Alison Acevedo1, Ana Berthel2, Debra DuBois3,4, Richard R Almon3,4, William J Jusko3,4, Ioannis P Androulakis1,5,6. 1. Department of Biomedical Engineering, Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, Piscataway, NJ, USA. 2. Department of Biochemistry, Mount Holyoke College, South Hadley, MA, USA. 3. Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, The State University of New York at Buffalo, Buffalo, NY, USA. 4. Department of Biological Sciences, The State University of New York at Buffalo, Buffalo, NY, USA. 5. Department of Chemical and Biochemical Engineering, Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, Piscataway, NJ, USA. 6. Department of Surgery, Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, Piscataway, NJ, USA.
Abstract
Pharmacological time-series data, from comparative dosing studies, are critical to characterizing drug effects. Reconciling the data from multiple studies is inevitably difficult; multiple in vivo high-throughput -omics studies are necessary to capture the global and temporal effects of the drug, but these experiments, though analogous, differ in (microarray or other) platforms, time-scales, and dosing regimens and thus cannot be directly combined or compared. This investigation addresses this reconciliation issue with a meta-analysis technique aimed at assessing the intrinsic activity at the pathway level. The purpose of this is to characterize the dosing effects of methylprednisolone (MPL), a widely used anti-inflammatory and immunosuppressive corticosteroid (CS), within the liver. A multivariate decomposition approach is applied to analyze acute and chronic MPL dosing in male adrenalectomized rats and characterize the dosing-dependent differences in the dynamic response of MPL-responsive signaling and metabolic pathways. We demonstrate how to deconstruct signaling and metabolic pathways into their constituent pathway activities, activities which are scored for intrinsic pathway activity. Dosing-induced changes in the dynamics of pathway activities are compared using a model-based assessment of pathway dynamics, extending the principles of pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics (PKPD) to describe pathway activities. The model-based approach enabled us to hypothesize on the likely emergence (or disappearance) of indirect dosing-dependent regulatory interactions, pointing to likely mechanistic implications of dosing of MPL transcriptional regulation. Both acute and chronic MPL administration induced a strong core of activity within pathway families including the following: lipid metabolism, amino acid metabolism, carbohydrate metabolism, metabolism of cofactors and vitamins, regulation of essential organelles, and xenobiotic metabolism pathway families. Pathway activities alter between acute and chronic dosing, indicating that MPL response is dosing dependent. Furthermore, because multiple pathway activities are dominant within a single pathway, we observe that pathways cannot be defined by a single response. Instead, pathways are defined by multiple, complex, and temporally related activities corresponding to different subgroups of genes within each pathway.
Pharmacological time-series data, from comparative dosing studies, are critical to characterizing drug effects. Reconciling the data from multiple studies is inevitably difficult; multiple in vivo high-throughput -omics studies are necessary to capture the global and temporal effects of the drug, but these experiments, though analogous, differ in (microarray or other) platforms, time-scales, and dosing regimens and thus cannot be directly combined or compared. This investigation addresses this reconciliation issue with a meta-analysis technique aimed at assessing the intrinsic activity at the pathway level. The purpose of this is to characterize the dosing effects of methylprednisolone (MPL), a widely used anti-inflammatory and immunosuppressive corticosteroid (CS), within the liver. A multivariate decomposition approach is applied to analyze acute and chronic MPL dosing in male adrenalectomized rats and characterize the dosing-dependent differences in the dynamic response of MPL-responsive signaling and metabolic pathways. We demonstrate how to deconstruct signaling and metabolic pathways into their constituent pathway activities, activities which are scored for intrinsic pathway activity. Dosing-induced changes in the dynamics of pathway activities are compared using a model-based assessment of pathway dynamics, extending the principles of pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics (PKPD) to describe pathway activities. The model-based approach enabled us to hypothesize on the likely emergence (or disappearance) of indirect dosing-dependent regulatory interactions, pointing to likely mechanistic implications of dosing of MPL transcriptional regulation. Both acute and chronic MPL administration induced a strong core of activity within pathway families including the following: lipid metabolism, amino acid metabolism, carbohydrate metabolism, metabolism of cofactors and vitamins, regulation of essential organelles, and xenobiotic metabolism pathway families. Pathway activities alter between acute and chronic dosing, indicating that MPL response is dosing dependent. Furthermore, because multiple pathway activities are dominant within a single pathway, we observe that pathways cannot be defined by a single response. Instead, pathways are defined by multiple, complex, and temporally related activities corresponding to different subgroups of genes within each pathway.
Synthetic glucocorticoids (GCs), such as methylprednisolone (MPL), are widely used
anti-inflammatory and immunosuppressive agents for the treatment of a variety of
inflammatory and auto-immune conditions.[1,2] Glucocorticoid drugs magnify the
actions of endogenous GC regulating pathways by binding of a drug-receptor complex
to DNA GC regulatory elements (GREs) or by signaling through receptors in a
transcription-independent manner.[3] Because of the diverse effects of GC and the multitude of molecular
mechanisms involved, in vivo high-throughput transcriptomics has proven effective in
better understanding the temporal and tissue-specific effects of MPL.[4-12]However, while short-term corticosteroid (CS) use is beneficial for reducing
inflammation, long-term use is associated with serious consequences including
hyperglycemia, negative nitrogen balance, and fat redistribution leading to
complications including diabetes, muscle wasting, and osteoporosis.[13,14] Therefore,
adding to the complexity of the physiological and pharmacological effects of
CSs,[6,7,15] different dosing regimens of
GC administration induce different patterns of expression[5,16,17] likely indicative of
dosing-dependent regulation. Thus, transcriptional dynamics under acute CS
administration may not exhibit similar expression patterns during continuous
infusion, pointing to the possibility of alternative regulatory
mechanisms.[9,17,18] Thus, an improved understanding of CS pharmacogenomic effects
from multiple dosing regimens would be required to provide insight into the
underlying molecular mechanisms of action. In this direction, our earlier work had
focused on assessing transcriptional dynamics to (1) identify transcriptional
modules of characteristic mRNA dynamic features across multiple dosing regimens of
CSs and (2) elaborate on their common regulatory controls.[9,17,18]However, pharmacological time-series obtained from different (transcriptomic or
other) platforms and time-scales, including multiple dosing regimens,[5,19] complicate the analysis.
