Review



human anti dsg2  (R&D Systems)


Bioz Verified Symbol R&D Systems is a verified supplier
Bioz Manufacturer Symbol R&D Systems manufactures this product  
  • Logo
  • About
  • News
  • Press Release
  • Team
  • Advisors
  • Partners
  • Contact
  • Bioz Stars
  • Bioz vStars
    • 93
      Buy from Supplier

    Structured Review

    R&D Systems human anti dsg2
    (A) Schematic of desmosome structure. (B-D) Representative STED images of desmosomes showing a characteristic ‘railroad track’ pattern in (B) MCF7 WT cells, (C) MCF7 K19-KO cells, and (D) MCF7 K19-GfP cells. The desmosomes were immunolabeled for DPC (green) and <t>Dsg2</t> (red). Scale bar: 500 nm. (E) The boxed area from the representative STED images of MCF7 WT cells shows a closer look at an individual DP railroad track with Dsg2 between the two parallel DP plaques. Scale bar: 200 nm. (F) Line-scan analysis of DPC and Dsg2 fluorescence intensity (indicated by the dashed line in E). (G) Quantification of DPC-DPC distance from WT and K19-KO cells showing that desmosomes in WT cells are wider than K19-KO cells. In all boxplots, the box represents the 25th and 75th percentiles with the median indicated and whiskers reach 1.5 times the interquartile range (IQR), defined as the difference between the 25th and 75th percentiles. Data points outside the whiskers are shown as outliers. Number of datapoints (n) = 630 (WT), 505 (K19-KO); Number of replicates (N) = 3. Mann-Whitney’s U test; ***, P<0.001. (H) Quantification of DPC-DPC distance in K19-KO, WT, and K19-GFP cells. Desmosomes in WT and K19-GFP cells are wider than K19-KO cells. n = 505 (K19-KO), 630 (WT), 716 (K19-GFP); N = 3. Kruskal-Wallis Test, followed by Dunn’s multiple comparison Test; ***, P<0.001.
    Human Anti Dsg2, supplied by R&D Systems, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 93/100, based on 13 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/result/human anti dsg2/product/R&D Systems
    Average 93 stars, based on 13 article reviews
    human anti dsg2 - by Bioz Stars, 2026-02
    93/100 stars

    Images

    1) Product Images from "Desmoplakin is a desmosomal mechanosensor"

