O A Zeleznik1,2, E M Poole1,2, S Lindstrom3,4, P Kraft5, A Van Hylckama Vlieg6, J A Lasky-Su1, L B Harrington7, K Hagan1,2, J Kim1,5, B A Parry8, N Giordano8, C Kabrhel8,9. 1. Channing Division of Network Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA. 2. Department of Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA. 3. Department of Epidemiology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA. 4. Division of Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA, USA. 5. Department of Epidemiology, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA. 6. Clinical Epidemiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands. 7. Nutrition, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA. 8. Center for Vascular Emergencies, Department of Emergency Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA. 9. Department of Emergency Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Abstract
Essentials Risk-stratification often fails to predict clinical deterioration in pulmonary embolism (PE). First-ever high-throughput metabolomics analysis of risk-stratified PE patients. Changes in circulating metabolites reflect a compromised energy metabolism in PE. Metabolites play a key role in the pathophysiology and risk stratification of PE. SUMMARY: Background Patients with acute pulmonary embolism (PE) exhibit wide variation in clinical presentation and outcomes. Our understanding of the pathophysiologic mechanisms differentiating low-risk and high-risk PE is limited, so current risk-stratification efforts often fail to predict clinical deterioration and are insufficient to guide management. Objectives To improve our understanding of the physiology differentiating low-risk from high-risk PE, we conducted the first-ever high-throughput metabolomics analysis (843 named metabolites) comparing PE patients across risk strata within a nested case-control study. Patients/methods We enrolled 92 patients diagnosed with acute PE and collected plasma within 24 h of PE diagnosis. We used linear regression and pathway analysis to identify metabolites and pathways associated with PE risk-strata. Results When we compared 46 low-risk with 46 intermediate/high-risk PEs, 50 metabolites were significantly different after multiple testing correction. These metabolites were enriched in the following pathways: tricarboxylic acid (TCA) cycle, fatty acid metabolism (acyl carnitine) and purine metabolism, (hypo)xanthine/inosine containing. Additionally, energy, nucleotide and amino acid pathways were downregulated in intermediate/high-risk PE patients. When we compared 28 intermediate-risk with 18 high-risk PE patients, 41 metabolites differed at a nominal P-value level. These metabolites were enriched in fatty acid metabolism (acyl cholines), and hemoglobin and porphyrin metabolism. Conclusion Our results suggest that high-throughput metabolomics can provide insight into the pathophysiology of PE. Specifically, changes in circulating metabolites reflect compromised energy metabolism in intermediate/high-risk PE patients. These findings demonstrate the important role metabolites play in the pathophysiology of PE and highlight metabolomics as a potential tool for risk stratification of PE.
Essentials Risk-stratification often fails to predict clinical deterioration in pulmonary embolism (PE). First-ever high-throughput metabolomics analysis of risk-stratified PE patients. Changes in circulating metabolites reflect a compromised energy metabolism in PE. Metabolites play a key role in the pathophysiology and risk stratification of PE. SUMMARY: Background Patients with acute pulmonary embolism (PE) exhibit wide variation in clinical presentation and outcomes. Our understanding of the pathophysiologic mechanisms differentiating low-risk and high-risk PE is limited, so current risk-stratification efforts often fail to predict clinical deterioration and are insufficient to guide management. Objectives To improve our understanding of the physiology differentiating low-risk from high-risk PE, we conducted the first-ever high-throughput metabolomics analysis (843 named metabolites) comparing PE patients across risk strata within a nested case-control study. Patients/methods We enrolled 92 patients diagnosed with acute PE and collected plasma within 24 h of PE diagnosis. We used linear regression and pathway analysis to identify metabolites and pathways associated with PE risk-strata. Results When we compared 46 low-risk with 46 intermediate/high-risk PEs, 50 metabolites were significantly different after multiple testing correction. These metabolites were enriched in the following pathways: tricarboxylic acid (TCA) cycle, fatty acid metabolism (acyl carnitine) and purine metabolism, (hypo)xanthine/inosine containing. Additionally, energy, nucleotide and amino acid pathways were downregulated in intermediate/high-risk PE patients. When we compared 28 intermediate-risk with 18 high-risk PE patients, 41 metabolites differed at a nominal P-value level. These metabolites were enriched in fatty acid metabolism (acyl cholines), and hemoglobin and porphyrin metabolism. Conclusion Our results suggest that high-throughput metabolomics can provide insight into the pathophysiology of PE. Specifically, changes in circulating metabolites reflect compromised energy metabolism in intermediate/high-risk PE patients. These findings demonstrate the important role metabolites play in the pathophysiology of PE and highlight metabolomics as a potential tool for risk stratification of PE.
Authors: C Charles Jain; Yuchiao Chang; Christopher Kabrhel; Jay Giri; Richard Channick; Josanna Rodriguez-Lopez; Rachel P Rosovsky; Annemarie Fogerty; Kenneth Rosenfield; Michael R Jaff; Ido Weinberg Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 2016-12-06 Impact factor: 2.778
Authors: Tao Long; Michael Hicks; Hung-Chun Yu; William H Biggs; Ewen F Kirkness; Cristina Menni; Jonas Zierer; Kerrin S Small; Massimo Mangino; Helen Messier; Suzanne Brewerton; Yaron Turpaz; Brad A Perkins; Anne M Evans; Luke A D Miller; Lining Guo; C Thomas Caskey; Nicholas J Schork; Chad Garner; Tim D Spector; J Craig Venter; Amalio Telenti Journal: Nat Genet Date: 2017-03-06 Impact factor: 38.330
Authors: Jea Woo Kang; Xinyu Tang; Charles J Walton; Mark J Brown; Rachel A Brewer; Rolando L Maddela; Jack Jingyuan Zheng; Joanne K Agus; Angela M Zivkovic Journal: Front Nutr Date: 2022-06-17
Authors: Xia Jiang; Oana A Zeleznik; Sara Lindström; Jessica Lasky-Su; Kaitlin Hagan; Clary B Clish; A Heather Eliassen; Peter Kraft; Christopher Kabrhel Journal: J Am Heart Assoc Date: 2018-11-20 Impact factor: 5.501
Authors: Gustavo A Heresi; Jacob T Mey; John R Bartholomew; Ihab S Haddadin; Adriano R Tonelli; Raed A Dweik; John P Kirwan; Satish C Kalhan Journal: Pulm Circ Date: 2020-02-04 Impact factor: 3.017