Alex M Dickens1, James R Larkin1, Julian L Griffin1, Ana Cavey1, Lucy Matthews1, Martin R Turner1, Gordon K Wilcock1, Benjamin G Davis1, Timothy D W Claridge1, Jacqueline Palace1, Daniel C Anthony2, Nicola R Sibson1. 1. From the CR-UK/MRC Gray Institute for Radiation Oncology and Biology (A.M.D., J.R.L., N.R.S.), Department of Pharmacology (A.M.D., D.C.A.), Department of Chemistry (A.M.D., B.G.D., T.D.W.C.), Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences (A.C., L.M., M.R.T.), and Nuffield Department of Medicine (G.K.W.), University of Oxford; and the Department of Biochemistry (J.L.G., J.P.), University of Cambridge, UK. 2. From the CR-UK/MRC Gray Institute for Radiation Oncology and Biology (A.M.D., J.R.L., N.R.S.), Department of Pharmacology (A.M.D., D.C.A.), Department of Chemistry (A.M.D., B.G.D., T.D.W.C.), Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences (A.C., L.M., M.R.T.), and Nuffield Department of Medicine (G.K.W.), University of Oxford; and the Department of Biochemistry (J.L.G., J.P.), University of Cambridge, UK. Daniel.Anthony@pharm.ox.ac.uk.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: We tested whether it is possible to differentiate relapsing-remitting (RR) from secondary progressive (SP) disease stages in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) using a combination of nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) metabolomics and partial least squares discriminant analysis (PLS-DA) of biofluids, which makes no assumptions on the underlying mechanisms of disease. METHODS: Serum samples were obtained from patients with primary progressive MS (PPMS), SPMS, and RRMS; patients with other neurodegenerative conditions; and age-matched controls. Samples were analyzed by NMR and PLS-DA models were derived to separate disease groups. RESULTS: The PLS-DA models for serum samples from patients with MS enabled reliable differentiation between RRMS and SPMS. This approach also identified significant differences between the metabolite profiles of each of the MS groups (PP, SP, and RR) and the healthy controls, as well as predicting disease group membership with high specificity and sensitivity. CONCLUSIONS: NMR metabolomics analysis of serum is a sensitive and robust method for differentiating between different stages of MS, yielding diagnostic markers without a priori knowledge of disease pathogenesis. Critically, this study identified and validated a type II biomarker for the RR to SP transition in patients with MS. This approach may be of considerable benefit in categorizing patients for treatment and as an outcome measure in future clinical trials. CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE: This study provides Class II evidence that serum metabolite profiles accurately distinguish patients with different subtypes and stages of MS.
OBJECTIVE: We tested whether it is possible to differentiate relapsing-remitting (RR) from secondary progressive (SP) disease stages in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) using a combination of nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) metabolomics and partial least squares discriminant analysis (PLS-DA) of biofluids, which makes no assumptions on the underlying mechanisms of disease. METHODS: Serum samples were obtained from patients with primary progressive MS (PPMS), SPMS, and RRMS; patients with other neurodegenerative conditions; and age-matched controls. Samples were analyzed by NMR and PLS-DA models were derived to separate disease groups. RESULTS: The PLS-DA models for serum samples from patients with MS enabled reliable differentiation between RRMS and SPMS. This approach also identified significant differences between the metabolite profiles of each of the MS groups (PP, SP, and RR) and the healthy controls, as well as predicting disease group membership with high specificity and sensitivity. CONCLUSIONS: NMR metabolomics analysis of serum is a sensitive and robust method for differentiating between different stages of MS, yielding diagnostic markers without a priori knowledge of disease pathogenesis. Critically, this study identified and validated a type II biomarker for the RR to SP transition in patients with MS. This approach may be of considerable benefit in categorizing patients for treatment and as an outcome measure in future clinical trials. CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE: This study provides Class II evidence that serum metabolite profiles accurately distinguish patients with different subtypes and stages of MS.
