Rachel S Kelly1, Rachel T Giorgio1, Bo L Chawes1,2, Natalia I Palacios3,4, Kathryn J Gray5, Hoooman Mirzakhani1, Ann Wu6, Kevin Blighe1, Scott T Weiss1, Jessica Lasky-Su1. 1. Channing Division of Network Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital Harvard Medical School, Boston MA 02115, USA. 2. COPSAC, Copenhagen Prospective Studies on Asthma in Childhood, Herlev and Gentofte Hospital, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark. 3. Department of Public Health University of Massachusetts, Lowell, Lowell MA. 4. Department of Nutrition, Harvard School of Public Health, Boston MA. 5. Division of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA 02115, USA. 6. Boston Children's Hospital.
Abstract
Introduction: Preeclampsia represents a major public health burden worldwide, but predictive and diagnostic biomarkers are lacking. Metabolomics is emerging as a valuable approach to generating novel biomarkers whilst increasing the mechanistic understanding of this complex condition. Objectives: To summarize the published literature on the use of metabolomics as a tool to study preeclampsia. Methods: PubMed and Web of Science were searched for articles that performed metabolomic profiling of human biosamples using either Mass-spectrometry or Nuclear Magnetic Resonance based approaches and which included preeclampsia as a primary endpoint. Results: Twenty-eight studies investigating the metabolome of preeclampsia in a variety of biospecimens were identified. Individual metabolite and metabolite profiles were reported to have discriminatory ability to distinguish preeclamptic from normal pregnancies, both prior to and post diagnosis. Lipids and carnitines were among the most commonly reported metabolites. Further work and validation studies are required to demonstrate the utility of such metabolites as preeclampsia biomarkers. Conclusion: Metabolomic-based biomarkers of preeclampsia have yet to be integrated into routine clinical practice. However, metabolomic profiling is becoming increasingly popular in the study of preeclampsia and is likely to be a valuable tool to better understand the pathophysiology of this disorder and to better classify its subtypes, particularly when integrated with other omic data.
Introduction: Preeclampsia represents a major public health burden worldwide, but predictive and diagnostic biomarkers are lacking. Metabolomics is emerging as a valuable approach to generating novel biomarkers whilst increasing the mechanistic understanding of this complex condition. Objectives: To summarize the published literature on the use of metabolomics as a tool to study preeclampsia. Methods: PubMed and Web of Science were searched for articles that performed metabolomic profiling of human biosamples using either Mass-spectrometry or Nuclear Magnetic Resonance based approaches and which included preeclampsia as a primary endpoint. Results: Twenty-eight studies investigating the metabolome of preeclampsia in a variety of biospecimens were identified. Individual metabolite and metabolite profiles were reported to have discriminatory ability to distinguish preeclamptic from normal pregnancies, both prior to and post diagnosis. Lipids and carnitines were among the most commonly reported metabolites. Further work and validation studies are required to demonstrate the utility of such metabolites as preeclampsia biomarkers. Conclusion: Metabolomic-based biomarkers of preeclampsia have yet to be integrated into routine clinical practice. However, metabolomic profiling is becoming increasingly popular in the study of preeclampsia and is likely to be a valuable tool to better understand the pathophysiology of this disorder and to better classify its subtypes, particularly when integrated with other omic data.
Authors: Ray O Bahado-Singh; Ranjit Akolekar; Rupasri Mandal; Edison Dong; Jianguo Xia; Michael Kruger; David S Wishart; Kypros Nicolaides Journal: J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med Date: 2012-04-28
Authors: Suzy A A Comhair; Jonathan McDunn; Carole Bennett; Jade Fettig; Serpil C Erzurum; Satish C Kalhan Journal: J Immunol Date: 2015-06-05 Impact factor: 5.422
Authors: Leandro De Oliveira; Niels Olsen S Câmara; Tatiana Bonetti; Edson G Lo Turco; Ricardo P Bertolla; Antonio F Moron; Nelson Sass; Ismael Dale Cotrim Guerreiro Da Silva Journal: Clin Biochem Date: 2012-04-21 Impact factor: 3.281
Authors: Sílvia O Diaz; António S Barros; Brian J Goodfellow; Iola F Duarte; Eulália Galhano; Cristina Pita; Maria do Céu Almeida; Isabel M Carreira; Ana M Gil Journal: J Proteome Res Date: 2013-05-09 Impact factor: 4.466
Authors: Hannah J Lees; Jonathan R Swann; Ian D Wilson; Jeremy K Nicholson; Elaine Holmes Journal: J Proteome Res Date: 2013-03-06 Impact factor: 4.466
Authors: Sylwia Kuc; Maria P H Koster; Jeroen L A Pennings; Thomas Hankemeier; Ruud Berger; Amy C Harms; Adrie D Dane; Peter C J I Schielen; Gerard H A Visser; Rob J Vreeken Journal: PLoS One Date: 2014-05-29 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Ulla Sovio; Nancy McBride; Angela M Wood; Katya L Masconi; Emma Cook; Francesca Gaccioli; D Stephen Charnock-Jones; Debbie A Lawlor; Gordon C S Smith Journal: Int J Epidemiol Date: 2020-02-01 Impact factor: 9.685
Authors: Miguel A Ortega; Miguel A Saez; Felipe Sainz; Oscar Fraile-Martínez; Sandra García-Gallego; Leonel Pekarek; Coral Bravo; Santiago Coca; Melchor Álvarez- Mon; Julia Buján; Natalio García-Honduvilla; Ángel Asúnsolo Journal: Int J Med Sci Date: 2020-09-30 Impact factor: 3.738