| Literature DB >> 24453820 |
Shingo Hatakeyama1, Maho Amano2, Yuki Tobisawa1, Tohru Yoneyama3, Megumi Tsushima4, Kazuko Hirose2, Takahiro Yoneyama1, Yasuhiro Hashimoto3, Takuya Koie1, Hisao Saitoh5, Kanemitsu Yamaya5, Tomihisa Funyu5, Shin-Ichiro Nishimura2, Chikara Ohyama6.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study is to evaluate the usefulness of serum N-glycan profiling for prognosis in hemodialysis patients.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2013 PMID: 24453820 PMCID: PMC3884780 DOI: 10.1155/2013/268407
Source DB: PubMed Journal: ScientificWorldJournal ISSN: 1537-744X
Figure 1General protocol for the integrated glycoblotting technique and workflow for glycoblotting-based high-throughput clinical glycan analysis. Serum samples of 10 μL (a) were applied to the “Sweet Blot” automated machine for glycoblotting. After enzymatic cleaving from serum protein, the total serum N-glycans released in the digest mixture (b) were directly mixed with BlotGlyco H beads (Sumitomo Bakelite, Co., Tokyo, Japan) to capture N-glycans (c). After the beads had been separated from other molecules by washing (d), sialic acid was methyl esterified (e). The processed N-glycans were then labeled with benzyloxyamine (BOA) and released from the BlotGlyco H beads (f). Mass spectra of BOA-labeled N-glycans were acquired with an Ultraflex III instrument (Bruker Daltonics, Germany) (g).
Figure 2N-Glycan symbols of internal standard and significant N-glycans selected by logistic regression analysis. O-Benzyl hydroxylamine hydrochloride (BOA)-labeled amidated sialic acids (A2 amide), which do not exist in nature (peak number 35), were used as the internal standard (a). Putative structures of significant N-glycans selected using Cox regression analysis are presented. Peak number 49 (P49) was selected for overall survival (b).
Human serum N-glycans targeted in this study.
| Peak no. |
| Composition | Peak no. |
| Composition |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 1362.48 | (Hex)2 + (Man)3(GlcNAc)2 | 30 | 2260.8349 | (Hex)1(HexNAc)3(dHex)1(NeuAc)1 + (Man)3(GlcNAc)2 |
| 2 | 1387.51 | (HexNAc)1(dHex)1 + (Man)3(GlcNAc)2 | 31 | 2263.8345 | (Hex)2(HexNAc)3(dHex)2 + (Man)3(GlcNAc)2 |
| 3 | 1403.51 | (Hex)1(HexNAc)1 + (Man)3(GlcNAc)2 | 32 | 2276.8298 | (Hex)2(HexNAc)3(NeuAc)1 + (Man)3(GlcNAc)2 |
| 4 | 1444.53 | (HexNAc)2 + (Man)3(GlcNAc)2 | 33 | 2279.8294 | (Hex)2(HexNAc)3(NeuAc)1 + (Man)3(GlcNAc)2 |
| 5 | 1524.53 | (Hex)3 + (Man)3(GlcNAc)2 | 34 | 2336.8509 | (Hex)3(HexNAc)4 + (Man)3(GlcNAc)2 |
| 6 | 1549.57 | (Hex)1(HexNAc)1(dHex)1 + (Man)3(GlcNAc)2 |
|
|
|
| 7 | 1590.59 | (HexNAc)2(dHex)1 + (Man)3(GlcNAc)2 | 36 | 2378.8615 | (Hex)2(HexNAc)2(NeuAc)2 + (Man)3(GlcNAc)2 |
| 8 | 1606.59 | (Hex)1(HexNAc)2 + (Man)3(GlcNAc)2 | 37 | 2406.8928 | (Hex)1(HexNAc)3(dHex)2(NeuAc)1 + (Man)3(GlcNAc)2 |