    Article Title: Desmoplakin is a desmosomal mechanosensor

    Journal: bioRxiv

    doi: 10.1101/2024.11.19.624364

    (A) Schematic of desmosome structure. (B-D) Representative STED images of desmosomes showing a characteristic ‘railroad track’ pattern in (B) MCF7 WT cells, (C) MCF7 K19-KO cells, and (D) MCF7 K19-GfP cells. The desmosomes were immunolabeled for DPC (green) and Dsg2 (red). Scale bar: 500 nm. (E) The boxed area from the representative STED images of MCF7 WT cells shows a closer look at an individual DP railroad track with Dsg2 between the two parallel DP plaques. Scale bar: 200 nm. (F) Line-scan analysis of DPC and Dsg2 fluorescence intensity (indicated by the dashed line in E). (G) Quantification of DPC-DPC distance from WT and K19-KO cells showing that desmosomes in WT cells are wider than K19-KO cells. In all boxplots, the box represents the 25th and 75th percentiles with the median indicated and whiskers reach 1.5 times the interquartile range (IQR), defined as the difference between the 25th and 75th percentiles. Data points outside the whiskers are shown as outliers. Number of datapoints (n) = 630 (WT), 505 (K19-KO); Number of replicates (N) = 3. Mann-Whitney’s U test; ***, P<0.001. (H) Quantification of DPC-DPC distance in K19-KO, WT, and K19-GFP cells. Desmosomes in WT and K19-GFP cells are wider than K19-KO cells. n = 505 (K19-KO), 630 (WT), 716 (K19-GFP); N = 3. Kruskal-Wallis Test, followed by Dunn’s multiple comparison Test; ***, P<0.001.
    Figure Legend Snippet: (A) Schematic of desmosome structure. (B-D) Representative STED images of desmosomes showing a characteristic ‘railroad track’ pattern in (B) MCF7 WT cells, (C) MCF7 K19-KO cells, and (D) MCF7 K19-GfP cells. The desmosomes were immunolabeled for DPC (green) and Dsg2 (red). Scale bar: 500 nm. (E) The boxed area from the representative STED images of MCF7 WT cells shows a closer look at an individual DP railroad track with Dsg2 between the two parallel DP plaques. Scale bar: 200 nm. (F) Line-scan analysis of DPC and Dsg2 fluorescence intensity (indicated by the dashed line in E). (G) Quantification of DPC-DPC distance from WT and K19-KO cells showing that desmosomes in WT cells are wider than K19-KO cells. In all boxplots, the box represents the 25th and 75th percentiles with the median indicated and whiskers reach 1.5 times the interquartile range (IQR), defined as the difference between the 25th and 75th percentiles. Data points outside the whiskers are shown as outliers. Number of datapoints (n) = 630 (WT), 505 (K19-KO); Number of replicates (N) = 3. Mann-Whitney’s U test; ***, P<0.001. (H) Quantification of DPC-DPC distance in K19-KO, WT, and K19-GFP cells. Desmosomes in WT and K19-GFP cells are wider than K19-KO cells. n = 505 (K19-KO), 630 (WT), 716 (K19-GFP); N = 3. Kruskal-Wallis Test, followed by Dunn’s multiple comparison Test; ***, P<0.001.

    Techniques Used: Immunolabeling, Fluorescence, Comparison

    (A) Schematic of the desmosome under tension. The N-terminal of DP transitions from a closed conformation to an open conformation. (B) Quantification of desmosome half-unit widths (Dsg2-DPC distance) from WT and K19-KO cells. n = 1260 (WT), 1010 (K19-KO); N = 3. Mann-Whitney’s U test; ***, P<0.001. The distances between Dsg2 and DPC is significantly greater in the WT compared to the K19-KO cells. (C) Quantification of desmosome half-unit widths (Dsg2-DPN distance) from WT and K19-KO cells. n = 692 (WT), 826 (K19-KO); N = 3. Mann-Whitney’s U test; ns, P>0.05. The Dsg2-DPN distance in both cell lines are similar. (D) The mean values from the results in B and C are summarized in the bar chart to compare the DP length (DPN-DPC distance) between the WT and K19-KO cells. The DP length is 66 nm for the WT and 33 nm for the K19-KO, indicating that DP extends 33 nm in the WT cells. (E) Dispase assay after 24 h plating. The confluent cell sheets are treated with 4 mM EGTA for 1 h. The images show the intact cell sheets for WT, K19-KO, and K19-GFP rescued cells before stress and fragmented cell sheets after applying mechanical stress. (F) Quantification of the dispase assay from K19-KO, WT, and K19-GFP cells. n = 12 (KO), 12 (WT), 9 (K19-GFP); N = 3. Kruskal-Wallis Test, followed by Dunn’s multiple comparison Test; ***, P<0.001. The K19-KO cell sheets show a greater number of fragments compared to WT cell sheets, while K19-GFP cell sheets generate a similar number of fragments as WT. This indicates that elongation of DP strengthens intercellular adhesion in WT and K19-GFP cells.
    Figure Legend Snippet: (A) Schematic of the desmosome under tension. The N-terminal of DP transitions from a closed conformation to an open conformation. (B) Quantification of desmosome half-unit widths (Dsg2-DPC distance) from WT and K19-KO cells. n = 1260 (WT), 1010 (K19-KO); N = 3. Mann-Whitney’s U test; ***, P<0.001. The distances between Dsg2 and DPC is significantly greater in the WT compared to the K19-KO cells. (C) Quantification of desmosome half-unit widths (Dsg2-DPN distance) from WT and K19-KO cells. n = 692 (WT), 826 (K19-KO); N = 3. Mann-Whitney’s U test; ns, P>0.05. The Dsg2-DPN distance in both cell lines are similar. (D) The mean values from the results in B and C are summarized in the bar chart to compare the DP length (DPN-DPC distance) between the WT and K19-KO cells. The DP length is 66 nm for the WT and 33 nm for the K19-KO, indicating that DP extends 33 nm in the WT cells. (E) Dispase assay after 24 h plating. The confluent cell sheets are treated with 4 mM EGTA for 1 h. The images show the intact cell sheets for WT, K19-KO, and K19-GFP rescued cells before stress and fragmented cell sheets after applying mechanical stress. (F) Quantification of the dispase assay from K19-KO, WT, and K19-GFP cells. n = 12 (KO), 12 (WT), 9 (K19-GFP); N = 3. Kruskal-Wallis Test, followed by Dunn’s multiple comparison Test; ***, P<0.001. The K19-KO cell sheets show a greater number of fragments compared to WT cell sheets, while K19-GFP cell sheets generate a similar number of fragments as WT. This indicates that elongation of DP strengthens intercellular adhesion in WT and K19-GFP cells.

