Review



rabbit polyclonal anti adgrg6 antibody  (Proteintech)


Bioz Verified Symbol Proteintech is a verified supplier  
  • Logo
  • About
  • News
  • Press Release
  • Team
  • Advisors
  • Partners
  • Contact
  • Bioz Stars
  • Bioz vStars
  • 93

    Structured Review

    Proteintech rabbit polyclonal anti adgrg6 antibody
    Expression levels of <t>ADGRG6</t> mRNA in PAAD and clinical subgroups (GEPIA and UALCAN). ( A ) Comparison of ADGRG6 mRNA expression between PAAD tissues ( n = 179) and normal tissues ( n = 171) from the GEPIA database (TCGA + GTEx). ( B – I ) UALCAN-based subgroup analysis of ADGRG6 expression levels in PAAD samples stratified by sex ( B ), pancreatitis status ( C ), age ( D ), drinking habits ( E ), diabetes status ( F ), tumor grade ( G ), lymph node metastasis ( H ), and TP53 mutation status ( I ). The “normal” group in UALCAN ( n = 4) includes adjacent non-tumor tissues, without subgroup annotations. The comparison to the “normal” group in the UALCAN analysis should be interpreted with caution due to the small size of the normal cohort ( n = 4). “Drinking status” data is incomplete (missing in 80 samples), and comparisons among subgroups should be interpreted cautiously. Subtype descriptions of “Tumor Grade”: Grade 1-Well differentiated (low grade), Grade 2-Moderately differentiated (intermediate grade), Grade 3-Poorly differentiated (high grade), Grade 4-Undifferentiated (high grade). Pathologic descriptions of “Nodal Metastasis Status”: N0-No regional lymph node metastasis, N1-Metastases in 1 to 3 axillary lymph nodes. Data are presented as Mean ± SD. Statistical analysis was performed using Student’s t -test for two-group comparisons and one-way ANOVA followed by Bonferroni’s post hoc test. “*” indicates comparison with the control group; “#” indicates significance between experimental groups (* p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001; # p < 0.05, ## p < 0.01).
    Rabbit Polyclonal Anti Adgrg6 Antibody, supplied by Proteintech, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 93/100, based on 4 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/product/microarray+comparison+analyses/GPR126+Antibody/pmc12731683-69-10-15
    Average 93 stars, based on 4 article reviews
    rabbit polyclonal anti adgrg6 antibody - by Bioz Stars, 2026-09
    93/100 stars

    Images

    1) Product Images from "ADGRG6 Promotes Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma Progression Through the NF-κB/STAT6 Axis and Modulation of the Tumor Immune Microenvironment"

    Article Title: ADGRG6 Promotes Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma Progression Through the NF-κB/STAT6 Axis and Modulation of the Tumor Immune Microenvironment