| 9 | 1647.61 | (HexNAc)3 + (Man)3(GlcNAc)2 | 38 | 2419.8932 | (Hex)1(HexNAc)3(NeuAc)2 + (Man)3(GlcNAc)2 |
| 10 | 1686.59 | (Hex)4 + (Man)3(GlcNAc)2 | 39 | 2422.8877 | (Hex)2(HexNAc)3(dHex)1(NeuAc)1 + (Man)3(GlcNAc)2 |
| 11 | 1708.62 | (Hex)1(HexNAc)1(NeuAc)1 + (Man)3(GlcNAc)2 | 40 | 2438.8826 | (Hex)3(HexNAc)3(NeuAc)1 + (Man)3(GlcNAc)2 |
| 12 | 1752.64 | (Hex)1(HexNAc)2(dHex)1 + (Man)3(GlcNAc)2 | 41 | 2482.9088 | (Hex)3(HexNAc)4(dHex)1 + (Man)3(GlcNAc)2 |
| 13 | 1768.64 | (Hex)2(HexNAc)2 + (Man)3(GlcNAc)2 | 42 | 2498.9037 | (Hex)4(HexNAc)4 + (Man)3(GlcNAc)2 |
| 14 | 1793.67 | (HexNAc)3(dHex)1 + (Man)3(GlcNAc)2 | 43 | 2524.9194 | (Hex)2(HexNAc)2(dHex)1(NeuAc)2 + (Man)3(GlcNAc)2 |
| 15 | 1809.67 | (Hex)1(HexNAc)3 + (Man)3(GlcNAc)2 | 44 | 2584.9405 | (Hex)3(HexNAc)3(dHex)1(NeuAc)1 + (Man)3(GlcNAc)2 |
| 16 | 1848.64 | (Hex)5 + (Man)3(GlcNAc)2 | 45 | 2727.9988 | (Hex)2(HexNAc)3(dHex)1(NeuAc)2 + (Man)3(GlcNAc)2 |
| 17 | 1854.68 | (Hex)1(HexNAc)1(dHex)1(NeuAc)1 + (Man)3(GlcNAc)2 | 46 | 2743.9937 | (Hex)3(HexNAc)3(NeuAc)2 + (Man)3(GlcNAc)2 |
| 18 | 1870.67 | (Hex)2(HexNAc)1(NeuAc)1 + (Man)3(GlcNAc)2 | 47 | 2785.025 | (Hex)2(HexNAc)4(NeuAc)2 + (Man)3(GlcNAc)2 |
| 19 | 1914.7 | (Hex)2(HexNAc)2(dHex)1 + (Man)3(GlcNAc)2 | 48 | 2804.0148 | (Hex)4(HexNAc)4(NeuAc)1 + (Man)3(GlcNAc)2 |
| 20 | 1955.72 | (Hex)1(HexNAc)3(dHex)1 + (Man)3(GlcNAc)2 | 49 | 2890.0516 | (Hex)3(HexNAc)3(dHex)1(NeuAc)2 + (Man)3(GlcNAc)2 |
| 21 | 1971.72 | (Hex)2(HexNAc)3 + (Man)3(GlcNAc)2 | 50 | 3049.1048 | (Hex)3(HexNAc)3(NeuAc)3 + (Man)3(GlcNAc)2 |
| 22 | 2010.69 | (Hex)6 + (Man)3(GlcNAc)2 | 51 | 3109.1259 | (Hex)4(HexNAc)4(NeuAc)2 + (Man)3(GlcNAc)2 |
| 23 | 2032.72 | (Hex)3(HexNac)1(NeuAc)1 + (Man)3(GlcNAc)2 | 52 | 3195.1627 | (Hex)3(HexNAc)3(dHex)1(NeuAc)3 + (Man)3(GlcNAc)2 |
| 24 | 2057.76 | (Hex)1(HexNAc)2(dHex)1(NeuAc)1 + (Man)3(GlcNAc)2 | 53 | 3354.616 | (Hex)3(HexNAc)3(NeuAc)4 + (Man)3(GlcNAc)2 |
| 25 | 2060.76 | (Hex)2(HexNAc)2(dHex)2 + (Man)3(GlcNAc)2 | 54 | 3414.237 | (Hex)4(HexNAc)4(NeuAc)3 + (Man)3(GlcNAc)2 |
| 26 | 2073.75 | (Hex)2(HexNAc)2(NeuAc)1 + (Man)3(GlcNAc)2 | 55 | 3560.2949 | (Hex)4(HexNAc)4(dHex)1(NeuAc)3 + (Man)3(GlcNAc)2 |
| 27 | 2114.78 | (Hex)1(HexNAc)3(NeuAc)1 + (Man)3(GlcNAc)2 | 56 | 3719.3481 | (Hex)4(HexNAc)4(NeuAc)4 + (Man)3(GlcNAc)2 |
| 28 | 2117.78 | (Hex)2(HexNAc)3(dHex)1 + (Man)3(GlcNAc)2 | 57 | 3865.406 | (Hex)4(HexNAc)4(dHex)1(NeuAc)4 + (Man)3(GlcNAc)2 |
| 29 | 2219.81 | (Hex)2(HexNAc)2(dHex)1(NeuAc)1 + (Man)3(GlcNAc)2 |
We identified 56 kinds of N-glycan types in the hemodialysis patients. Peak number 35 was an internal standard spiked for quantification. Compositional annotation and putative structures (presented as abbreviations) were collected using the GlycoSuite online database (Proteome Systems). Hex: hexose; HexNAc: N-acetyl hexosamine; dHex: deoxyhexose.