    Techniques Used: Comparison



    Similar Products

    human anti dsg2  (R&D Systems)
    93
    R&D Systems human anti dsg2
    (A) Schematic of desmosome structure. (B-D) Representative STED images of desmosomes showing a characteristic ‘railroad track’ pattern in (B) MCF7 WT cells, (C) MCF7 K19-KO cells, and (D) MCF7 K19-GfP cells. The desmosomes were immunolabeled for DPC (green) and <t>Dsg2</t> (red). Scale bar: 500 nm. (E) The boxed area from the representative STED images of MCF7 WT cells shows a closer look at an individual DP railroad track with Dsg2 between the two parallel DP plaques. Scale bar: 200 nm. (F) Line-scan analysis of DPC and Dsg2 fluorescence intensity (indicated by the dashed line in E). (G) Quantification of DPC-DPC distance from WT and K19-KO cells showing that desmosomes in WT cells are wider than K19-KO cells. In all boxplots, the box represents the 25th and 75th percentiles with the median indicated and whiskers reach 1.5 times the interquartile range (IQR), defined as the difference between the 25th and 75th percentiles. Data points outside the whiskers are shown as outliers. Number of datapoints (n) = 630 (WT), 505 (K19-KO); Number of replicates (N) = 3. Mann-Whitney’s U test; ***, P<0.001. (H) Quantification of DPC-DPC distance in K19-KO, WT, and K19-GFP cells. Desmosomes in WT and K19-GFP cells are wider than K19-KO cells. n = 505 (K19-KO), 630 (WT), 716 (K19-GFP); N = 3. Kruskal-Wallis Test, followed by Dunn’s multiple comparison Test; ***, P<0.001.
    Human Anti Dsg2, supplied by R&D Systems, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 93/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/result/human anti dsg2/product/R&D Systems
    Average 93 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    human anti dsg2 - by Bioz Stars, 2026-02
    93/100 stars
    		  Buy from Supplier
    desmoglein 2  (R&D Systems)
    93
    R&D Systems desmoglein 2

    Desmoglein 2, supplied by R&D Systems, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 93/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/result/desmoglein 2/product/R&D Systems
    Average 93 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    desmoglein 2 - by Bioz Stars, 2026-02
    93/100 stars
    		  Buy from Supplier
    mab947  (R&D Systems)
    93
    R&D Systems mab947

    Mab947, supplied by R&D Systems, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 93/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/result/mab947/product/R&D Systems
    Average 93 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    mab947 - by Bioz Stars, 2026-02
    93/100 stars
    		  Buy from Supplier
    desmoglein  (R&D Systems)
    93
    R&D Systems desmoglein