    Journal: Current Issues in Molecular Biology

    doi: 10.3390/cimb47120991

    Expression levels of ADGRG6 mRNA in PAAD and clinical subgroups (GEPIA and UALCAN). ( A ) Comparison of ADGRG6 mRNA expression between PAAD tissues ( n = 179) and normal tissues ( n = 171) from the GEPIA database (TCGA + GTEx). ( B – I ) UALCAN-based subgroup analysis of ADGRG6 expression levels in PAAD samples stratified by sex ( B ), pancreatitis status ( C ), age ( D ), drinking habits ( E ), diabetes status ( F ), tumor grade ( G ), lymph node metastasis ( H ), and TP53 mutation status ( I ). The “normal” group in UALCAN ( n = 4) includes adjacent non-tumor tissues, without subgroup annotations. The comparison to the “normal” group in the UALCAN analysis should be interpreted with caution due to the small size of the normal cohort ( n = 4). “Drinking status” data is incomplete (missing in 80 samples), and comparisons among subgroups should be interpreted cautiously. Subtype descriptions of “Tumor Grade”: Grade 1-Well differentiated (low grade), Grade 2-Moderately differentiated (intermediate grade), Grade 3-Poorly differentiated (high grade), Grade 4-Undifferentiated (high grade). Pathologic descriptions of “Nodal Metastasis Status”: N0-No regional lymph node metastasis, N1-Metastases in 1 to 3 axillary lymph nodes. Data are presented as Mean ± SD. Statistical analysis was performed using Student’s t -test for two-group comparisons and one-way ANOVA followed by Bonferroni’s post hoc test. “*” indicates comparison with the control group; “#” indicates significance between experimental groups (* p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001; # p < 0.05, ## p < 0.01).
    Figure Legend Snippet: Expression levels of ADGRG6 mRNA in PAAD and clinical subgroups (GEPIA and UALCAN). ( A ) Comparison of ADGRG6 mRNA expression between PAAD tissues ( n = 179) and normal tissues ( n = 171) from the GEPIA database (TCGA + GTEx). ( B – I ) UALCAN-based subgroup analysis of ADGRG6 expression levels in PAAD samples stratified by sex ( B ), pancreatitis status ( C ), age ( D ), drinking habits ( E ), diabetes status ( F ), tumor grade ( G ), lymph node metastasis ( H ), and TP53 mutation status ( I ). The “normal” group in UALCAN ( n = 4) includes adjacent non-tumor tissues, without subgroup annotations. The comparison to the “normal” group in the UALCAN analysis should be interpreted with caution due to the small size of the normal cohort ( n = 4). “Drinking status” data is incomplete (missing in 80 samples), and comparisons among subgroups should be interpreted cautiously. Subtype descriptions of “Tumor Grade”: Grade 1-Well differentiated (low grade), Grade 2-Moderately differentiated (intermediate grade), Grade 3-Poorly differentiated (high grade), Grade 4-Undifferentiated (high grade). Pathologic descriptions of “Nodal Metastasis Status”: N0-No regional lymph node metastasis, N1-Metastases in 1 to 3 axillary lymph nodes. Data are presented as Mean ± SD. Statistical analysis was performed using Student’s t -test for two-group comparisons and one-way ANOVA followed by Bonferroni’s post hoc test. “*” indicates comparison with the control group; “#” indicates significance between experimental groups (* p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001; # p < 0.05, ## p < 0.01).

    Techniques Used: Expressing, Comparison, Mutagenesis, Control

    Protein expression of ADGRG6 in PAAD based on UALCAN and HPA databases. ( A ) Comparison of ADGRG6 protein expression between PAAD tissues ( n = 137) and normal pancreatic tissues ( n = 74) using the UALCAN database (CPTAC dataset). ( B – L ) Subgroup analyses of ADGRG6 protein expression stratified by sex ( B ), chromatin modifier alteration status ( C ), age ( D ), weight ( E ), tumor grade ( F ), tumor stage ( G ), MYC/MYCN alteration ( H ), SWI/SNF complex alteration ( I ), and activity status of the mTOR ( J ), Hippo ( K ), and RTK ( L ) signal pathways. Each subgroup was compared to normal tissues. The “others” group in ( C , H – L ) refers to patients without the specific mutation or alteration listed. ( M ) Representative IHC staining images from the HPA database showing ADGRG6 expression in normal pancreatic tissue and PAAD tissue. Scale Bar: 200 µm. Data are presented as Mean ± SD. Statistical analysis was performed using Student’s t -test for two-group comparisons and one-way ANOVA followed by Bonferroni’s post hoc test. “*” indicates comparison with the control group; “#” indicates significance between experimental groups (* p < 0.05, *** p < 0.001; # p < 0.05).
    Figure Legend Snippet: Protein expression of ADGRG6 in PAAD based on UALCAN and HPA databases. ( A ) Comparison of ADGRG6 protein expression between PAAD tissues ( n = 137) and normal pancreatic tissues ( n = 74) using the UALCAN database (CPTAC dataset). ( B – L ) Subgroup analyses of ADGRG6 protein expression stratified by sex ( B ), chromatin modifier alteration status ( C ), age ( D ), weight ( E ), tumor grade ( F ), tumor stage ( G ), MYC/MYCN alteration ( H ), SWI/SNF complex alteration ( I ), and activity status of the mTOR ( J ), Hippo ( K ), and RTK ( L ) signal pathways. Each subgroup was compared to normal tissues. The “others” group in ( C , H – L ) refers to patients without the specific mutation or alteration listed. ( M ) Representative IHC staining images from the HPA database showing ADGRG6 expression in normal pancreatic tissue and PAAD tissue. Scale Bar: 200 µm. Data are presented as Mean ± SD. Statistical analysis was performed using Student’s t -test for two-group comparisons and one-way ANOVA followed by Bonferroni’s post hoc test. “*” indicates comparison with the control group; “#” indicates significance between experimental groups (* p < 0.05, *** p < 0.001; # p < 0.05).