Several approaches have been proposed and are generally classified into two main
categories: (1) integrate profiles from different studies into one dataset so that
available analysis tools can be directly applied to the concatenated dataset or (2)
analyze and interpret each dataset separately and subsequently compare the analysis
(meta-analysis).[20-27] Since combining data across
different platforms remains a serious challenge, meta-analysis approaches are
gaining popularity[28,29] given the underlying hypothesis is that even though raw data
may not be comparable, the results of the individual analyses are.As an alternative to the meta-analysis approach, we recently proposed the mapping of
transcriptomic data onto signaling and metabolic pathways which are scored based on
the emerging activity of the pathway, as manifested via the obtained transcriptional
data.[30-33] The pathway scoring expresses
the overall, intrinsic dynamic of the pathway and its score does not rely on
measuring a consistent set of transcriptional profiles across the various
conditions—provided the score can be robustly determined (see “Methods”
section).In this study, we extend and expand our earlier framework and present an integrated
approach for decomposing transcriptomic-based pathway activities enabling the
characterization of (1) the emerging transcriptional dynamics in response to MPL and
(2) the dosing-dependent implications induced due to differences in drug exposure
(acute vs chronic). We analyzed acute and chronic MPL dosing in male
adrenalectomized (ADX) rats and characterized the dosing-dependent differences in
the dynamic response of MPL-responsive signaling and metabolic pathways, including
the following: lipid metabolism,[34,35] amino acid
metabolism,[36,37] carbohydrate metabolism,[38,39] metabolism of cofactors and vitamins,[40] regulation of essential organelles,[41-43] and xenobiotic metabolism
pathway groups.[44] To further elucidate, and consistently compare dosing-induced changes in the
dynamics of pathway activities, we propose a novel model-based assessment of pathway
dynamics, extending the principles of pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics (PKPD) to
describe pathway activities. The model-based approach enabled us to hypothesize on
the likely emergence (or disappearance) of multiple dosing-dependent regulatory
interactions, pointing to likely mechanistic implications of dosing of MPL upon
transcriptional regulation.
Methods
Animal model and experimental data
Acute dosing
A total of 43 ADX male Wistar rats were treated with a bolus dose of 50 mg/kg
MPL intravenously.[19] This dose was established in previous investigations identifying
biomarkers for gene-mediated effects of GCs within liver because it produces
strong, but not saturating, effects on gene and protein expression within
rat liver and for its comparability with large doses in human upon scale-up.[5] Liver is analyzed as a primary site of GC action and contains a
relatively high concentration of GC receptors in comparison with other tissues.[46] The animals were sacrificed at 17 timepoints (n = 2-4) from 0 to 72
hours post dosing. Affymetrix GeneChip Rat Genome U34A (Affymetrix, Inc,
Santa Clara, CA) was used to array the mRNA expression data collected at
these timepoints (microarray contains 8799 probes). The dataset was
collected in a previous investigation, submitted to GEO (GSE490), and we
have previously presented multiple analyses of the transcription
responses.[8-11,33,47]
Chronic dosing
A total of 40 ADX male Wistar rats were administered 0.3 mg/(kg·h) of MPL
intravenously for 7 days.[5] As with the acute analysis, liver is analyzed as a primary site of GC
action and contains a relatively high concentration of GC receptors in
comparison with other tissues.[46] Rats were sacrificed at 11 timepoints (n = 4) from 0 to 168 h.[5] As an additional timepoint at 0 h and as a control, four additional
rats were used as a control group at various times throughout 7-day time period.[5] Affymetrix GeneChip Rat Genome 230A (Affymetrix, Inc) was used to
analyze the data in the chronic study (microarray contains 15 967 probes).
The dataset was collected in a previous investigation, submitted to GEO
(GDS972), and we have previously presented multiple analyses of the
transcription responses.[9,10,17,18]
Mapping transcriptomic data onto pathways
A pathway can be defined as a network of molecular interactions and reactions
designed to link genes in the genome to gene products. Pathways express layered
and complementary activities, meaning pathways are groups of genes linked
mechanistically that effect a biochemical action. Numerous databases exist
describing pathway definition. The Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes
(KEGG) pathways is used as the functional grouping instrument. KEGG is one of
the most comprehensive and readily used by genomics researchers.[48,49] As of
January 2018, this database contains 524 pathways that represent genomic and
proteomic information across 5646 organisms, 53 of which are mammals. Of the 524
possible KEGG pathways, 317 are relevant to Rattus norvegicus.
Pathways unrelated to the liver are irrelevant to this study of MPL influence
within the liver. For this reason, pathways unrelated to the liver (eg cardiac
muscle contraction, complement and coagulation cascades, and platelet
activation), describing neurological diseases (eg non-alcoholic fatty liver
disease, Alzheimer disease, Parkinson disease, and Huntington disease),
irrelevant to the liver (olfactory transduction), or redundant for all other
metabolic pathways (KEGG’s pathway titled Metabolic pathways rno:01100 is the
set of all other metabolism-related pathways) are removed from the pathway set.
The final list used for this investigation totals 209 pathways relevant to the
liver.To begin characterizing the liver response to MPL, the microarray data are
contextualized by identifying which of the 209 liver-relevant pathways are
populated by it. Fractional coverage () is calculated for each pathway, a fraction that communicates
the number of unique genes (rno) identified within the microarray data relative
to the number of genes within the KEGG pathway (equation 1). The metric
quantifies the extent to which a pathway is represented in the dataset and is
reported in the genome-wide transcriptomic studies. This step requires a series
of probe name conversions facilitated by additional databases: DAVID[50,51] and UniProt.[52] Genes from rat pathways in KEGG are recognized by the identifier,
rno. UniProt is used to convert from rno to UniProt
accession numbers. Only genes reported as reviewed in UniProt were retained.
These are then converted to Affymetrix probe identifiers within the DAVID
database. Affymetrix probes are redundant meaning multiple Affymetrix
identifiers will refer to a single protein accession ID. However, one rno ID
refers to a single unique protein accession number:To assess the confidence in the fractional coverage, an associated
p-value (
p-value) is calculated. Confidence in is important for two reasons: (1) to quantify the extent to
which the fractional coverage of a pathway based on the specific experiment
could have been obtained by a random collection of genes and (2) more
importantly, since different experiments may not be quantifying the same subsets
of pathway-specific genes, we need to establish significant coverage based on
different subsets. The significance of the is determined using the one-tail Fisher exact test such that
the total rat genome is the set of unique rat genes in all of KEGG’s
rat-relevant pathways.A pathway is considered significant if its
p-value meets a user-defined threshold. For this investigation,
a p-value threshold of is used to identify the pathways considered significantly
represented. Pathway activity analysis further refines this list of significant
pathways by determining which pathways are significantly active.A pathway may yield a high value but contain a small population of actual genes. The
selection of the list of significant pathways that make up the pathway solution
set is presented in the “Results” section. In the process of determining this
list of significant pathways, the actual gene population for each pathway is
necessary to consider. In addition, determining whether a set of pathways is
significant involves consideration of the average actual gene count for the set.
An average rno () is calculated for a pathway solution set. The significance of
this statistic is reported as a p-value (
p-value) calculated using a bootstrapping technique (equation
2). Given a pathway set containing pathways, N random pathway sets of length are selected and is calculated for each. The distribution of is compared against the from the original set of pathways yielding n pathways with
greater than :
Pathway activity analysis
Methylprednisolone administration is the impetus for genomic activity, directly
and indirectly, within the datasets considered in this investigation. Pathways
determined to have significant fractional coverage are analyzed with pathway
activity analysis (Figure
1). This component of the analysis determines whether a pathway is
active without eliminating individual genes; no gene expression profiles are
eliminated using conventional differential expression analysis and user-defined
threshold cutoff.[53] Instead, singular value decomposition (SVD) is used to identify global
and subtle expression trends within the pathway gene sets.
Figure 1.
Method of significant pathway assessment and comparison.