    Desmoglein, supplied by R&D Systems, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 93/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/result/desmoglein/product/R&D Systems
    Average 93 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    desmoglein - by Bioz Stars, 2026-02
    93/100 stars
    		  Buy from Supplier
    mab against dsg2  (R&D Systems)
    94
    R&D Systems mab against dsg2
    Fig. 1. <t>DSG2</t> is expressed by MM PC at the gene and protein level in a distinct subset of MM patients. (A, B) In silico analysis of publicly available microarray datasets E-MTAB-363 (A) and E-GEOD-16122 (B) was performed. In these studies, RNA was extracted from CD138+
    Mab Against Dsg2, supplied by R&D Systems, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 94/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/result/mab against dsg2/product/R&D Systems
    Average 94 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    mab against dsg2 - by Bioz Stars, 2026-02
    94/100 stars
    		  Buy from Supplier

    Image Search Results


    (A) Schematic of desmosome structure. (B-D) Representative STED images of desmosomes showing a characteristic ‘railroad track’ pattern in (B) MCF7 WT cells, (C) MCF7 K19-KO cells, and (D) MCF7 K19-GfP cells. The desmosomes were immunolabeled for DPC (green) and Dsg2 (red). Scale bar: 500 nm. (E) The boxed area from the representative STED images of MCF7 WT cells shows a closer look at an individual DP railroad track with Dsg2 between the two parallel DP plaques. Scale bar: 200 nm. (F) Line-scan analysis of DPC and Dsg2 fluorescence intensity (indicated by the dashed line in E). (G) Quantification of DPC-DPC distance from WT and K19-KO cells showing that desmosomes in WT cells are wider than K19-KO cells. In all boxplots, the box represents the 25th and 75th percentiles with the median indicated and whiskers reach 1.5 times the interquartile range (IQR), defined as the difference between the 25th and 75th percentiles. Data points outside the whiskers are shown as outliers. Number of datapoints (n) = 630 (WT), 505 (K19-KO); Number of replicates (N) = 3. Mann-Whitney’s U test; ***, P<0.001. (H) Quantification of DPC-DPC distance in K19-KO, WT, and K19-GFP cells. Desmosomes in WT and K19-GFP cells are wider than K19-KO cells. n = 505 (K19-KO), 630 (WT), 716 (K19-GFP); N = 3. Kruskal-Wallis Test, followed by Dunn’s multiple comparison Test; ***, P<0.001.

    Journal: bioRxiv

    Article Title: Desmoplakin is a desmosomal mechanosensor

    doi: 10.1101/2024.11.19.624364

    Figure Lengend Snippet: (A) Schematic of desmosome structure. (B-D) Representative STED images of desmosomes showing a characteristic ‘railroad track’ pattern in (B) MCF7 WT cells, (C) MCF7 K19-KO cells, and (D) MCF7 K19-GfP cells. The desmosomes were immunolabeled for DPC (green) and Dsg2 (red). Scale bar: 500 nm. (E) The boxed area from the representative STED images of MCF7 WT cells shows a closer look at an individual DP railroad track with Dsg2 between the two parallel DP plaques. Scale bar: 200 nm. (F) Line-scan analysis of DPC and Dsg2 fluorescence intensity (indicated by the dashed line in E). (G) Quantification of DPC-DPC distance from WT and K19-KO cells showing that desmosomes in WT cells are wider than K19-KO cells. In all boxplots, the box represents the 25th and 75th percentiles with the median indicated and whiskers reach 1.5 times the interquartile range (IQR), defined as the difference between the 25th and 75th percentiles. Data points outside the whiskers are shown as outliers. Number of datapoints (n) = 630 (WT), 505 (K19-KO); Number of replicates (N) = 3. Mann-Whitney’s U test; ***, P<0.001. (H) Quantification of DPC-DPC distance in K19-KO, WT, and K19-GFP cells. Desmosomes in WT and K19-GFP cells are wider than K19-KO cells. n = 505 (K19-KO), 630 (WT), 716 (K19-GFP); N = 3. Kruskal-Wallis Test, followed by Dunn’s multiple comparison Test; ***, P<0.001.

