| Literature DB >> 25806102 |
Nornazliya Mohamad1, Rose Iszati Ismet1, MohdSalleh Rofiee1, Zakaria Bannur1, Thomas Hennessy2, Manikandan Selvaraj1, Aminuddin Ahmad3, FadzilahMohd Nor3, ThuhairahHasrah Abdul Rahman3, Kamarudzaman Md Isa1, AdzroolIdzwan Ismail1, Lay Kek Teh4, Mohd Zaki Salleh4.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The dynamics of metabolomics in establishing a prediction model using partial least square discriminant analysis have enabled better disease diagnosis; with emphasis on early detection of diseases. We attempted to translate the metabolomics model to predict the health status of the Orang Asli community whom we have little information. The metabolite expressions of the healthy vs. diseased patients (cardiovascular) were compared. A metabotype model was developed and validated using partial least square discriminant analysis (PLSDA). Cardiovascular risks of the Orang Asli were predicted and confirmed by biochemistry profiles conducted concurrently.Entities:
Keywords: Metabolomics; Myocardial infarction; Orang Asli; Phenotype; Predictive model
Year: 2015 PMID: 25806102 PMCID: PMC4371619 DOI: 10.1186/s13336-015-0018-4
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Clin Bioinforma ISSN: 2043-9113
Figure 1Principal component analysis of MI and HT (A) and MI, OA and HT (B). PCA represents a separation of MI and HT group (A). B shows that several Orang Asli were clustered within the MI.
Figure 2Workflow for prediction of phenotype among the OA from the serum metabolite profiles. The workflow was divided into three parts; validation, training and prediction. The OA data were added to the training model [data of healthy volunteers (HT) and patients (MI)] in order to predict their phenotype according to the metabolite profiles and identified biomarkers.
Lists of metabolites differentially expressed among the patients (MI) and healthy volunteers (HT)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lipids | 8,11,14-nonadecatriynoic acid | 3.72E-11 | -13.01 | 0.727 | 0.8 | 0.8 |
| 18-oxo-nonadecanoic acid | 1.17E-05 | -3.30 | 0.691 | 0.8 | 0.6 | |
| 5,8-heptadecadiynoic acid | 1.28E-18 | -4.29 | 0.754 | 0.9 | 0.7 | |
| 19-methyl-heneicosanoic acid | 4.37E-08 | -2.78 | 0.680 | 0.7 | 0.5 | |
| Methyl 12,13-epoxy-9,15-octadecadienoic acid | 4.61E-05 | 1.14 | 0.776 | 0.7 | 0.7 | |
| 5,8,11,14-Docosatetraynoic acid | 7.49E-10 | 1.44 | 0.861 | 0.8 | 0.8 | |
| 2E,5Z,8Z,11Z,14Z-eicosapentaenoic acid | 4.66E-06 | 5.20 | 0.909 | 0.8 | 0.8 | |
| 14-methyl-8-hexadecen-1-ol | 1.07E-07 | 5.52 | 0.689 | 0.5 | 0.8 | |
| 15(S)-HETE | 6.18E-15 | 11.04 | 0.997 | 1.0 | 1.0 | |
| Prostaglandin E2 | 2.58E-06 | 2.86 | 0.910 | 0.8 | 0.9 | |
| Vitamin K1 2,3-epoxide | 1.11E-05 | 1.74 | 0.679 | 0.6 | 0.8 | |
| 24,25-Dihydroxyvitamin D | 3.48E-06 | -2.07 | 0.874 | 0.8 | 0.8 | |
| 21-Deoxycortisol | 3.97E-09 | -2.90 | 0.688 | 0.7 | 0.7 | |
| C22 Sulfatide | 7.06E-11 | -8.73 | 0.766 | 0.8 | 0.8 | |
| 1-(9Z-heptadecenoyl)-2-docosanoyl-sn-glycerol | 2.33E-03 | -1.95 | 0.655 | 0.8 | 0.5 | |
| 1-(9Z,12Z-heptadecadienoyl)-2-(9Z,12Z-octadecadienoyl)-sn-glycerol | 1.72E-04 | 2.63 | 0.681 | 0.8 | 0.7 | |
| Phosphorylcholine | 5.31E-17 | 14.04 | 0.995 | 1.0 | 1.0 | |
| GPCho(16:1(9E)/0:0) | 1.61E-05 | 5.22 | 0.737 | 0.9 | 0.6 | |
| GPCho(16:1(9Z)/2:0) | 3.39E-05 | 1.96 | 0.881 | 0.8 | 0.8 | |
| GPCho(O-18:1(9Z)/0:0) | 2.10E-04 | 2.23 | 0.869 | 0.8 | 0.8 | |
| Others | Indoleacetaldehyde | 4.05E-07 | -5.96 | 0.751 | 0.9 | 0.8 |
| Inosine | 1.20E-04 | -4.85 | 0.652 | 0.6 | 0.9 | |
| Biliverdin IX | 1.83E-06 | -3.51 | 0.665 | 0.8 | 0.6 | |
| L-Urobilinogen | 1.48E-05 | 5.32 | 0.635 | 0.8 | 0.8 |
Significant analysis was performed using t-test unequal variance (p<0.005). The (-) Fold change value indicates the down regulation of the metabolite in MI, while (+) fold change value indicates the up regulation of metabolite in the MI when compared to HT.
Figure 3Quantitative evaluation of the diagnostic performance for putative biomarkers. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was performed to quantify the diagnostic performance of the nineteen candidate metabolites using PLSDA (A), Support Vector Machine (SVM) (B) and Random Forest (RF) (C). The biomarkers were capable of discriminating the MI from HT with area under curve (AUC) of 0.998, 0.998 and 0.991, with average accuracy of 0.947, 0.961 and 0.963, respectively.
Figure 4Score plot of the PLSDA prediction model of the MI, HT and OA using identified biomarkers. A shows the PLSDA of MI and HT while B shows the PLSDA of MI, HT and OA. OA data were added to the model for prediction resulted that several OA subjects were predicted to have similar profiles with patients with cardiovascular diseases. The model was constructed according to the metabolites which have high specificity and sensitivity (AUC >0.7).