Method of significant pathway assessment and comparison.Pathway analysis assumes that pathways exhibit layered behaviors of subgroups of
genes. Singular value decomposition is used as a dimension reduction technique,
reducing temporal gene expression datasets into sets of singular vectors and
singular values that communicate global trends and relative trend
dominance.[30-33] (As a preprocessing step
before application of SVD pathway activity analysis, gene expression profiles
are z-scored.) This technique is previously applied within
investigations assessing for subtle circadian rhythmicity in genes that
otherwise are not recognized as differentially expressed[33] and for identifying the effects of dibutyl phthalate in male reproductive
organ development.[30-32] Within
this investigation, complex tissue-specific behavior is revealed by the SVD
decomposition of pathway gene sets.Application of SVD to a pathway gene set yields two translational matrices (U and
V) and an singular value matrix (S) (Figure 2). The subtle global trends
within the pathways are the activities of metagenes, an abstract object that
captures dominant characteristics common to many gene expression profiles within
the dataset. The “expression” or activity of a metagene over time is defined as
the pathway activity level (PAL) profile. Pathway activity level profiles are
found within the row vectors of the transpose of the translational matrix V (ie
PAL profiles are the row vectors of ) denoted in equation 3.
Figure 2.
Singular value decomposition (SVD) of a pathway gene set. A pathway
matrix (X) designed such that each row is a unique gene and columns are
samples at each timepoint from 0 to 72 hours. SVD yields (1) matrices U
(translational matrix) in which the rows are individual genes and
columns indicate a gene’s match to a metagene (G genes make up a gene
set and M metagenes results from SVD where the number of metagenes is
equal to the number of sample times.); (2) matrix S, a diagonal singular
value matrix reporting the dominance of each metagene; and (3) matrix V,
the transform denoted , an additional translational matrix in which the rows
of indicate each metagene and the columns indicate time.
Pathway activity level profiles are taken as metagene expression over
time—the rows of .
Singular value decomposition (SVD) of a pathway gene set. A pathway
matrix (X) designed such that each row is a unique gene and columns are
samples at each timepoint from 0 to 72 hours. SVD yields (1) matrices U
(translational matrix) in which the rows are individual genes and
columns indicate a gene’s match to a metagene (G genes make up a gene
set and M metagenes results from SVD where the number of metagenes is
equal to the number of sample times.); (2) matrix S, a diagonal singular
value matrix reporting the dominance of each metagene; and (3) matrix V,
the transform denoted , an additional translational matrix in which the rows
of indicate each metagene and the columns indicate time.
Pathway activity level profiles are taken as metagene expression over
time—the rows of .The dominance of each metagene’s activity is preserved in the order in which the
PAL profiles appear descending in as well as in the diagonal of the singular value matrix (S);
the most dominant metagene appears first. To quantify this dominance, the
singular values within the diagonal of matrix S are normalized by the sum of the
diagonal (equation 4) to yield the fraction of pathway activity of a PAL
defined as the statistic.[33] Each PAL describes a pathway activity profile and corresponds to a unique
value which reports the percent of total pathway activity
represented by that PAL.The number of PAL profiles reported by is equal to the number of samples (timepoints). However, not
all patterns are significant. To determine PAL significance, a bootstrapping
calculation is used to generate a p-value associated with
statistic. The original gene set is bootstrapped
(). Bootstrapped gene sets are constructed by scrambling the
pathway gene set N times.[54] Each bootstrapped pathway gene set is decomposed with SVD, yielding
sets of profiles and associated values for each profile. For each PAL, the distribution of values which results from the bootstrapped pathway gene sets
is compared with the original values. The number of greater than an is divided by N to determine whether each (and by association the PAL) is likely to emerge from a
randomized gene set (equation 5).This investigation seeks to characterize the consequences of MPL within the liver
from a pathway perspective. However, the correlation of each metagene to each
gene is important to our understanding of the consequences of MPL and is
identified within the translational matrix U. Rows of U correspond to genes and
columns to metagenes. The correlation of each gene (g) to each
metagene (m) is defined as (equation 6). The correlation of
each gene to each metagene () is the correlation of each gene expression profile to each
PAL profile.Thus, global trends (PAL) in a gene set each have an associated fraction of the
pathway activity () that they capture. Multiple significant PAL may emerge for
each gene set, and each gene’s correlation to each PAL is given by its weight.
Pathway activity levels are also symmetric, thus two PAL profiles, of opposite
sign but equal magnitude, indicate the same expression activity events.The list of pathways with significant fractional coverage (
p-value ⩽ ) is further reduced to the list of pathways that also yield
significant pathway activity. Pathways capable of generating at least one
significant PAL profile are considered significant and a PAL profile is
significant if its corresponding
p-value ⩽ :
Prediction of pathway activity with bootstrapping
Variability in the expression data indicates that the influence of MPL within the
liver is not uniform with each administration. To account for the variability, a
bootstrapping approach is used to generate pathway gene sets likely to exist
given additional MPL dosing studies which are then assessed for pathway
activity. In this component of the investigation, the range of activity capable
of emerging from the system is investigated.Bootstrapped gene sets are constructed from bootstrapped gene expression
profiles, where each profile is projected within a normal distribution about the
gene’s average expression. In short, each gene expression profile is
bootstrapped within a normal distribution about the gene expression profile’s
mean. The bootstrapped genes are assembled into appropriate pathway gene sets,
ultimately yielding bootstrapped pathway gene sets for each pathway
( bootstrapped gene sets per pathway). Each of these
bootstrapped pathway gene sets is decomposed with SVD. Significant PAL profiles
identified from these bootstrapped genes and their corresponding and
p-value statistics are retained for each significant pathway.
All PAL profiles extracted from these bootstrapped gene sets are assumed likely
system behavior that would emerge if the rat experiments were repeated.For each pathway, the significant bootstrapped PALs are clustered such that
common activity patterns group together. The MATLAB® function
evalclusters.m is applied to assess optimal cluster number
using the gap statistic and applying k-means clustering.[55] Thus, a finite set of PAL centroids are identified, indicating that a
finite list of activity patterns are induced by MPL to emerge from each
pathway.
Evaluating pathway dynamics
The pathway activity analysis decomposes a pathway’s intrinsic dynamics into its
leading, independent constitutive elements. To compare activities based on
non-overlapping gene sets, across dosing regimens of different time horizons, we
introduce a novel model-based approach, where the dynamics of each dominant PAL
is approximated using PKPD-driven models exploring alternative hypotheses for
the mechanisms of regulation of a pathway.
Pharmacokinetics
The PK of MPL in both regimens was shown to be appropriately described by a
two-compartment model (Figure 3; equations 7 and 8).[18,56]
and denote drug in the plasma and tissue compartments,
respectively. Term is the zero-order rate constant for drug input into the
plasma, indicates clearance, indicates plasma volume of distribution, and
and are the intercompartmental distribution rate constants. In
the case of acute MPL administration, indicates a bolus injection. Parameter values are adopted
from the study of Ramakrishnan et al and presented in Table 1[18,56]:
Figure 3.
Time profiles of MPL pharmacokinetics and receptor dynamics for (A)
acute 50 mg/mL bolus MPL dose and (B) chronic infusion of
0.3 mg/(kg∙h) MPL. Methylprednisolone influence over transcription
within the liver is dosing dependent and receptor
mediated.[18,19,56–59]
Table 1.