    Article Snippet: The following primary antibodies were used: human anti-DSG2 (MAB947, R&D systems), rabbit anti-DPC antibody (A303-356A, Bethyl Lab), rabbit anti-DPN antibody (25318-1-AP, Proteintech), chicken anti-GFP (600-901-215, Rockland), mouse anti-K19 antibody (A53-B/A2) (Santa Cruz Biotechnology), control mouse IgG (sc-2025) (Santa Cruz Biotechnology), and mouse anti-actin antibody (66009-1-Ig, Proteintech).

    Techniques: Immunolabeling, Fluorescence, Comparison

    (A) Schematic of the desmosome under tension. The N-terminal of DP transitions from a closed conformation to an open conformation. (B) Quantification of desmosome half-unit widths (Dsg2-DPC distance) from WT and K19-KO cells. n = 1260 (WT), 1010 (K19-KO); N = 3. Mann-Whitney’s U test; ***, P<0.001. The distances between Dsg2 and DPC is significantly greater in the WT compared to the K19-KO cells. (C) Quantification of desmosome half-unit widths (Dsg2-DPN distance) from WT and K19-KO cells. n = 692 (WT), 826 (K19-KO); N = 3. Mann-Whitney’s U test; ns, P>0.05. The Dsg2-DPN distance in both cell lines are similar. (D) The mean values from the results in B and C are summarized in the bar chart to compare the DP length (DPN-DPC distance) between the WT and K19-KO cells. The DP length is 66 nm for the WT and 33 nm for the K19-KO, indicating that DP extends 33 nm in the WT cells. (E) Dispase assay after 24 h plating. The confluent cell sheets are treated with 4 mM EGTA for 1 h. The images show the intact cell sheets for WT, K19-KO, and K19-GFP rescued cells before stress and fragmented cell sheets after applying mechanical stress. (F) Quantification of the dispase assay from K19-KO, WT, and K19-GFP cells. n = 12 (KO), 12 (WT), 9 (K19-GFP); N = 3. Kruskal-Wallis Test, followed by Dunn’s multiple comparison Test; ***, P<0.001. The K19-KO cell sheets show a greater number of fragments compared to WT cell sheets, while K19-GFP cell sheets generate a similar number of fragments as WT. This indicates that elongation of DP strengthens intercellular adhesion in WT and K19-GFP cells.

    Journal: bioRxiv

    Article Title: Desmoplakin is a desmosomal mechanosensor

    doi: 10.1101/2024.11.19.624364

    Figure Lengend Snippet: (A) Schematic of the desmosome under tension. The N-terminal of DP transitions from a closed conformation to an open conformation. (B) Quantification of desmosome half-unit widths (Dsg2-DPC distance) from WT and K19-KO cells. n = 1260 (WT), 1010 (K19-KO); N = 3. Mann-Whitney’s U test; ***, P<0.001. The distances between Dsg2 and DPC is significantly greater in the WT compared to the K19-KO cells. (C) Quantification of desmosome half-unit widths (Dsg2-DPN distance) from WT and K19-KO cells. n = 692 (WT), 826 (K19-KO); N = 3. Mann-Whitney’s U test; ns, P>0.05. The Dsg2-DPN distance in both cell lines are similar. (D) The mean values from the results in B and C are summarized in the bar chart to compare the DP length (DPN-DPC distance) between the WT and K19-KO cells. The DP length is 66 nm for the WT and 33 nm for the K19-KO, indicating that DP extends 33 nm in the WT cells. (E) Dispase assay after 24 h plating. The confluent cell sheets are treated with 4 mM EGTA for 1 h. The images show the intact cell sheets for WT, K19-KO, and K19-GFP rescued cells before stress and fragmented cell sheets after applying mechanical stress. (F) Quantification of the dispase assay from K19-KO, WT, and K19-GFP cells. n = 12 (KO), 12 (WT), 9 (K19-GFP); N = 3. Kruskal-Wallis Test, followed by Dunn’s multiple comparison Test; ***, P<0.001. The K19-KO cell sheets show a greater number of fragments compared to WT cell sheets, while K19-GFP cell sheets generate a similar number of fragments as WT. This indicates that elongation of DP strengthens intercellular adhesion in WT and K19-GFP cells.