    Techniques Used: Expressing, Comparison, Activity Assay, Mutagenesis, Immunohistochemistry, Control

    Prognostic value of ADGRG6 expression in PAAD. ( A ) Kaplan–Meier survival curves showing OS relative to ADGRG6 expression. ( B – I ) Subgroup OS analyses, including ( B , C ) gender, ( D , E ) stage 1–2, ( F ) T2 (tumor size > 2 cm but ≤4 cm), ( G ) T3 (tumor size > 4 cm), ( H ) N0 (no regional lymph node metastasis), and ( I ) M0 (no distant metastasis).
    Figure Legend Snippet: Prognostic value of ADGRG6 expression in PAAD. ( A ) Kaplan–Meier survival curves showing OS relative to ADGRG6 expression. ( B – I ) Subgroup OS analyses, including ( B , C ) gender, ( D , E ) stage 1–2, ( F ) T2 (tumor size > 2 cm but ≤4 cm), ( G ) T3 (tumor size > 4 cm), ( H ) N0 (no regional lymph node metastasis), and ( I ) M0 (no distant metastasis).

    Techniques Used: Expressing

    Single-cell analysis of ADGRG6 in the TME. ( A ) TISCH database analysis of ADGRG6 expression across different cell types in the TME. ( B , C ) The distribution of ADGRG6 expression in various immune and stromal cell types in the PAAD_CRA001160 and PAAD_GSE154778 datasets. The left panels ( B , C ) depict the Uniform manifold approximation and projection (UMAP) of single-cell transcriptome data with cell typing (major lineages) in the two datasets. The right panels ( B , C ) show the expression of the ADGRG6 gene in different cell types (major lineages) within the two datasets.
    Figure Legend Snippet: Single-cell analysis of ADGRG6 in the TME. ( A ) TISCH database analysis of ADGRG6 expression across different cell types in the TME. ( B , C ) The distribution of ADGRG6 expression in various immune and stromal cell types in the PAAD_CRA001160 and PAAD_GSE154778 datasets. The left panels ( B , C ) depict the Uniform manifold approximation and projection (UMAP) of single-cell transcriptome data with cell typing (major lineages) in the two datasets. The right panels ( B , C ) show the expression of the ADGRG6 gene in different cell types (major lineages) within the two datasets.