Pharmacokinetic parameters of acute and chronic MPL administration.[56]
Parameter
Definition
Acute
Chronic
k0(1h)
Rate of drug concentration into central plasma
compartment
0
220
CL (lh⋅kg)
Clearance
3.48
5.61
Vp(lkg)
Central volume of drug distribution
0.73
0.82
k12(1h)
Drug distribution rate constant
0.98
0.32
k21(1h)
Drug distribution rate constant
1.78
0.68
Time profiles of MPL pharmacokinetics and receptor dynamics for (A)
acute 50 mg/mL bolus MPL dose and (B) chronic infusion of
0.3 mg/(kg∙h) MPL. Methylprednisolone influence over transcription
within the liver is dosing dependent and receptor
mediated.[18,19,56-59]Pharmacokinetic parameters of acute and chronic MPL administration.[56]
Receptor dynamics
Methylprednisolone action is receptor mediated (Figure 3; equations
9-12).[18,56,57]
Parameter values are adopted from the work of Hazra et al[18] and presented in Table 2. Here, indicates the mRNA of the free cytosolic receptor,
R indicates the free cytosolic receptor,
indicates the cytosolic drug-receptor complex, and
indicates the drug-receptor complex in the nucleus.[56] The concentration at which the synthesis rate of receptor mRNA drops
to 50% of its baseline value is indicated by parameter. Parameter indicates the second-order rate constant for drug-receptor
binding. Parameters and are the first-order rates of receptor translocation
between the nucleus and the cytosol ( to the nucleus; : recycling back to the nucleus).[56] The fraction of receptor recycled is indicated by parameter
. corresponds to the concentration of free receptor in the
cytosol and is determined by the equation where is the fraction of unbound MPL within the
cytosol[18,56]:
Table 2.
Parameters for receptor-mediated effects of acute and chronic MPL administration.[18]
Parameter
Definition
Acute
Chronic
ksRm(fmolg⋅h)
Receptor mRNA synthesis rate constant
3.15
0.45
kdRm(1h)
Receptor mRNA degradation rate constant
0.122
IC50Rm(nmolL⋅mgprotein)
DRN required for 50% inhibition of the synthesis rate of
Rm
123.7
ksR(nmolL⋅mgprotein⋅fmolRm⋅g⋅h)
Receptor synthesis rate
0.84
3.63
kre(1h)
Loss rate for drug receptor in the nucleus
0.402
kon(lnmol⋅h)
Association rate for receptor-drug binding
0.019
kdR(1h)
Receptor loss/degradation rate
0.0403
kT(1h)
Translocation of receptor into the nucleus
58.1
Rf
Receptor recycling factor from nucleus to cytosol
0.69
Parameters for receptor-mediated effects of acute and chronic MPL administration.[18]
Pathway pharmacodynamics
Once a pathway’s activity has been decomposed to its constitutive intrinsic
components, we characterize its dynamics in a model-based manner by assuming
that each PAL is approximated by an appropriate dynamic model. Comparisons
across dosing regimens are then performed in the space of models as opposed
to the space of transcriptional data. We hypothesized (based on the results
to be discussed shortly) that the dynamic decomposition of the pathway
activity indicates components whose transcription is regulated by an
MPL-receptor complex (DRN) binding to a GRE element in the nucleus and
regulated by transcription mediated by MPL binding to an intermediate
biosignal (BS)—interestingly, this was dosing dependent. In this direction,
we extend the concepts described in the studies of Yao et al[17] and Hazra et al.[18] The simpler mode of pathway regulation assumes a saturable induction
of the pathway activity (Figure 4A; equation 13) where
indicates the activation rate of pathway activity,
indicates the concentration of DRN responsible for 50%
inhibition of the pathway activity activation rate, and indicates the deactivation rate of pathway activity. This
mode is expected to reflect “monophasic” dynamics with a transient (acute
dosing) or persistent (chronic dosing) deviation of a pathway’s activity
following i.v. MPL administration. In addition, the emergence of regulation
mediated through an MPL-regulated BS is likely to exhibit a “biphasic”
response (Figure 4B;
equations 14 and 15), describing the
dynamics of an intermediate BS whose synthesis is directly related to DRN by
, S is the stimulation constant for
pathway activity due to DRN, indicates the BS responsible for 50% inhibition of pathway
activity activation rate, and γ indicates the factor of
amplification of the influence of BS on the activation of pathway activity.
These model equations are adapted from the transcription regulatory models
of Hazra et al,[18] where alternative models were also discussed, and could be easily
accommodated. However, our analysis indicated that these simpler forms
captured the essence of the pathway dynamics.
Figure 4.
Regulatory mechanism schematics for the (A) monophasic activity
model and (B) biphasic activity model adapted from the study of
Hazra et al.[18] (A) Methylprednisolone regulates transcription via
binding to glucocorticoid receptors within the cytosol,
transporting into the nucleus, and binding to a GRE element thus
initiating targeted transcription, as captured by the monophasic
model. (B) The biphasic model describes this GRE-binding
activity in combination with an additional mechanism of MPL
regulation, that of binding to an intermediate biosignal (BS)
which influences targeted transcription rate.[18,19,56–59]
Monophasic activity
Biphasic activity
Regulatory mechanism schematics for the (A) monophasic activity
model and (B) biphasic activity model adapted from the study of
Hazra et al.[18] (A) Methylprednisolone regulates transcription via
binding to glucocorticoid receptors within the cytosol,
transporting into the nucleus, and binding to a GRE element thus
initiating targeted transcription, as captured by the monophasic
model. (B) The biphasic model describes this GRE-binding
activity in combination with an additional mechanism of MPL
regulation, that of binding to an intermediate biosignal (BS)
which influences targeted transcription rate.[18,19,56-59]Parameter estimation was performed using MATLAB’s optimization toolkit in
a series of optimization stages. In all stages, we sought to minimize
the residual sum of squares between the model prediction and the cluster
centroid profile. In the first stage, it is assumed that the system is
nonlinear and neither continuous nor differentiable for the entire
parameter solution space. Therefore, as a rapid preliminary global
search for a minimum, a stochastic direct method (simulated annealing)
with bound constraints is employed. The result of this global search
technique is taken as the initial parameter values for the second
optimization stage using a direct pattern search method. In the final
stage, a gradient-based method is used to probe this more limited space
as the final optimization step. This stage uses the sequential quadratic
programming as implemented through MATLAB’s fmincon.
The model which results from this optimization process is visually
inspected.
Results
Fractional coverage analysis of the 209 rat/liver-relevant KEGG pathways yields 56
and 57 pathways as significant, for acute and chronic dosing, respectively. These
are decomposed to their constitutive activities with the SVD approach described
earlier. Each pathway yields multiple PAL profiles of varying significance. A
fraction of total pathway activity is identified for each PAL and only significant indicate significant PAL. To assess the significance of the
coverage, we also calculate the confidence for each value, defined as the
p-value and described in the “Pathway activity analysis”
section.For consistency, the p-value threshold of is used for selecting both the over-represented pathways and the
significant values. A significant corresponds to a PAL profile. A pathway is robustly active if its
activity is described by at least one significant PAL. This analysis yields 26
significant pathways in the acute and 27 in the chronic datasets. Interestingly, we
identify that the subset of 24 active pathways are shared across both dosing
regimens, albeit the patterns of activity observed within the PAL are different—as
will be discussed in greater detail in the “Discussion” section.Table 3 reports the
details of the 24 pathways active in both the acute and the chronic data. For each
pathway, fractional coverage ( is reported in the acute and chronic datasets. Also reported in
this table are total values for pathway datasets of different significance thresholds.