    Article Snippet: The following primary antibodies were used: human anti-DSG2 (MAB947, R&D systems), rabbit anti-DPC antibody (A303-356A, Bethyl Lab), rabbit anti-DPN antibody (25318-1-AP, Proteintech), chicken anti-GFP (600-901-215, Rockland), mouse anti-K19 antibody (A53-B/A2) (Santa Cruz Biotechnology), control mouse IgG (sc-2025) (Santa Cruz Biotechnology), and mouse anti-actin antibody (66009-1-Ig, Proteintech).

    Techniques: Comparison

    Journal: iScience

    Article Title: OBP2A regulates epidermal barrier function and protects against cytotoxic small hydrophobic molecules

    doi: 10.1016/j.isci.2024.111093

    Figure Lengend Snippet:

    Article Snippet: Membrane staining was performed by using antibodies to OBP2A (orb582625, Biorbyt Ltd., Cambridge, UK), FABP5 (39926, Cell Signaling Technology, MA, USA), PERK (5683, Cell Signaling Technology, MA, USA), Bip (3177, Cell Signaling Technology, MA, USA), PDI (3501, Cell Signaling Technology, MA, USA), involucrin (ab53112, abcam, Cambridge, UK), keratin 10 (ab76318, abcam, Cambridge, UK), corneodesmosin (13184, proteintech, IL, USA), desmoglein 2 (MAB947, R&D Systems, MO, USA), and β-actin (sc-47778, Santa Cruz Biotechnology, TX, USA) as primary antibodies and a Novex AP Rabbit Chemiluminescent Detection Kit or Novex AP Mouse Chemiluminescent Detection Kit (Invitrogen, CA, USA) as secondary antibodies.

    Techniques: Imaging, Recombinant, Transfection, Saline, Sterility, Cell Culture, Protease Inhibitor, DC Protein Assay, Binding Assay, Enzyme-linked Immunosorbent Assay, Plasmid Preparation, Quantitation Assay, Fluorescence, Sequencing, Software

    Journal: iScience

    Article Title: OBP2A regulates epidermal barrier function and protects against cytotoxic small hydrophobic molecules

    doi: 10.1016/j.isci.2024.111093

    Figure Lengend Snippet:

    Article Snippet: Human Desmoglein-2 Antibody , R&D Systems , MAB947.

    Techniques: Imaging, Recombinant, Transfection, Saline, Sterility, Cell Culture, Protease Inhibitor, DC Protein Assay, Binding Assay, Enzyme-linked Immunosorbent Assay, Plasmid Preparation, Quantitation Assay, Fluorescence, Sequencing, Software

    Fig. 1. DSG2 is expressed by MM PC at the gene and protein level in a distinct subset of MM patients. (A, B) In silico analysis of publicly available microarray datasets E-MTAB-363 (A) and E-GEOD-16122 (B) was performed. In these studies, RNA was extracted from CD138+

    Journal: Molecular oncology

    Article Title: Desmoglein-2 expression is an independent predictor of poor prognosis patients with multiple myeloma.

    doi: 10.1002/1878-0261.13055

    Figure Lengend Snippet: Fig. 1. DSG2 is expressed by MM PC at the gene and protein level in a distinct subset of MM patients. (A, B) In silico analysis of publicly available microarray datasets E-MTAB-363 (A) and E-GEOD-16122 (B) was performed. In these studies, RNA was extracted from CD138+

    Article Snippet: Molecular Oncology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Federation of European Biochemical Societies. with primary mAb against DSG2 (0.9 μg mL 1 final concentration, clone #141409, MAB947 R&D Systems, Minneapolis, MN, USA), anti-CD138 (clone MI15; Dako, 1 : 100 dilution from stock), anti-CD31 (clone 89C2; Cell Signaling Technology, Danvers, MA, USA, 1 : 1200 dilution from stock) or an isotype-matched (IgG1) control antibody (0.5 μg mL 1, Abcam, Cambridge, UK), followed by reaction with DAB, counterstaining using Mayer’s haematoxylin and mounting in DPX.

