst. 2012 Nov 7;137(21):5088-96 2354914 - Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1990 Jun;31(6):1119-26 17508119 - Ocul Surf. 2007 Apr;5(2):153-62 6698755 - Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1984 Mar;25(3):374-7 23233782 - Mol Vis. 2012;18:2717-25 26267059 - Optom Vis Sci. 2015 Sep;92(9):931-8 18334958 - Mol Vis. 2008 Mar 07;14:456-70 22259145 - Methods Mol Biol. 2012;842:313-25 23325272 - Jpn J Ophthalmol. 2013 Mar;57(2):150-5 16633032 - Cornea. 2006 Apr;25(3):312-8 17898272 - Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2007 Oct;48(10):4509-18 17399701 - Exp Eye Res. 2007 May;84(5):939-50 17508116 - Ocul Surf. 2007 Apr;5(2):75-92 15106916 - Exp Eye Res. 2004 Mar;78(3):379-88 20852451 - Optom Vis Sci. 2010 Nov;87(11):854-60 9888425 - Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1999 Jan;40(1):43-9 23357333 - Ann Anat. 2013 Mar;195(2):137-42 21275520 - Curr Eye Res. 2011 Mar;36(3):198-207 14729350 - Exp Eye Res. 2004 Feb;78(2):173-85 18436821 - Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2008 May;49(5):1864-71 11685069 - Cornea. 2001 Nov;20(8):873-7 12766047 - Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2003 Jun;44(6):2487-95 |
| References_xml | – reference: 11685069 - Cornea. 2001 Nov;20(8):873-7 – reference: 16299150 - Br J Ophthalmol. 2005 Dec;89(12):1655-9 – reference: 22991688 - Analyst. 2012 Nov 7;137(21):5088-96 – reference: 20852451 - Optom Vis Sci. 2010 Nov;87(11):854-60 – reference: 6698755 - Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1984 Mar;25(3):374-7 – reference: 17508116 - Ocul Surf. 2007 Apr;5(2):75-92 – reference: 9888425 - Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1999 Jan;40(1):43-9 – reference: 15219877 - Prog Retin Eye Res. 2004 Jul;23(4):449-74 – reference: 18334958 - Mol Vis. 2008 Mar 07;14:456-70 – reference: 23233782 - Mol Vis. 2012;18:2717-25 – reference: 17399701 - Exp Eye Res. 2007 May;84(5):939-50 – reference: 17898272 - Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2007 Oct;48(10):4509-18 – reference: 7322505 - Ophthalmology. 1981 Aug;88(8):858-61 – reference: 19556244 - J Biol Chem. 2009 Aug 21;284(34):23037-45 – reference: 23325272 - Jpn J Ophthalmol. 2013 Mar;57(2):150-5 – reference: 16633032 - Cornea. 2006 Apr;25(3):312-8 – reference: 18436821 - Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2008 May;49(5):1864-71 – reference: 2354914 - Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1990 Jun;31(6):1119-26 – reference: 15106916 - Exp Eye Res. 2004 Mar;78(3):379-88 – reference: 26267059 - Optom Vis Sci. 2015 Sep;92(9):931-8 – reference: 21275520 - Curr Eye Res. 2011 Mar;36(3):198-207 – reference: 14713002 - Int Rev Cytol. 2003;231:1-49 – reference: 12766047 - Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2003 Jun;44(6):2487-95 – reference: 22259145 - Methods Mol Biol. 2012;842:313-25 – reference: 17508119 - Ocul Surf. 2007 Apr;5(2):153-62 – reference: 23357333 - Ann Anat. 2013 Mar;195(2):137-42 – reference: 14729350 - Exp Eye Res. 2004 Feb;78(2):173-85 – reference: 22089171 - Cornea. 2011 Dec;30(12):1346-52 |
| SSID | ssj0021547 |
| Score | 2.303582 |
| Snippet | To determine the optimal tear collection method for analysis of ocular surface mucins MUC5AC and MUC16.