In the original gene set of each pathway, significant PALs are identified, each
corresponding to an independent value. The total of these significant values indicates the fraction of pathway activity that is
significant. This total fraction of pathway activity is what is reported as the
total value within this table.
Table 3.
Significant pathways common to acute and chronic dosing data. These pathways
exhibit significant fractional coverage (
p-value ⩽ ) and significant pathway activity (
p-value ⩽ ) in both the acute and the chronic datasets.
Pathway
rno ID
Acute
Chronic
Unique genes in pathway from dataset
(rno)
Fractional pathway coverage
(fc), %
Total significant fraction of pathway
activity (total fP)
Unique genes in pathway from dataset
(rno)
Fractional pathway coverage
(fc), %
Total significant fraction of pathway
activity (total fP)
Significant pathways common to acute and chronic dosing data. These pathways
exhibit significant fractional coverage (
p-value ⩽ ) and significant pathway activity (
p-value ⩽ ) in both the acute and the chronic datasets.Abbreviations: PPAR, peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor; TCA,
tricarboxylic acid cycle.Bootstrapping each pathway dataset allows us to identify, in silico, likely activity
patterns from synthetic replications (bootstrapped) of the animal studies which
yielded the transcriptomic datasets. A total of 1000 bootstrapped datasets were
generated for each pathway and significant pathway activities (PAL profiles) were
identified, as described in the “Methods” section. We repeatedly identified
significant pathway activities within the bootstrapped pathway gene sets and
identified common patterns of activity despite the variability of the original
data.Pathways decomposed each into multiple PALs, indicating a likely codominance of
activity patterns within the pathway and complex regulation of the pathways’
components. To consistently characterize the dynamics of each individual PAL for a
given pathway, we hypothesize likely modes of regulation. Namely, we hypothesize a
PAL component is either directly or indirectly regulated by MPL and possibly an
intermediate BS. The dynamics of each PAL are fitted using either the monophasic or
biphasic regulatory models, as described in the “Evaluating pathway dynamics”
section. This step is critical as it allows us to compare PAL dynamics within, and
across, dosing regimens in a model-based, data-independent manner.Detailed analysis of the common pathways revealed very interesting trends. Using the
acute response as the basis, we identify two class groupings within the set of 24
significant pathways: Class 1 (acute monophasic or acute biphasic response):
pathways exhibiting either monophasic or biphasic regulation only; Class 2 (acute
monophasic and acute biphasic, also known as complex acute): pathways exhibiting
both monophasic and biphasic activities, that is, individual pathways that yield
multiple PALs, some of which are acute monophasic and some of which are acute
biphasic. Within these primary categories based on acute data, we further
investigated the type of regulation each of the pathways under chronic dosing. Table 4 presents each
pathway and its categorization by class and response type.
Table 4.
Responses of significant (
p-value and
p-value ⩽ ) pathways to acute and chronic MPL administration.
Responses of significant (
p-value and
p-value ⩽ ) pathways to acute and chronic MPL administration.Abbreviations: MPL, methylprednisolone; PPAR, peroxisome
proliferator-activated receptor; TCA, tricarboxylic acid cycle.
Class 1: exclusively monophasic or biphasic acute response
Overall, 12 pathways are identified with strictly acute monophasic responses and
one pathway exhibits strictly acute biphasic response. The acute monophasic
response pathways are classified by pathway families including amino acid
metabolism (beta-alanine metabolism; glutathione metabolism; tryptophan
metabolism; and valine, leucine, and isoleucine degradation),[36,37]
carbohydrate metabolism (propanoate metabolism),[38,39] essential organelle
regulation (peroxisome and proteasome),[41-43] lipid metabolism (fatty
acid degradation, fatty acid metabolism, peroxisome proliferator-activated
receptor [PPAR] signaling pathway, and steroid hormone biosynthesis),[34,35] and
metabolism of cofactors and vitamins (retinol metabolism).[40] Most of the monophasic responses in this set yield an early monophasic
response, which consists of a single peak of activity corresponding to the
direct effect of DRN between 2 and 5 hours (also referenced as DRN effect peak)
and subsequent return to initial baseline between 18 and 30 hours. The
proteasome pathway exists as an outlier by exhibiting a late monophasic response
consisting of a delayed DRN event peak between 7 and 15 hours and a return to
baseline between 32 and 65 hours, defining the late biphasic response category.
Only the glyoxylate and dicarboxylate metabolism pathway, within the
carbohydrate metabolism family, exhibits a biphasic response to acute MPL
administration, discussed further below.Although many pathways exhibit monophasic behavior in response to either acute or
chronic dosing, the glutathione metabolism, retinol metabolism, proteasome, and
beta-alanine metabolism pathways exhibit exclusively monophasic behavior in
response to both acute and chronic dosing. The acute response for each of these
pathways reports a DRN event peak between 3 and 4 hours followed by a return to
baseline between 20 and 25 hours. In the glutathione metabolism pathway, chronic
MPL administration yields a steep and continuous incline and does not settle to
a new steady-state value within the 168 hours of the experiment. The
beta-alanine pathway yields strictly one pattern of behavior in response to
chronic MPL, a steep incline until 25 hours followed by a settling to a new
steady state by 120 hours. The retinol metabolism pathway returns multiple
chronic behavior responses: a steep continuous incline with no peak and no
settling to a new baseline within the experiment time; steep incline until
25 hours followed by settling at a new steady state by 120 hours; and peak DRN
activity event at 22 hours followed by a settling at a new steady state by
55 hours. The proteasome pathway exhibits a slightly later acute DRN event peak
at 9 hours and returns to baseline by 50 hours. The proteasome pathway is
singular in that its response to chronic MPL administration yields DRN event
peaks between 12 and 16 hours followed by settling to a new steady state by
50 hours.Two pathways, propanoate metabolism and tryptophan metabolism, exhibit a DRN
event peak at 3 hours and a return to baseline by 20 to 25 hours in response to
acute MPL administration. In response to chronic MPL administration, these
pathways exhibit strictly biphasic behavior. Propanoate metabolism yields a DRN
peak between 11 and 17 hours, and a peak activity event due to an intermediate
BS between 40 and 44 hours. This pathway does not settle to a new steady state
within the 168-hour timeframe of the experiment, but the approach to an
asymptote is implied. Tryptophan metabolism reports similar behavior, yielding a
DRN event peak at 16 hours, an intermediate BS peak between 44 and 54 hours, and
approaches an asymptote either by 150 hours or is implied to approach steady
state outside of the 168-hexperimental period.The remaining six pathways (fatty acid degradation; fatty acid metabolism;
peroxisome; PPAR signaling pathway; steroid hormone biosynthesis; and valine,
leucine, and isoleucine degradation) exhibit the acute response (DRN peak
between 3 and 4 hours and return to baseline by 20-25 hours), as well as both
monophasic and biphasic responses to chronic MPL administration. Within the
lipid metabolism pathways, fatty acid degradation yields monophasic responses
with DRN event peaks between 22 and 24 hours followed by a rapid steady-state
achievement at 25 hours or a delayed steady-state achievement by 55 hours. This
pathway’s biphasic responses yield peak DRN events at 15 to 16 hours,
intermediate BS events at 40 to 41 hours, and settle to a new activity baseline
by 155 hours or after 168 hours. Fatty acid metabolism returns monophasic
reporting steep inclines in activity until 25 hours and a similar settling to a
new steady state achieved rapidly by 35 hours or with delay by 90 hours. Fatty
acid metabolism pathway’s chronic biphasic response reports DRN event peaks at
14 hours, intermediate BS event peaks at 33 to 36 hours, and new steady-state
achievement either rapidly by 115 hours or is implied to approach a new steady
state after the 168 hours.Relatedly within the lipid metabolism family, PPAR signaling pathway and steroid
hormone biosynthesis pathway exhibit steep inclines until 30 to 35 hours in
their monophasic response to chronic MPL administration. This is followed by
achievement of a new steady state of activity by 90 to 110 hours. The chronic
biphasic response within the PPAR signaling pathway describes DRN peaks from 15
to 16 hours, intermediate BS peaks from 34 to 38 hours, and new steady-state
achievement by 125 or 130 hours or are implied to achieve steady state after
168 hours by their approach to an activity asymptote. The steroid hormone
biosynthesis pathway exhibits one biphasic response that reports a DRN event
peak at 1 hour, an intermediate BS event peak at 30 hours, and does not appear
to achieve steady state within 168 hours.Glyoxylate and dicarboxylate metabolism pathway exhibits strictly early biphasic
response to acute MPL administration and represents the pathway family
carbohydrate metabolism. Early biphasic response is defined by pathways
exhibiting DRN effect peaks between 1 and 5 hours, an intermediate BS peak
between 12 and 20 hours, and return to baseline between 38 and 65 hours. In
response to acute MPL administration, this pathway exhibits DRN event peaks
between 4 and 5 hours, intermediate BS event peaks between 16 and 19 hours, and
return to baseline between 57 and 65 hours. In response to chronic MPL
administration, glyoxylate and dicarboxylate metabolism pathway yields a
monophasic response reporting a steep incline until 25 hours and a settling at a
new steady state by 90 hours.