    Techniques: In Silico, Microarray

    Fig. 2. DSG2 expression in a subset of MM cell lines. (A) DSG2 gene expression values for 65 human MM cell lines were extracted from a publicly available RNAseq dataset as described in Materials and methods. Cell lines were ranked according to level of DSG2 gene expression for simplicity of visualization. (B, C) For nine of the cell lines shown in A, surface expression of DSG2 protein was assessed by flow cytometry. Examples of negative, low and high expression are shown in (B), while the relationship between gene and surface protein for all cell lines analysed is shown in C (Spearman’s correlation coefficient r = 0.65).

    Journal: Molecular oncology

    Article Title: Desmoglein-2 expression is an independent predictor of poor prognosis patients with multiple myeloma.

    doi: 10.1002/1878-0261.13055

    Figure Lengend Snippet: Fig. 2. DSG2 expression in a subset of MM cell lines. (A) DSG2 gene expression values for 65 human MM cell lines were extracted from a publicly available RNAseq dataset as described in Materials and methods. Cell lines were ranked according to level of DSG2 gene expression for simplicity of visualization. (B, C) For nine of the cell lines shown in A, surface expression of DSG2 protein was assessed by flow cytometry. Examples of negative, low and high expression are shown in (B), while the relationship between gene and surface protein for all cell lines analysed is shown in C (Spearman’s correlation coefficient r = 0.65).

    Article Snippet: Molecular Oncology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Federation of European Biochemical Societies. with primary mAb against DSG2 (0.9 μg mL 1 final concentration, clone #141409, MAB947 R&D Systems, Minneapolis, MN, USA), anti-CD138 (clone MI15; Dako, 1 : 100 dilution from stock), anti-CD31 (clone 89C2; Cell Signaling Technology, Danvers, MA, USA, 1 : 1200 dilution from stock) or an isotype-matched (IgG1) control antibody (0.5 μg mL 1, Abcam, Cambridge, UK), followed by reaction with DAB, counterstaining using Mayer’s haematoxylin and mounting in DPX.

    Techniques: Expressing, Gene Expression, Cytometry

    Fig. 3. DSG2 expression in MM is strongly associated with reduced survival, independent of NSD2. (A) Microarray dataset GSE4581 was analysed for expression of DSG2 using probe set 1553105. Visual inspection of the data spread revealed a cluster of samples with elevated DSG2 expression. A 70/30 percentile split was applied to the data, which cleanly separated these DSG2-low and DSG2-high populations, as shown, for further analysis. (B) Overall survival was compared between the DSG2-low (lower 70%, n = 289) and DSG2-high (upper 30%, n = 125) subsets using Kaplan–Meier analysis. P < 0.01 (C) Expression of DSG2 was compared between patients grouped into disease subtypes according to gene expression signatures. DSG2 expression was significantly greater in the MS subset compared to all others (Kruskal–Wallis test). (D, E) Scatterplots comparing expression of DSG2 and NSD2 genes in all samples (D) or non-MS samples only (E). Dotted lines indicate thresholds for expression based on 70th percentile (DSG2) or 80th percentile (NSD2). Values represent the number of samples in each quadrant. (F) The non-MS patient cohort was stratified into DSG2-low and DSG2-high subsets and overall patient survival compared using Kaplan–Meier analysis.

