Mahim Jain1, Adam D Kennedy2, Sarah H Elsea1, Marcus J Miller3. 1. Dept. of Molecular and Human Genetics, Medical Genetics Laboratory, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, United States. 2. Metabolon Inc., Durham, NC, United States. 3. Dept. of Molecular and Human Genetics, Medical Genetics Laboratory, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, United States. Electronic address: marcusm@bcm.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Delaying plasma separation after phlebotomy (processing delay) can cause perturbations of numerous small molecule analytes. This poses a major challenge to the clinical application of metabolomics analyses. In this study, we further define the analyte changes that occur during processing delays and generate a model for the post hoc detection of this preanalytical error. METHODS: Using an untargeted metabolomics platform we analyzed EDTA-preserved plasma specimens harvested after processing delays lasting from minutes to days. Identified biomarkers were tested on (i) a test-set of samples exposed to either minimal (n=28) or long delays (n=40) and (ii) samples collected in a clinical setting for metabolomics analysis (n=141). RESULTS: A total of 149 of 803 plasma analytes changed significantly during processing delays lasting 0-20h. Biomarkers related to erythrocyte metabolism, e.g., 5-oxoproline, lactate, and an ornithine/arginine ratio, were the strongest predictors of plasma separation delays, providing 100% diagnostic accuracy in the test set. Together these biomarkers could accurately predict processing delays >2h in a pilot study and we found evidence of sample mishandling in 4 of 141 clinically derived specimens. CONCLUSIONS: Our study highlights the widespread effects of processing delays and proposes that erythrocyte metabolism creates a reproducible signal that can identify mishandled specimens in metabolomics studies.
BACKGROUND: Delaying plasma separation after phlebotomy (processing delay) can cause perturbations of numerous small molecule analytes. This poses a major challenge to the clinical application of metabolomics analyses. In this study, we further define the analyte changes that occur during processing delays and generate a model for the post hoc detection of this preanalytical error. METHODS: Using an untargeted metabolomics platform we analyzed EDTA-preserved plasma specimens harvested after processing delays lasting from minutes to days. Identified biomarkers were tested on (i) a test-set of samples exposed to either minimal (n=28) or long delays (n=40) and (ii) samples collected in a clinical setting for metabolomics analysis (n=141). RESULTS: A total of 149 of 803 plasma analytes changed significantly during processing delays lasting 0-20h. Biomarkers related to erythrocyte metabolism, e.g., 5-oxoproline, lactate, and an ornithine/arginine ratio, were the strongest predictors of plasma separation delays, providing 100% diagnostic accuracy in the test set. Together these biomarkers could accurately predict processing delays >2h in a pilot study and we found evidence of sample mishandling in 4 of 141 clinically derived specimens. CONCLUSIONS: Our study highlights the widespread effects of processing delays and proposes that erythrocyte metabolism creates a reproducible signal that can identify mishandled specimens in metabolomics studies.
Authors: Sarah Clark; Linda D Youngman; Alison Palmer; Sarah Parish; Richard Peto; Rory Collins Journal: Int J Epidemiol Date: 2003-02 Impact factor: 7.196
Authors: Alkes L Price; Nick J Patterson; Robert M Plenge; Michael E Weinblatt; Nancy A Shadick; David Reich Journal: Nat Genet Date: 2006-07-23 Impact factor: 38.330
Authors: Mary K Townsend; Clary B Clish; Peter Kraft; Chen Wu; Amanda L Souza; Amy A Deik; Shelley S Tworoger; Brian M Wolpin Journal: Clin Chem Date: 2013-07-29 Impact factor: 8.327
Authors: Ying Wang; Brian D Carter; Susan M Gapstur; Marjorie L McCullough; Mia M Gaudet; Victoria L Stevens Journal: Metabolomics Date: 2018-09-25 Impact factor: 4.290
Authors: Bo Burla; Makoto Arita; Masanori Arita; Anne K Bendt; Amaury Cazenave-Gassiot; Edward A Dennis; Kim Ekroos; Xianlin Han; Kazutaka Ikeda; Gerhard Liebisch; Michelle K Lin; Tze Ping Loh; Peter J Meikle; Matej Orešič; Oswald Quehenberger; Andrej Shevchenko; Federico Torta; Michael J O Wakelam; Craig E Wheelock; Markus R Wenk Journal: J Lipid Res Date: 2018-08-16 Impact factor: 5.922
Authors: Andres Gottfried-Blackmore; Samuel J S Rubin; Lawrence Bai; Sheun Aluko; Yujun Yang; Walter Park; Aida Habtezion Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2020-10-15 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Naama Karu; Alida Kindt; Lieke Lamont; Adriaan J van Gammeren; Anton A M Ermens; Amy C Harms; Lutzen Portengen; Roel C H Vermeulen; Willem A Dik; Anton W Langerak; Vincent H J van der Velden; Thomas Hankemeier Journal: Metabolites Date: 2022-07-04
Authors: Nikolaos G Bliziotis; Leo A J Kluijtmans; Gerjen H Tinnevelt; Parminder Reel; Smarti Reel; Katharina Langton; Mercedes Robledo; Christina Pamporaki; Alessio Pecori; Josie Van Kralingen; Martina Tetti; Udo F H Engelke; Zoran Erlic; Jasper Engel; Timo Deutschbein; Svenja Nölting; Aleksander Prejbisz; Susan Richter; Jerzy Adamski; Andrzej Januszewicz; Filippo Ceccato; Carla Scaroni; Michael C Dennedy; Tracy A Williams; Livia Lenzini; Anne-Paule Gimenez-Roqueplo; Eleanor Davies; Martin Fassnacht; Hanna Remde; Graeme Eisenhofer; Felix Beuschlein; Matthias Kroiss; Emily Jefferson; Maria-Christina Zennaro; Ron A Wevers; Jeroen J Jansen; Jaap Deinum; Henri J L M Timmers Journal: Metabolites Date: 2022-07-24