Class 2: complex acute response
A total of 11 pathways within the pathway groups of amino acid
metabolism[36,37] (arginine biosynthesis, biosynthesis of amino acids, and
cysteine and methionine metabolism), carbohydrate metabolism[38,39] (pyruvate
metabolism, carbon metabolism, glycolysis/gluconeogenesis, citrate cycle, and
oxidative phosphorylation), regulation of essential organelles (ribosome and
protein processing in endoplasmic reticulum),[41-43] and xenobiotic metabolism[44] (metabolism of xenobiotics by cytochrome P450) also report complex
responses to acute MPL administration. In this class, the PAL responses captured
indicate that some components (ie subgroups of genes) of pathways respond with
monophasic behavior, whereas other components exhibit biphasic behavior. Acute
MPL administration yields multiple profile patterns: both early and late phase
of either monophasic or biphasic response. As previously defined, early
monophasic response indicates DRN event peaks between 2 and 5 hours followed by
a return to baseline between 18 and 30 hours. Late monophasic responses are
defined by a DRN event peak between 7 and 15 hours followed by a return to
baseline between 32 and 65 hours. Early biphasic responses are defined by a DRN
event peak between 1 and 5 hours, an intermediate BS peak between 12 and
20 hours, and a return to baseline between 38 and 65 hours. Only one pathway
exhibited a late biphasic response (arginine biosynthesis), defined by a DRN
peak at 16 hours, and intermediate BS event peak at 23 hours and a return to
baseline implied to occur after 72 hours.
Acute response: early monophasic and early biphasic
Pathways in this subgroup (protein processing in endoplasmic reticulum,
metabolism of xenobiotics by cytochrome P450, and ribosome) exhibit both
early monophasic and early biphasic responses to acute MPL administration.
In response to chronic MPL administration, protein processing in endoplasmic
reticulum exhibits both monophasic and biphasic responses. The chronic
monophasic response exhibits a DRN event peak between 5 and 6 hours followed
by a settling to a new steady state by 45 hours. The chronic biphasic
response exhibits DRN event peak between 16 and 18 hours, an intermediate BS
peak between 58 and 60 hours, and settles to a new steady state after
168 hours. The metabolism of xenobiotics by cytochrome P450 and ribosome
pathways exhibit chronic biphasic behavior only. Metabolism of xenobiotics
by cytochrome P450 reports DRN effect peaks between 2 and 4 hours, a peak
due to the intermediate BS between 36 and 38 hours, and establishment of a
new steady state is implied to occur after 168 hours. The ribosome pathways
exhibits DRN effect peaks slightly later, between 16 and 29 hours, followed
by intermediate BS effects between 58 and 60 hours, and establishment of a
new steady state after 130 hours.
Acute response: early and late monophasic and early biphasic
Oxidative phosphorylation and carbon metabolism exhibit early and late
monophasic, as well as early biphasic, responses to acute MPL
administration. In response to chronic MPL administration, the oxidative
phosphorylation pathway exhibits a monophasic response, exhibiting a steep
incline until 40 hours with no clear event peak, but establishes a new
steady state by 120 hours. Carbon metabolism exhibits both monophasic and
biphasic responses to chronic MPL administration. Its chronic monophasic
response reported a steep incline until 25 hours with no peak and
establishes a new steady state by 30 hours. Its chronic biphasic response
reports a DRN event peak between 5 and 9 hours, an intermediate BS peak
between 35 and 40 hours, and a settling to a new steady state after
150 hours.
Acute response: late monophasic and early biphasic
Pathways cysteine and methionine metabolism, pyruvate metabolism,
glycolysis/gluconeogenesis, biosynthesis of amino acids, and citrate cycle
all exhibit this complex response to acute MPL administration, yielding both
late monophasic and early biphasic responses. In response to chronic MPL
administration, a combination of monophasic and biphasic responses is also
observed. Cysteine and methionine metabolism reports chronic biphasic
responses with DRN peaks between 2 and 9 hours, intermediate BS peaks
between 28 and 30 hours, and establishment of a new steady state between 55
and 120 hours. Its chronic monophasic response exhibits a steep incline
until 35 hours, no discernable peak, and establishment of a new steady state
by 90 hours. Pyruvate metabolism exhibits a chronic monophasic response with
a steep continuous incline, no peak, and an implication that the system will
settle after 168 hours. Its chronic biphasic response exhibits a DRN event
peak at 8 hours, an intermediate BS peak at 47 hours, and a new steady state
is implied after 168 hours. Glycolysis/gluconeogenesis exhibits multiple
chronic monophasic responses: one in which a peak is observed at 13 hours
and a new steady state is achieved by 50 hours; as well as a monophasic
response in which a steep incline is observed until 50 hours, no peak is
identifiable, and a new steady state is implied to occur after 168 hours.
Its biphasic response reports a DRN peak at 16 hours, an intermediate BS
event peak at 57 hours, and establishment of a new steady state after
168 hours. Biosynthesis of amino acids pathway yields monophasic responses
that exhibit DRN event peaks between 4 and 15 hours and settles to a new
steady state between 35 and 45 hours. Biphasic responses to chronic MPL
within this pathway report DRN event peaks between 9 and 15 hours,
intermediate BS peaks between 27 and 45 hours, and settle to a new steady
state by 80 to 120 hours. Chronic MPL administration exhibits
citrate-cycle-only chronic biphasic response, reporting a DRN event peak
between 9 and 13 hours, and intermediate BS peak between 32 and 37 hours,
and establishment of a new steady state by 95 to 100 hours.
