Jennifer A Kirwan1,2, Lorraine Brennan3, David Broadhurst4, Oliver Fiehn5, Marta Cascante6, Warwick B Dunn7, Michael A Schmidt8,9, Vidya Velagapudi10. 1. Berlin Institute of Health, Berlin, Germany; vidya.velagapudi@helsinki.fi jennifer.kirwan@mdc-berlin.de. 2. Max Delbrück Center for Molecular Medicine, Berlin-Buch, Germany. 3. UCD School of Agriculture and Food Science, Institute of Food and Health, UCD, Dublin, Ireland. 4. School of Science, Edith Cowan University, Perth, Australia. 5. NIH West Coast Metabolomics Center, UC Davis, Davis, CA. 6. Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biomedicine and IBUB, Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona and Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red en Enfermedades Hepáticas y Digestivas (CIBER-EHD), Madrid, Spain. 7. School of Biosciences and Phenome Centre Birmingham, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK. 8. Advanced Pattern Analysis and Countermeasures Group, Research Innovation Center, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO. 9. Sovaris Aerospace, LLC, Boulder, CO. 10. Metabolomics Unit, Institute for Molecular Medicine FIMM, HiLIFE, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland. vidya.velagapudi@helsinki.fi jennifer.kirwan@mdc-berlin.de.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The metabolome of any given biological system contains a diverse range of low molecular weight molecules (metabolites), whose abundances can be affected by the timing and method of sample collection, storage, and handling. Thus, it is necessary to consider the requirements for preanalytical processes and biobanking in metabolomics research. Poor practice can create bias and have deleterious effects on the robustness and reproducibility of acquired data. CONTENT: This review presents both current practice and latest evidence on preanalytical processes and biobanking of samples intended for metabolomics measurement of common biofluids and tissues. It highlights areas requiring more validation and research and provides some evidence-based guidelines on best practices. SUMMARY: Although many researchers and biobanking personnel are familiar with the necessity of standardizing sample collection procedures at the axiomatic level (e.g., fasting status, time of day, "time to freezer," sample volume), other less obvious factors can also negatively affect the validity of a study, such as vial size, material and batch, centrifuge speeds, storage temperature, time and conditions, and even environmental changes in the collection room. Any biobank or research study should establish and follow a well-defined and validated protocol for the collection of samples for metabolomics research. This protocol should be fully documented in any resulting study and should involve all stakeholders in its design. The use of samples that have been collected using standardized and validated protocols is a prerequisite to enable robust biological interpretation unhindered by unnecessary preanalytical factors that may complicate data analysis and interpretation.
BACKGROUND: The metabolome of any given biological system contains a diverse range of low molecular weight molecules (metabolites), whose abundances can be affected by the timing and method of sample collection, storage, and handling. Thus, it is necessary to consider the requirements for preanalytical processes and biobanking in metabolomics research. Poor practice can create bias and have deleterious effects on the robustness and reproducibility of acquired data. CONTENT: This review presents both current practice and latest evidence on preanalytical processes and biobanking of samples intended for metabolomics measurement of common biofluids and tissues. It highlights areas requiring more validation and research and provides some evidence-based guidelines on best practices. SUMMARY: Although many researchers and biobanking personnel are familiar with the necessity of standardizing sample collection procedures at the axiomatic level (e.g., fasting status, time of day, "time to freezer," sample volume), other less obvious factors can also negatively affect the validity of a study, such as vial size, material and batch, centrifuge speeds, storage temperature, time and conditions, and even environmental changes in the collection room. Any biobank or research study should establish and follow a well-defined and validated protocol for the collection of samples for metabolomics research. This protocol should be fully documented in any resulting study and should involve all stakeholders in its design. The use of samples that have been collected using standardized and validated protocols is a prerequisite to enable robust biological interpretation unhindered by unnecessary preanalytical factors that may complicate data analysis and interpretation.
Authors: Eline H van Roekel; Erikka Loftfield; Rachel S Kelly; Oana A Zeleznik; Krista A Zanetti Journal: Metabolomics Date: 2019-01-07 Impact factor: 4.290
Authors: Michael R La Frano; Suzan L Carmichael; Chen Ma; Macy Hardley; Tong Shen; Ron Wong; Lorenzo Rosales; Kamil Borkowski; Theresa L Pedersen; Gary M Shaw; David K Stevenson; Oliver Fiehn; John W Newman Journal: Metabolomics Date: 2018-11-15 Impact factor: 4.290
Authors: Anne M Evans; Claire O'Donovan; Mary Playdon; Chris Beecher; Richard D Beger; John A Bowden; David Broadhurst; Clary B Clish; Surendra Dasari; Warwick B Dunn; Julian L Griffin; Thomas Hartung; Ping- Ching Hsu; Tao Huan; Judith Jans; Christina M Jones; Maureen Kachman; Andre Kleensang; Matthew R Lewis; María Eugenia Monge; Jonathan D Mosley; Eric Taylor; Fariba Tayyari; Georgios Theodoridis; Federico Torta; Baljit K Ubhi; Dajana Vuckovic Journal: Metabolomics Date: 2020-10-12 Impact factor: 4.290
Authors: Saleh Alseekh; Asaph Aharoni; Yariv Brotman; Kévin Contrepois; John D'Auria; Jan Ewald; Jennifer C Ewald; Paul D Fraser; Patrick Giavalisco; Robert D Hall; Matthias Heinemann; Hannes Link; Jie Luo; Steffen Neumann; Jens Nielsen; Leonardo Perez de Souza; Kazuki Saito; Uwe Sauer; Frank C Schroeder; Stefan Schuster; Gary Siuzdak; Aleksandra Skirycz; Lloyd W Sumner; Michael P Snyder; Huiru Tang; Takayuki Tohge; Yulan Wang; Weiwei Wen; Si Wu; Guowang Xu; Nicola Zamboni; Alisdair R Fernie Journal: Nat Methods Date: 2021-07-08 Impact factor: 47.990
Authors: Hutan Ashrafian; Viknesh Sounderajah; Robert Glen; Timothy Ebbels; Benjamin J Blaise; Dipak Kalra; Kim Kultima; Ola Spjuth; Leonardo Tenori; Reza M Salek; Namrata Kale; Kenneth Haug; Daniel Schober; Philippe Rocca-Serra; Claire O'Donovan; Christoph Steinbeck; Isaac Cano; Pedro de Atauri; Marta Cascante Journal: Med Princ Pract Date: 2020-12-03 Impact factor: 2.132
Authors: J Will Thompson; Kendra J Adams; Jerzy Adamski; Yasmin Asad; David Borts; John A Bowden; Gregory Byram; Viet Dang; Warwick B Dunn; Facundo Fernandez; Oliver Fiehn; David A Gaul; Andreas Fr Hühmer; Anastasia Kalli; Therese Koal; Stormy Koeniger; Rupasri Mandal; Florian Meier; Fuad J Naser; Donna O'Neil; Akos Pal; Gary J Patti; Hai Pham-Tuan; Cornelia Prehn; Florence I Raynaud; Tong Shen; Andrew D Southam; Lisa St John-Williams; Karolina Sulek; Catherine G Vasilopoulou; Mark Viant; Catherine L Winder; David Wishart; Lun Zhang; Jiamin Zheng; M Arthur Moseley Journal: Anal Chem Date: 2019-11-08 Impact factor: 6.986
Authors: Candice Z Ulmer; Jeremy P Koelmel; Christina M Jones; Timothy J Garrett; Juan J Aristizabal-Henao; Hubert W Vesper; John A Bowden Journal: Lipids Date: 2020-06-09 Impact factor: 1.646