Fifteen subjects without ocular surface disease were... Purpose: To determine the optimal tear collection method for analysis of ocular surface mucins MUC5AC and MUC16. Methods: Fifteen subjects without ocular... To determine the optimal tear collection method for analysis of ocular surface mucins MUC5AC and MUC16.PURPOSETo determine the optimal tear collection method... |
| SourceID | pubmedcentral proquest pubmed |
| SourceType | Open Access Repository Aggregation Database Index Database |
| StartPage | 529 |
| SubjectTerms | Adult Blotting, Western CA-125 Antigen - analysis Capillary electrophoresis Chemiluminescence Densitometry Electrophoresis, Agar Gel Eye Eye Proteins - analysis Female Healthy Volunteers Humans Male Membrane Proteins - analysis Methods Mucin Mucin 5AC - analysis Specimen Handling - methods Statistical analysis Tears Tears - chemistry Young Adult |
| Title | Concentrations of MUC16 and MUC5AC using three tear collection methods |
| URI | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28761326 https://www.proquest.com/docview/2136904924 https://www.proquest.com/docview/1925287890 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/PMC5534489 |
| Volume | 23 |
| WOSCitedRecordID | wos000406492900001&url=https%3A%2F%2Fcvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com%2F%23%21%2Fsearch%3Fho%3Df%26include.ft.matches%3Dt%26l%3Dnull%26q%3D |
| hasFullText | 1 |
| inHoldings | 1 |
| isFullTextHit | |
| isPrint | |
| journalDatabaseRights | – providerCode: PRVAON databaseName: DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals (WRLC) customDbUrl: eissn: 1090-0535 dateEnd: 20191231 omitProxy: false ssIdentifier: ssj0021547 issn: 1090-0535 databaseCode: DOA dateStart: 19950101 isFulltext: true titleUrlDefault: https://www.doaj.org/ providerName: Directory of Open Access Journals – providerCode: PRVHPJ databaseName: ROAD: Directory of Open Access Scholarly Resources customDbUrl: eissn: 1090-0535 dateEnd: 99991231 omitProxy: false ssIdentifier: ssj0021547 issn: 1090-0535 databaseCode: M~E dateStart: 19950101 isFulltext: true titleUrlDefault: https://road.issn.org providerName: ISSN International Centre |
| link | http://cvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwtV1Lj9MwEB7RFUJcEOzyKCwrI6G9VEF52HFyrKJWCLWFQyv1FuVhix5wuk0LCwd-O-NH2xTtYTlwiapJ1VT-RpPPnscH8J7XKbJUQT2elJVHWRF5-J6XXlXWTDJe81iYRuEJn82S5TL94iQ4WyMnwJVKbm_T9X-FGm0Itm6d_Qe4Dz-KBvyMoOMVYcfrvYDPdCOictNwbYnLIgtiW1GxyNgwG-xa2yS1EWKg63kH2huEFQ23ktJtl7RO9xK6A9uJfkwZoTs1P1bVL1saqYpjnTB6GMZV6ySFVjn81D1fCMzBZdgNiX6q0-V2qMgHcYfNxdEw6gRC5s4xTgZczz7n48Vkks9Hy_n1-sbT2l86R-6EUHrQi3ytfzD9PTpsmpHiGYGc_RPv2gn8XdDaYQjzp_DEUXsytJA8gwdCncPFUBXb5ttPck1Msa3JYpzDo6mrabiA8SlgpJHEAEYQMGIBIwYwYgAjGjByBIw4wJ7DYjyaZx89p27hrcOUbr1S-gWtkXJKP5RSIPHzWYVskuEmWKa1L6sAX4osqUKksGWR8DCSdVDqCW9RIND6As5Uo8QrILGkkgtkXxTJvJR-mmj5uMAXMq5oXER9uNyvWe48tc3DIIpT3B-GtA_vDrcxuOiMUaFEs2tzpP_4d3SvdB9e2iXO13YKSo52pIJh3Ad-sviHL-jB5ad31OqrGWDOWERpkr6-x3PfwOOjU17C2XazE2_hYfV9u2o3V9Djy-TKOMwfWFhnpQ |
| linkProvider | ISSN International Centre |
| openUrl | ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fsummon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Concentrations+of+MUC16+and+MUC5AC+using+three+tear+collection+methods&rft.jtitle=Molecular+vision&rft.au=Ablamowicz%2C+Anna+F&rft.au=Nichols%2C+Jason+J&rft.date=2017-07-28&rft.issn=1090-0535&rft.eissn=1090-0535&rft.volume=23&rft.spage=529&rft.externalDBID=NO_FULL_TEXT |
| thumbnail_l | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/lc.gif&issn=1090-0535&client=summon |
| thumbnail_m | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/mc.gif&issn=1090-0535&client=summon |
| thumbnail_s | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/sc.gif&issn=1090-0535&client=summon |