    Journal: Molecular oncology

    Article Title: Desmoglein-2 expression is an independent predictor of poor prognosis patients with multiple myeloma.

    doi: 10.1002/1878-0261.13055

    Figure Lengend Snippet: Fig. 3. DSG2 expression in MM is strongly associated with reduced survival, independent of NSD2. (A) Microarray dataset GSE4581 was analysed for expression of DSG2 using probe set 1553105. Visual inspection of the data spread revealed a cluster of samples with elevated DSG2 expression. A 70/30 percentile split was applied to the data, which cleanly separated these DSG2-low and DSG2-high populations, as shown, for further analysis. (B) Overall survival was compared between the DSG2-low (lower 70%, n = 289) and DSG2-high (upper 30%, n = 125) subsets using Kaplan–Meier analysis. P < 0.01 (C) Expression of DSG2 was compared between patients grouped into disease subtypes according to gene expression signatures. DSG2 expression was significantly greater in the MS subset compared to all others (Kruskal–Wallis test). (D, E) Scatterplots comparing expression of DSG2 and NSD2 genes in all samples (D) or non-MS samples only (E). Dotted lines indicate thresholds for expression based on 70th percentile (DSG2) or 80th percentile (NSD2). Values represent the number of samples in each quadrant. (F) The non-MS patient cohort was stratified into DSG2-low and DSG2-high subsets and overall patient survival compared using Kaplan–Meier analysis.

    Article Snippet: Molecular Oncology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Federation of European Biochemical Societies. with primary mAb against DSG2 (0.9 μg mL 1 final concentration, clone #141409, MAB947 R&D Systems, Minneapolis, MN, USA), anti-CD138 (clone MI15; Dako, 1 : 100 dilution from stock), anti-CD31 (clone 89C2; Cell Signaling Technology, Danvers, MA, USA, 1 : 1200 dilution from stock) or an isotype-matched (IgG1) control antibody (0.5 μg mL 1, Abcam, Cambridge, UK), followed by reaction with DAB, counterstaining using Mayer’s haematoxylin and mounting in DPX.

    Techniques: Expressing, Microarray, Gene Expression

    Fig. 4. Differential gene expression analysis comparing DSG2-low and DSG2-high subsets. Dataset GSE4581 was stratified into DSG2-low (blue bar) and DSG2-high (red bar) patient subsets as per Fig. 3, and genes differentially expressed between the two groups were identified and displayed in heatmaps. Clustering of genes displayed in the heatmap was unsupervised and shown as analyses of the entire patient cohort (A), or only the subgroup of patients lacking MMSET expression (MS-neg; B).

    Journal: Molecular oncology

    Article Title: Desmoglein-2 expression is an independent predictor of poor prognosis patients with multiple myeloma.

    doi: 10.1002/1878-0261.13055

    Figure Lengend Snippet: Fig. 4. Differential gene expression analysis comparing DSG2-low and DSG2-high subsets. Dataset GSE4581 was stratified into DSG2-low (blue bar) and DSG2-high (red bar) patient subsets as per Fig. 3, and genes differentially expressed between the two groups were identified and displayed in heatmaps. Clustering of genes displayed in the heatmap was unsupervised and shown as analyses of the entire patient cohort (A), or only the subgroup of patients lacking MMSET expression (MS-neg; B).

    Article Snippet: Molecular Oncology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Federation of European Biochemical Societies. with primary mAb against DSG2 (0.9 μg mL 1 final concentration, clone #141409, MAB947 R&D Systems, Minneapolis, MN, USA), anti-CD138 (clone MI15; Dako, 1 : 100 dilution from stock), anti-CD31 (clone 89C2; Cell Signaling Technology, Danvers, MA, USA, 1 : 1200 dilution from stock) or an isotype-matched (IgG1) control antibody (0.5 μg mL 1, Abcam, Cambridge, UK), followed by reaction with DAB, counterstaining using Mayer’s haematoxylin and mounting in DPX.

    Techniques: Gene Expression, Expressing