cd2ap human pre designed sirna (MedChemExpress)
Structured Review

Cd2ap Human Pre Designed Sirna, supplied by MedChemExpress, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 94/100, based on 6 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
https://www.bioz.com/result/cd2ap human pre designed sirna/product/MedChemExpress
Average 94 stars, based on 6 article reviews
Images
1) Product Images from "Identification of a ubiquitin-binding domain protein, CD2AP, in predicting the prognosis and treatment of lung adenocarcinoma"
Article Title: Identification of a ubiquitin-binding domain protein, CD2AP, in predicting the prognosis and treatment of lung adenocarcinoma
Journal: Frontiers in Immunology
doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2025.1726531
Figure Legend Snippet: Analysis of proteomics data in the CPTAC database. (A) Comparison of the protein levels between normal (green) and tumour (red) samples. (B) Kaplan–Meier curve for each protein. (C) Pan-cancer analysis for CD2AP (green: normal tissue, red: cancer tissue). (D) Relationship between CD2AP protein level and immune infiltration in pan-cancer.
Techniques Used: Comparison
Figure Legend Snippet: TMB and immune cell analysis. (A) The top 20 mutated genes in the CD2AP -low subgroup. (B) The top 20 mutated genes in the CD2AP -high subgroup. In both panels, the genes are ordered from top to bottom by their mutation frequency. The most frequently mutated genes in the entire cohort are TP53 and TTN. (C) The infiltration fraction for each immune cell between the CD2AP -low(blue) and the CD2AP -high(red) subgroups. (D) The relationship between CD2AP copy number variation and the infiltration level of immune cells. *, P <0.05**, P <0.01; ***, P <0.001.
Techniques Used: Cell Analysis, Mutagenesis
Figure Legend Snippet: Pathway enrichment analysis. (A) GO analysis for the DEGs between the CD2AP -low and CD2AP -high subgroups. (B) KEGG analysis for the DEGs between the CD2AP -low and CD2AP -high subgroups. (C) GSEA analysis for CD2AP -low and CD2AP -high subgroups.
Techniques Used:
Figure Legend Snippet: Single-cell and IHC analysis. (A) Single-cell analysis for GSE99254 . (B) Healthy lung tissue (Patient ID: 2101) staining with CD2AP. (C) LUAD tissue (Patient ID: 2438) staining with CD2AP.
Techniques Used: Single-cell Analysis, Staining
Figure Legend Snippet: Exploration of CD2AP functions. (A) CD2AP gene expression across all cell types; (B) CD2AP gene expression in monocyte subtypes; (C) Expression distribution of CD2AP in cancer cells and monocytes; (D) Cellular interaction network of CD2AP + cancer cells LUAD; (E) Dot plot for the enrichment of ligand-receptor pathways; (F) KEGG pathway enrichment analysis for CD2AP + and CD2AP - monocytes.
Techniques Used: Gene Expression, Expressing
Figure Legend Snippet: Drug sensitivity analysis and molecular docking. (A) Venn plot indicating the potential targeted compounds. (B) The structures of CD2AP. (C) Molecular docking between afatinib and CD2AP. (D) Molecular docking between dasatinib and CD2AP.
Techniques Used:
Figure Legend Snippet: Histological experiments to validate the expression of CD2AP. (A) Validation of CD2AP expression in cancer and adjacent tissues by immunofluorescence (n=3 biologically independent samples); (B) Determine CD2AP protein levels using Western blot analysis; (C) Statistical chart for WB, data are presented as mean ± SD (n=5 biologically independent samples). * P < 0.05; (D) Results of rt-qPCR for 5 controls vs. 5 LUADs, data are presented as mean ± SD (n=5 biologically independent samples). ** P < 0.01.
Techniques Used: Expressing, Biomarker Discovery, Immunofluorescence, Western Blot, Quantitative RT-PCR
Figure Legend Snippet: Cell experiments to validate the function of CD2AP. (A) WB to show the knockdown efficiency of CD2AP; (B) Statistical chart for WB, data are presented as mean ± SD (n=3 biologically independent samples). ** P < 0.01; (C) Proliferative capacity of A549 cells by CCK-8 assay, data are presented as mean ± SD (n=3 technical replicates per group, representative of three independent experiments); (D) Cell migration capabilities by transwell; (E) Statistical chart for transwell counts, data are presented as mean ± SD (n=3 biologically independent samples). **** P < 0.0001; (F) Cell migration capabilities by wound healing assays; (G) Statistical chart for wound healing assays, data are presented as mean ± SD (n=3 biologically independent samples). ** P < 0.01.
Techniques Used: Knockdown, CCK-8 Assay, Migration