Patient characteristics in the study groups.
| All | Survivors | Deceased |
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 100 | 63 | 37 |
|
| Age (years) | 65 ± 7.0 | 64 ± 7.0 | 66 ± 7.0 |
|
| Gender (M/F) | 52/48 | 30/33 | 22/15 |
|
| Dialysis vintage (months) | 90 ± 57 | 87 ± 63 | 95 ± 48 |
|
| Diabetes | 57 (57%) | 30 (48%) | 27 (73%) |
|
| BMI (kg/m2) | 22 ± 3.1 | 23 ± 3.2 | 21 ± 2.7 |
|
| Blood pressure (mean, mmHg) | 123 ± 16 | 124 ± 15 | 122 ± 17 |
|
| Hemoglobin (g/dL) | 9.9 ± 1.0 | 9.9 ± 0.9 | 10 ± 1.0 |
|
| Albumin (g/dL) | 3.7 ± 0.4 | 3.8 ± 0.3 | 3.6 ± 0.5 |
|
| Correlated calcium (mg/dL) | 9.4 ± 0.9 | 9.5 ± 0.9 | 9.3 ± 0.9 |
|
| Phosphorus (mg/dL) | 5.0 ± 1.3 | 5.2 ± 1.2 | 4.6 ± 1.4 |
|
| C-reactive protein (mg/dL) | 1.2 ± 2.2 | 0.9 ± 2.1 | 1.6 ± 2.4 |
|
| max-IMT (mm) | 1.9 ± 1.0 | 1.6 ± 0.8 | 2.4 ± 1.2 |
|
| ACI (%) | 66 ± 29 | 61 ± 29 | 75 ± 26 |
|
| Cardiovascular events | 34 (34%) | 17 (17%) | 17 (17%) |
|
| P49 | 0.20 ± 0.21 | 0.16 ± 0.19 | 0.26 ± 0.24 |
|
Uni- and multivariate Cox regression analysis of biochemical markers and clinical factors associated with overall survival. HR: hazard ratio, CI: confidence interval.
| Univariate analysis |
| HR | 95.0% CI | Multivariate analysis |
| HR | 95.0% CI |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age (years) |
| 1.03 | 0.99–1.08 | ||||
| Gender (M/F) |
| 1.73 | 0.91–3.28 | ||||
| Dialysis vintage (months) |
| 1.00 | 1.00-1.01 | ||||
| Diabetes |
| 2.55 | 1.25–5.23 | ||||
| BMI (kg/m2) |
| 0.87 | 0.78–0.97 | BMI (kg/m2) |
| 0.83 | 0.73–0.94 |
| Blood pressure (mean, mmHg) |
| 0.99 | 0.97–1.01 | ||||
| Hemoglobin (g/dL) |
| 0.98 | 0.71–1.37 | ||||
| Albumin (g/dL) |
| 0.24 | 0.11–0.54 | ||||
| Correlated calcium (mg/dL) |
| 0.77 | 0.52–1.14 | ||||
| Phosphorus (mg/dL) |
| 0.87 | 0.67–1.12 | ||||
| C-reactive protein (mg/dL) |
| 1.16 | 1.03–1.30 | ||||
| max-IMT (mm) |
| 1.66 | 1.25–2.19 | max-IMT (mm) |
| 1.49 | 1.11–2.00 |
| ACI (%) |
| 1.02 | 1.00–1.03 | ||||
| Cardiovascular events |
| 2.61 | 1.39–4.91 | Cardiovascular events |
| 2.88 | 1.46–5.69 |
| P49 |
| 11.40 | 3.45–37.3 | P49 |
| 8.39 | 2.64–26.7 |
Figure 3Patients' parameters significantly associated with overall survival. Selected parameters for overall survival were presence of DM (a), BMI (b), CRP (c), max-IMT (d), ACI (e), and intensity of P49 (f).
Figure 4Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. Areas under the curves (AUCs) in BMI, max-IMT, and intensity of P49 were 0.66, 0.67, and 0.67, respectively.
Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves for independent prognostic factors to determine the area under the curves (AUCs) and the optimal cutoff values.
| Risk factor | AUC |
| 95% CI | Optimal cutoff value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| BMI(kg/m2) | 0.66 |
| 0.55–0.77 | 22.0 |
| max-IMT (mm) | 0.67 |
| 0.56–0.78 | 1.6 |
| P49 | 0.67 |
| 0.56–0.78 | 0.226 |
Figure 5Overall survival from the cutoff points. Significantly poor overall survival was observed in patients with BMI < 22.0 (a), max-IMT > 1.6 (b), and P49 > 0.226 (c) using the log-rank test and the Kaplan-Meier method. Overall survival in patients with cardiovascular events showed not significant but boundary effects on prognosis (P = 0.0623) (d).
Figure 6Risk classification according to the number of independent risk factors for overall survival. Patients were categorized into 3 groups according to the number of independent risk factors for overall survival: the low-risk group (patients with no risk factors), the intermediate-risk group (1 or 2 risk factors), and the high-risk group (3 or 4 risk factors). Risk classification revealed significantly poor prognosis by increasing the number of risk factors (*P < 0.001). The patients with high-risk group showed significantly poor prognosis compared with those in the other groups.