Acute response: late monophasic, early and late biphasic
Solely arginine biosynthesis demonstrates this combination of responses to
acute MPL administration: late monophasic, as well as early and late
biphasic. In response to chronic MPL, arginine biosynthesis exhibits
monophasic behavior: exhibiting activities with steep and continuous
inclines until 30 or 40 hours, no distinguishable peaks, and establishment
of new steady states by 110 hours or after 168 hours.
Discussion
Synthetic GCs, such as MPL, are widely used anti-inflammatory drugs. Despite their
widespread usage, the actions and secondary effects are still under investigation.
Dosing regimens further complicate the host’s response to the drug. Of importance is
the liver response, being the organ of primary drug metabolism. Earlier studies have
focused on liver-specific genome-wide transcriptomic analyses under acute and
chronic dosing.[5,9-11,15,18,19,56-58,60-64] Transcriptional analyses focus
on characterizing individual gene responses. Clustering and functional annotation
enables a more complete characterization of the response. In this investigation, we
approach the problem from another angle: we aim to characterize the dynamic response
of functionally related a priori groupings of genes. We therefore aim to
characterize the dynamic response of signaling and metabolic pathways following
acute and chronic exposure to MPL. Characterizing the dynamics at the pathway level,
or at the level of functionally related genes in general, enables comparison across
platforms and experiments since the approach does not require consistency across
experiments.The first step of the analysis requires that we identify pathway appropriately
represented in the microarray data. This is a critical step, as we need to confirm
that pathways whose activities will be further analyzed are adequately represented
in the experimental data. In doing so, we define fractional coverage
() as the metric characterizing the extent to which a pathway is
represented in the probe set used and reported in the genome-wide transcriptomic
studies, as previously defined in the “Methods” section. We further assess the
statistical significance of this metric by associating with the fractional coverage
of a pathway with a p-value communicating our confidence that the
fractional coverage is statistically significant. The metric is very important
particularly in cases like the one we analyzed where we assess and compare
experimental data using different platforms, or arrays as in our case. Since the
initial set of genes whose activity is quantified are not the same across the two
conditions (different animal studies make use of different microarrays), it is
important to confirm that the pathways are appropriately represented because these
pathways are identical across datasets and thus can be compared. As expected, as the
statistical significance of the reliability of the fractional coverage metric is
increased, the set of significantly represented pathways decreases. Our results
indicate that of 209 pathways represented in KEGG which are relevant to
Rattus norvegicus and the liver, 56 and 57 have statistically
significant fractional coverage in the acute and chronic experiments, respectively,
at a confidence level of .The next critical step is to associate a coherent dynamic response with each of the
represented pathways. Our hypothesis is that each pathway is effectively a
high-dimensional dynamic system, with each dimension corresponding to a gene in the
pathway. We hypothesize that the multi-dimensional dynamics can be decomposed into
intrinsic elements, identified via the SVD decomposition.[32,33,65] Singular value decomposition
of the original data determined whether a pathway can generate at least one PAL, an
indication that the pathway is active and should be further analyzed for multiple
activity patterns in a manner that considers the inherent variability of the data.
To account for the inherent variability in the experimental observations, the
proposed bootstrap enabled us to identify likely intrinsic responses and further to
assess a likelihood metric via corresponding p-values.From within the sets of the 56 and 57 pathways identified to have statistically
significant fractional coverage in the acute and chronic data, respectively, 26
pathways in the acute and 27 in the chronic yielded at least one significant PAL
profile, indicating their significant pathway activity. Of these pathways, 24 are
common to both the acute and chronic significant pathway sets (Table 3). The chronic
pathways exhibit consistently higher fractional coverage than their acute
counterparts. Completed a few years after the acute study, the chronic study had
access to a microarray platform (230A) previously unavailable. Because both
experiments investigate MPL within the liver, a consistent set of significant
pathways is anticipated to emerge when comparing these data with our framework.
However, it is likely that the difference in platform contributes to this
discrepancy between acute and chronic pathway fractional coverage. The chronic study
has a larger probe set on its microarray and thus has more genes to occupy each
pathway. Thus, a consistent core set of pathways emerges as significantly
represented and active in response to MPL in both datasets. These pathways emerge
from the amino acid metabolism,[36,37] carbohydrate
metabolism,[38,39] essential organelle regulation,[41-43] lipid metabolism,[34,35] metabolism of
cofactors and vitamins,[40] and xenobiotic metabolism pathway families.[44]Interestingly, the decomposition of the pathway dynamics to its intrinsic
constituents verified that the emergent dynamics were consistent with likely
mechanisms of regulation. Broadly, the intrinsic responses for the acute dosing
reflects transient activity events due to DRN to GRE binding or transcription
mediated via an intermediate BS influenced by MPL—while returning to baseline
following the elimination of the drug. The chronic administration led to more
complicated responses, including transient and persistent effects indicating both
DRN to GRE binding or transcription mediated via intermediate BS. The bootstrapping
step enabled us to investigate how the variability in a pathway dataset influences
which PALs are dominant. The initial SVD step which determined whether a pathway can
yield at least one PAL is a screening step which identifies if the pathway is at all
active. The bootstrapping step is applied afterwards to ask the question, what kinds
of significant activity emerge if the variability in the gene set is considered? For
this investigation, this bootstrapping step is applied to pathways significant with
p-values . It can be applied to pathway sets of any significance (ie pathway
sets corresponding to p-value and p-value ); however, this is not necessary for our investigation as we are
only interested in pathways that pass the screening SVD test at the greatest
significance. This process identified pathways indicating consistent activity under
either acute or chronic drug administration. The first important observation from
our analysis is that, regardless of dosing, the pathways encapsulating the MPL
effects are similar. Interestingly, chronic administration leads to the emergence of
complex dynamics, not necessarily expected based on analysis of the acute
response.To systematically compare across dosing regimens and time horizons (72 hours in acute
study and 168 hours in chronic study), we compare the intrinsic dynamics in the
space of regulatory models. We hypothesize that each intrinsic response can be
represented by corresponding PKPD models. Following the regulatory mechanisms
proposed in previous publications,[18,56,57] we develop a two-compartment
PK model for both acute and chronic dosing (Figure 4) and hypothesized either monophasic
(equation
13) or biphasic (equations 14 and 15)
regulation of the intrinsic component of the activity of the pathway. We therefore
extend the concept of PD dynamic to characterizing the intrinsic responses at the
pathway level. Our analysis indicates that the acute response initiates pathway
dynamics consistent with the nature of the acute dosing: as MPL half-life of
0.33 hours in ADX rats with a total drug clearance observed in ADX rats by 4.6 hours.[59]We observed that the pathway responses emerging under acute dosing reflect monophasic
or biphasic responses. However, the same pathway can lead to rather complicated
dynamics under chronic administration. For consistency in our analysis, we examined
pathways based on their response under acute administration. We, therefore, broadly
