| Literature DB >> 30205969 |
Komal Kedia1, Jason P Wendler1, Erin S Baker1, Kristin E Burnum-Johnson1, Leah G Jarsberg2, Kelly G Stratton3, Aaron T Wright1, Paul D Piehowski1, Marina A Gritsenko1, David M Lewinsohn4, George B Sigal5, Marc H Weiner6, Richard D Smith1, Jon M Jacobs7, Payam Nahid2.
Abstract
RATIONALE: The monitoring of TB treatments in clinical practice and clinical trials relies on traditional sputum-based culture status indicators at specific time points. Accurate, predictive, blood-based protein markers would provide a simpler and more informative view of patient health and response to treatment.Entities:
Keywords: Antibiotic treatment; Ion mobility spectrometry; Proteomics; Tuberculosis
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30205969 PMCID: PMC6181582 DOI: 10.1016/j.tube.2018.07.005
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Tuberculosis (Edinb) ISSN: 1472-9792 Impact factor: 3.131
Fig. 1.Schematic workflow of the experimental design and analysis procedure. Utilization of the LC-IM-MS platform generated peptide level peak intensity data for each of the 578 samples (289 baseline samples and 289 8-week samples) from which protein level data was inferred. Protein level data was the basis to investigate the dynamic changes in the serum proteome after 8 weeks of treatment.
Demographic distribution of analyzed patient population.
| Category | No. of Patients (% of Total) | No. Sputum Converted (% of Category) | Median days to conversion | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Liquid media at 8 wks | Solid media at 8 wks | Smear_WHO_8 wks | Solid media | Liquid media | ||
|
| 289 (100%) | |||||
|
| 190 (66%) | 227 (79%) | 206 (71%) | |||
| Female | 92 (32%) | 69 (75%) | 81 (88%) | 75 (81%) | 41.5 (13, 84) | 42 (13, 140) |
| Male | 197 (68%) | 121 (61%) | 146 (74%) | 131 (66%) | 42 (13, 168) | 56 (13, 168) |
|
| 188 (65%) | 226 (78%) | 205 (71%) | |||
| 0 – 20 | 16 (5%) | 13 (81%) | 15 (94%) | 14 (87%) | 28 (14, 56) | 42 (14, 85) |
| 21 – 40 | 181 (63%) | 115 (64%) | 143 (79%) | 130 (72%) | 42 (14, 168) | 56 (13, 168) |
| 41 – 60 | 75 (26%) | 49 (65%) | 57 (76%) | 50 (67%) | 42 (13, 119) | 50 (13, 124) |
| 61 – | 17 (6%) | 11 (65%) | 11 (65%) | 11 (65%) | 29 (14, 84) | 29 (14, 112) |
|
| 168 (58%) | 227 (79%) | 178 (62%) | |||
| BMI < = 18.5 | 84 (29%) | 46 (55%) | 67 (80%) | 50 (60%) | 42 (13, 140) | 56 (13, 140) |
| BMI > 18.5 | 205 (71%) | 122 (60%) | 160 (78%) | 128 (62%) | 42 (13, 168) | 56 (13, 168) |
|
| 190 (66%) | 227 (79%) | 206 (71%) | |||
| N. America (NA) | 105 (36%) | 84 (80%) | 83 (79%) | 76 (72%) | 35 (13, 119) | 42 (13, 124) |
| Spain (ESP) | 21 (7%) | 16 (76%) | 14 (67%) | 19 (90%) | 42 (14, 87) | 42 (14, 87) |
| S. Africa (AF) | 48 (17%) | 34 (71%) | 37 (77%) | 36 (75%) | 42 (13, 168) | 56 (13, 168) |
| Uganda (UGA) | 115 (40%) | 56 (49%) | 93 (81%) | 75 (65%) | 42 (14, 140) | 61 (28, 140) |
|
| 190 (66%) | 257 (89%) | 206 (71%) | |||
| Negative | 273 (94%) | 181 (66%) | 213 (78%) | 194 (71%) | 42 (13, 168) | 56 (13, 168) |
| Positive | 16 (6%) | 9 (56%) | 14 (87%) | 12 (75%) | 42 (14,82) | 56 (17, 112) |
|
| 189 (66%) | 226 (78%) | 205 (71%) | |||
| No cavity | 101 (35%) | 70 (69%) | 81 (80%) | 80 (79%) | 42 (13, 141) | 49 (13, 140) |
| Cavity ≤ 4 cm | 78 (27%) | 53 (68%) | 60 (77%) | 57 (73%) | 42 (13, 168) | 56 (13, 168) |
| Cavity > 4 cm | 109 (38%) | 66 (60%) | 85 (78%) | 68 (62%) | 42 (13, 140) | 56 (13, 119) |
|
| 149 (52%) | 215 (74%) | 161 (56%) | |||
| TTD < = 5 days | 77 (27%) | 25 (32%) | 42 (55%) | 35 (45%) | 42 (14, 168) | 59 (14, 168) |
| TTD > 5 days | 191 (66%) | 124 (65%) | 135 (70%) | 126 (66%) | 42 (13, 141) | 55 (13, 117) |
|
| 190 (66%) | 227 (79%) | 206 (71%) | |||
| Rifampin | 137 (47%) | 90 (66%) | 108 (79%) | 101 (74%) | 28 (13, 140) | 56 (13, 140) |
| Rifapentine | 152 (53%) | 100 (66%) | 119 (78%) | 105 (69%) | 42 (13, 168) | 56 (13, 124) |
BMI = Body Mass Index; TTD = Time to Detection
Fig. 2.Visual representation of the serum proteins differential abundant due to 8 weeks of antibiotic treatment. A) Volcano plot of all proteins analyzed via linear mixed model to determine differential abundance due to antibiotic treatment at 8 weeks. Red lines correspond to thresholds of acceptance (pval < 0.05 and > ±0.1 log2 fold change). B) Heat map of 244 proteins representing quantitative changes in protein abundances between baseline and 8 weeks from 289 patients. Red magnitude representing increase in abundance with treatment, blue magnitude representing reduced serum abundance upon treatment. (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the Web version of this article.)
Fig. 3.Protein based pathway mapping of the patient response in the serum to antibiotic treatment. The GO annotations of 244 significantly altered proteins were extracted from DAVID and after corrected p-value filtering was visualized in Cytoscape to create the interconnected pathway network. Yellow squares: Pathways, spatial proximity indicates similarity in pathways; Red circles: proteins upregulated following 8 weeks of therapy; Blue circles: proteins downregulated following 8 weeks of therapy. Color intensity represents degree of fold change, darker signifying larger fold change. (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the Web version of this article.)
Fig. 4.Plots and diagram of proteins significantly altered based upon culture status at week 6 and week 8 treatment. Volcano plot showing log2 values calculated from the difference of fold change from baseline to week 8 for culture positive (culture+) patients compared to culture negative (culture-) patients at (a) Week 6 culture status and B) Week 8 culture status based upon a linear mixed model. Proteins labeled are those most significant and found in common across both week 6 and week 8 results. C) Venn diagram representing overlap between the 244 treatment serum proteins and discriminatory proteins for week 6 and week 8 culture status stratification.
Fig. 5.Plots of 6 serum proteins measured at baseline with highest significance in discriminating subsequent culture status across all culture time points. Black dots represent the average log2 protein abundance for that protein, red error bars (standard deviation) represent positive culture status patients, where green error bars represent patients with negative culture status. (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the Web version of this article.)