    Techniques Used: Single-cell Analysis, Expressing

    ADGRG6 silencing suppresses PAAD cell proliferation, migration, and invasion in vitro. ( A ) IHC staining of ADGRG6 in PAAD tissues based on tissue microarray analysis, showing higher expression in advanced TNM stages. Scale Bar: 200 µm. ( B ) ADGRG6 mRNA levels in AsPC-1 and BxPC-3 post si- ADGRG6 . ( C ) Cell proliferation of si- ADGRG6 -transfected AsPC-1 and BxPC-3 measured by CCK-8 assay. ( D ) Wound-healing assay demonstrating reduced migration capacity in si- ADGRG6 -transfected AsPC-1 and BxPC-3 cells. Scale Bar: 50 µm. ( E ) Transwell invasion assays (200×) confirming decreased invasive ability post-knockdown. Scale Bar: 50 µm. ( F ) 3D spheroid culture assays demonstrating impaired spheroid growth in si- ADGRG6 cells, quantified by spheroid diameters across 21 days (4×). Scale Bar: 200 µm. Data are presented as Mean ± SD. Statistical analysis was performed using Student’s t -test for two-group comparisons and one-way ANOVA followed by Bonferroni’s post hoc test. “*” indicates comparison with the control group; “#” indicates significance between experimental groups (** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001; # p < 0.05).
    Figure Legend Snippet: ADGRG6 silencing suppresses PAAD cell proliferation, migration, and invasion in vitro. ( A ) IHC staining of ADGRG6 in PAAD tissues based on tissue microarray analysis, showing higher expression in advanced TNM stages. Scale Bar: 200 µm. ( B ) ADGRG6 mRNA levels in AsPC-1 and BxPC-3 post si- ADGRG6 . ( C ) Cell proliferation of si- ADGRG6 -transfected AsPC-1 and BxPC-3 measured by CCK-8 assay. ( D ) Wound-healing assay demonstrating reduced migration capacity in si- ADGRG6 -transfected AsPC-1 and BxPC-3 cells. Scale Bar: 50 µm. ( E ) Transwell invasion assays (200×) confirming decreased invasive ability post-knockdown. Scale Bar: 50 µm. ( F ) 3D spheroid culture assays demonstrating impaired spheroid growth in si- ADGRG6 cells, quantified by spheroid diameters across 21 days (4×). Scale Bar: 200 µm. Data are presented as Mean ± SD. Statistical analysis was performed using Student’s t -test for two-group comparisons and one-way ANOVA followed by Bonferroni’s post hoc test. “*” indicates comparison with the control group; “#” indicates significance between experimental groups (** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001; # p < 0.05).

    Techniques Used: Migration, In Vitro, Immunohistochemistry, Microarray, Expressing, Transfection, CCK-8 Assay, Wound Healing Assay, Knockdown, Comparison, Control

    In vivo evidence of ADGRG6 oncogenic function in zebrafish and murine xenograft models. ( A ) Representative fluorescence microscopy images of zebrafish xenografts injected with CM-DiI-labeled AsPC-1 cells (si-NC vs. si- ADGRG6 ) at 48 h post-injection (hpi), showing reduced tumor fluorescence area in si- ADGRG6 xenografts. Scale Bar: 300 µm. ( B ) Migration distance of tumor cells in zebrafish xenografts at 24 hpi, significantly reduced upon ADGRG6 knockdown. Fluorescence (red) resulting from CM-Dil labeling was used to monitor the behavior of the cells in the zebrafish model. ( C ) Relative ADGRG6 mRNA and ( D ) protein levels in AsPC-1 cells transfected with siRNA. ( E ) Representative images of mice in vivo tumorigenesis assay. ( F ) Representative images of excised tumors from the tumor-bearing mice. ( G ) Body weight of mice across groups was measured every three days for each mouse and the growth curve was plotted ( n = 6). ( H ) Comparison of the tumor weight ( n = 6). Data are presented as Mean ± SD. Statistical analysis was performed using Student’s t -test for two-group comparisons and one-way ANOVA followed by Bonferroni’s post hoc test. * p < 0.05, *** p < 0.001.
    Figure Legend Snippet: In vivo evidence of ADGRG6 oncogenic function in zebrafish and murine xenograft models. ( A ) Representative fluorescence microscopy images of zebrafish xenografts injected with CM-DiI-labeled AsPC-1 cells (si-NC vs. si- ADGRG6 ) at 48 h post-injection (hpi), showing reduced tumor fluorescence area in si- ADGRG6 xenografts. Scale Bar: 300 µm. ( B ) Migration distance of tumor cells in zebrafish xenografts at 24 hpi, significantly reduced upon ADGRG6 knockdown. Fluorescence (red) resulting from CM-Dil labeling was used to monitor the behavior of the cells in the zebrafish model. ( C ) Relative ADGRG6 mRNA and ( D ) protein levels in AsPC-1 cells transfected with siRNA. ( E ) Representative images of mice in vivo tumorigenesis assay. ( F ) Representative images of excised tumors from the tumor-bearing mice. ( G ) Body weight of mice across groups was measured every three days for each mouse and the growth curve was plotted ( n = 6). ( H ) Comparison of the tumor weight ( n = 6). Data are presented as Mean ± SD. Statistical analysis was performed using Student’s t -test for two-group comparisons and one-way ANOVA followed by Bonferroni’s post hoc test. * p < 0.05, *** p < 0.001.