Authors: E Holmes; P J Foxall; J K Nicholson; G H Neild; S M Brown; C R Beddell; B C Sweatman; E Rahr; J C Lindon; M Spraul Journal: Anal Biochem Date: 1994-08-01 Impact factor: 3.365
Authors: J N Whitaker; R D Kachelhofer; E L Bradley; S Burgard; B A Layton; A T Reder; W Morrison; G J Zhao; D W Paty Journal: Ann Neurol Date: 1995-10 Impact factor: 10.422
Authors: Bert A 't Hart; Jack T W E Vogels; Gerwin Spijksma; Herbert P M Brok; Chris Polman; Jan van der Greef Journal: J Neurol Sci Date: 2003-08-15 Impact factor: 3.181
Authors: Chris H Polman; Stephen C Reingold; Brenda Banwell; Michel Clanet; Jeffrey A Cohen; Massimo Filippi; Kazuo Fujihara; Eva Havrdova; Michael Hutchinson; Ludwig Kappos; Fred D Lublin; Xavier Montalban; Paul O'Connor; Magnhild Sandberg-Wollheim; Alan J Thompson; Emmanuelle Waubant; Brian Weinshenker; Jerry S Wolinsky Journal: Ann Neurol Date: 2011-02 Impact factor: 10.422
Authors: David S Wishart; Dan Tzur; Craig Knox; Roman Eisner; An Chi Guo; Nelson Young; Dean Cheng; Kevin Jewell; David Arndt; Summit Sawhney; Chris Fung; Lisa Nikolai; Mike Lewis; Marie-Aude Coutouly; Ian Forsythe; Peter Tang; Savita Shrivastava; Kevin Jeroncic; Paul Stothard; Godwin Amegbey; David Block; David D Hau; James Wagner; Jessica Miniaci; Melisa Clements; Mulu Gebremedhin; Natalie Guo; Ying Zhang; Gavin E Duggan; Glen D Macinnis; Alim M Weljie; Reza Dowlatabadi; Fiona Bamforth; Derrick Clive; Russ Greiner; Liang Li; Tom Marrie; Brian D Sykes; Hans J Vogel; Lori Querengesser Journal: Nucleic Acids Res Date: 2007-01 Impact factor: 16.971
Authors: Claire L Waterman; Richard A Currie; Lisa A Cottrell; Jacky Dow; Jayne Wright; Catherine J Waterfield; Julian L Griffin Journal: BMC Genomics Date: 2010-01-06 Impact factor: 3.969
Authors: Giacomo Lazzarino; Angela M Amorini; Axel Petzold; Claudio Gasperini; Serena Ruggieri; Maria Esmeralda Quartuccio; Giuseppe Lazzarino; Enrico Di Stasio; Barbara Tavazzi Journal: Mol Neurobiol Date: 2016-11-08 Impact factor: 5.590
Authors: J Singh; M Cerghet; L M Poisson; I Datta; K Labuzek; H Suhail; R Rattan; Shailendra Giri Journal: J Neuroimmune Pharmacol Date: 2018-10-12 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Freya Davies; Fiona Wood; Katherine E Brain; Michelle Edwards; Rhiannon Jones; Rachel Wallbank; Neil P Robertson; Adrian Edwards Journal: Int J MS Care Date: 2016 Sep-Oct
Authors: Pavan Bhargava; Matthew D Smith; Leah Mische; Emily Harrington; Kathryn C Fitzgerald; Kyle Martin; Sol Kim; Arthur Anthony Reyes; Jaime Gonzalez-Cardona; Christina Volsko; Ajai Tripathi; Sonal Singh; Kesava Varanasi; Hannah-Noelle Lord; Keya Meyers; Michelle Taylor; Marjan Gharagozloo; Elias S Sotirchos; Bardia Nourbakhsh; Ranjan Dutta; Ellen M Mowry; Emmanuelle Waubant; Peter A Calabresi Journal: J Clin Invest Date: 2020-07-01 Impact factor: 14.808
Authors: Martha E García-Aguilera; Eduardo Rodríguez de San Miguel; Jocelyn Cruz-Pérez; Lucinda Aguirre-Cruz; Christian M Ramirez-Alfaro; Nuria Esturau-Escofet Journal: Metabolomics Date: 2021-04-16 Impact factor: 4.290
Authors: Alex M Dickens; James R Larkin; Benjamin G Davis; Julian L Griffin; Timothy D W Claridge; Nicola R Sibson; Daniel C Anthony Journal: J Neuroimmune Pharmacol Date: 2015-07-09 Impact factor: 4.147