    Techniques Used: In Vivo, Fluorescence, Microscopy, Injection, Labeling, Migration, Knockdown, Transfection, Comparison

    Regulatory Role of ADGRG6 in the NF-κB→STAT6→GATA3 Signaling Axis. ( A ) KEGG pathway analysis of the gene set co-expressed with ADGRG6 using the LinkInterpreter module; ( B – E ) Pearson correlation analysis between ADGRG6 and key genes of the signaling axis ( NFKB1 , RELA , STAT6 , and GATA3 ) in 178 clinical samples. Values represent Pearson correlation coefficients and corresponding p -values, n = 178; ( F , G ) Relative expression levels of STAT6 and GATA3 genes in the signaling axis in AsPC-1 and BxPC-3 cells after ADGRG6 knockdown detected by RT-qPCR. Data are presented as mean ± standard deviation; ( H , I ) Secretion levels of secretory cytokines IL-6 and IL-8 in AsPC-1 and BxPC-3 cells detected by ELISA; ( J ) Expression and activity of key proteins in the signaling axis after ADGRG6 knockdown detected by Western blot, *** p < 0.001.
    Figure Legend Snippet: Regulatory Role of ADGRG6 in the NF-κB→STAT6→GATA3 Signaling Axis. ( A ) KEGG pathway analysis of the gene set co-expressed with ADGRG6 using the LinkInterpreter module; ( B – E ) Pearson correlation analysis between ADGRG6 and key genes of the signaling axis ( NFKB1 , RELA , STAT6 , and GATA3 ) in 178 clinical samples. Values represent Pearson correlation coefficients and corresponding p -values, n = 178; ( F , G ) Relative expression levels of STAT6 and GATA3 genes in the signaling axis in AsPC-1 and BxPC-3 cells after ADGRG6 knockdown detected by RT-qPCR. Data are presented as mean ± standard deviation; ( H , I ) Secretion levels of secretory cytokines IL-6 and IL-8 in AsPC-1 and BxPC-3 cells detected by ELISA; ( J ) Expression and activity of key proteins in the signaling axis after ADGRG6 knockdown detected by Western blot, *** p < 0.001.

    Techniques Used: Expressing, Knockdown, Quantitative RT-PCR, Standard Deviation, Enzyme-linked Immunosorbent Assay, Activity Assay, Western Blot

    Related Articles

    Incubation:

    Article Title: Progesterone activates GPR126 to promote breast cancer development via the Gi pathway
    Article Snippet: .. The slices were blocked with 5% bovine serum albumin for 60 min at room temperature and incubated overnight with primary antibodies (1:300, GPR126, Proteintech) in humidified box at 4 °C. ..

    Article Title: ADGRG6 Promotes Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma Progression Through the NF-κB/STAT6 Axis and Modulation of the Tumor Immune Microenvironment
    Article Snippet: .. Sections were then incubated overnight at 4 °C with a rabbit polyclonal anti-ADGRG6 antibody (1:500; Proteintech, Rosemont, IL, USA, Cat. no. 17774-1-AP). ..

    other:

    Article Title: A force-sensitive adhesion GPCR is required for equilibrioception
    Article Snippet: Eye position data were analyzed using OpenCV 4.0.0 (Open Source Computer Vision Library, Intel) and MatLab (MathWorks, Natick, MA).



    Similar Products

    90
    Keio University Press Inc microarray comparison analyses
    Microarray Comparison Analyses, supplied by Keio University Press Inc, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 90/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/product/microarray+comparison+analyses/microarray+analysis/pm17460410-9-0-23
    Average 90 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    microarray comparison analyses - by Bioz Stars, 2026-09
    90/100 stars
      Buy from Supplier

    Image Search Results