identified two major categories: Class 1—capturing pathways yielding strictly
monophasic response or strictly biphasic response to acute MPL administration; Class
2—reporting pathways yielding both monophasic and biphasic response to acute MPL
administration. Within these categories (Table 4), pathway response to chronic MPL
administration is compared.Although PAL profiles resemble gene expression profiles, the features in these
profiles do not necessarily correspond to up or down gene expression. The SVD linear
combination technique preserves the relative magnitudes of gene expression profiles,
but it does not preserve sign. For example, many genes which report an early
upregulation event in their expression profiles will contribute to a single unique
PAL, which will contain an early event peak. This is because the PAL is a linear
combination of those gene expression profiles. A set of gene expression profiles
will “resolve” to a PAL with the same timing and relative magnitude of features, but
which may appear as a reflection of the gene expression profiles. What is critical
to our analysis is the timing and relative magnitude of the peak events, which SVD
preserves. These features determine whether a monophasic of biphasic mechanism is
proposed.Class 1 includes pathways exhibiting exclusively monophasic or exclusive biphasic
regulation under acute dosing. Methylprednisolone induces a response which dies out
as the drug is eventually eliminated from the system. Out of the 24 pathways, 13
pathways (tryptophan metabolism; beta-alanine metabolism; glutathione metabolism;
proteasome; retinol metabolism; valine, leucine, and isoleucine degradation;
propanoate metabolism; peroxisome; fatty acid degradation; steroid hormone
biosynthesis; fatty acid metabolism; PPAR signaling pathway; and glyoxylate and
dicarboxylate metabolism) exhibited this response under acute dosing. Almost all of
these pathways reported early acute monophasic response. Only proteasome exhibited
both early and late acute monophasic responses and only glyoxylate and dicarboxylate
metabolism exhibited biphasic response to acute MPL. Interestingly, the chronic
response for the Class 1 pathways manifested itself in multiple ways. Some pathways
(valine, leucine, and isoleucine degradation; tryptophan metabolism; propanoate
metabolism; peroxisome; fatty acid degradation; steroid hormone biosynthesis; fatty
acid metabolism; and PPAR signaling pathway) exhibited strictly early monophasic
response but increased complexity in response to chronic MPL administration,
exhibiting both monophasic and biphasic responses in different subcomponents of each
pathway. Tryptophan metabolism (Figure 5), a pathway describing the processing of the amino acid
tryptophan into biproducts catabolized by glycolysis, and other energy regulating
pathways,[37,66] exemplifies the observed shift from acute monophasic response
to a response of greater complexity, such as chronic biphasic. This shift indicates
that the mechanism of regulation presumed appropriate for describing the pathway’s
response to acute MPL administration is insufficient for describing the pathway’s
actual mechanism of regulation, which is revealed with greater complexity in its
biphasic response to chronic MPL administration. The peroxisome pathway (Figure 6), which describes the
biogenesis of peroxisome organelles and is crucial to redox signaling and lipid
homeostasis,[34,43,66] yields strictly an acute monophasic response to acute MPL.
However, the pathway reports multiple dominant activity patterns in response to
chronic MPL. Pathway activity level profiles are linear combinations of the
expression patterns of individual genes and if a pathway yields multiple significant
PAL, it indicates that unique subgroups of genes within that pathway are responsible
for each. The peroxisome pathway demonstrates this segregation of the pathway;
within the gene set that composes the peroxisome pathway, unique subgroups of genes
behave differently, some prescribing to monophasic regulation and yielding a chronic
monophasic response (Figure
6B) and some prescribing to a chronic biphasic response (Figure 6C). Thus, the
peroxisome pathway cannot be assumed homogeneous, and in fact represents at least
two subgroups of uniquely regulated gene sets. Other pathways maintained a strictly
monophasic response (beta-alanine metabolism, glutathione metabolism, proteasome,
and retinol metabolism) to both acute and chronic MPL administration.
Figure 5.
(A) Tryptophan metabolism pathway response to (A) acute and (B) chronic MPL
administration. Example of Class 1 pathway which yields monophasic response
to acute MPL administration but varies in its response to chronic MPL
administration. The tryptophan metabolism pathway yields a biphasic response
to chronic MPL administration indicating an increased complexity across
dosing studies.
Figure 6.
Peroxisome pathway response to (A) acute and (B, C) chronic MPL
administration. Example of Class 1 pathway which yields monophasic response
to acute MPL administration but varies in its response to chronic MPL
administration. The peroxisome pathway yields both monophasic and biphasic
responses to chronic MPL administration indicating an increased complexity
across dosing studies as well as an internal complexity to the pathway. This
pathway exhibits multiple dominant patterns of activity, each corresponding
to unique subgroups of genes within the pathway.
(A) Tryptophan metabolism pathway response to (A) acute and (B) chronic MPL
administration. Example of Class 1 pathway which yields monophasic response
to acute MPL administration but varies in its response to chronic MPL
administration. The tryptophan metabolism pathway yields a biphasic response
to chronic MPL administration indicating an increased complexity across
dosing studies.Peroxisome pathway response to (A) acute and (B, C) chronic MPL
administration. Example of Class 1 pathway which yields monophasic response
to acute MPL administration but varies in its response to chronic MPL
administration. The peroxisome pathway yields both monophasic and biphasic
responses to chronic MPL administration indicating an increased complexity
across dosing studies as well as an internal complexity to the pathway. This
pathway exhibits multiple dominant patterns of activity, each corresponding
to unique subgroups of genes within the pathway.One pathway exhibited exclusively biphasic response to acute MPL, the glyoxylate and
dicarboxylate metabolism pathway. This pathway describes energy regulating
biosynthesis reactions for synthesis of carbohydrates from acetyl-CoA and fatty acids.[66] It yielded early biphasic response to acute MPL administration but a
prolonged monophasic response to chronic MPL administration.The 11 pathways that yielded more complex acute responses were included within Class
2. Some pathways (cysteine and methionine metabolism, glycolysis/gluconeogenesis,
and carbon metabolism) within this class remained complex between dosing regimens,
exhibiting both monophasic and biphasic behavior in different subcomponents of the
pathway, in response to both acute and chronic MPL administration. The cysteine and
methionine metabolism pathway (Figure 7) describes the metabolism of the eponymous amino acids into
intermediates supplied to such processes as pyruvate metabolism and amino acid
synthesizing pathways including valine, leucine, and isoleucine biosynthesis
pathway.[36,37,66] It exemplifies the conservation of complex response between
acute and chronic dosing. Regardless of dosing type, this pathway contains unique
subgroups of genes whose expression patterns are the foundation for the PAL profiles
observed in the pathway’s response. A complexity which indicates that multiple
mechanisms of regulation are required to describe the activity of this pathway.
Other pathways shifted their response, exhibiting complex acute behavior but
resolving to either strictly chronic monophasic behavior (arginine biosynthesis and
oxidative phosphorylation) or strictly chronic biphasic behavior (protein processing
in endoplasmic reticulum, citrate cycle [TCA cycle], pyruvate metabolism, metabolism
of xenobiotics by cytochrome P450, and ribosome). The arginine biosynthesis pathway
describes the construction of the amino acid arginine as well as the overlap of this
process with others including the citrate cycle (catabolism of 2-oxoglutarate and
production of fumarate), as well as the urea cycle (various steps including the
generation of urea).[66] Acute MPL administration provokes both acute monophasic and acute biphasic
responses, indicating that the pathway can be decomposed into uniquely regulated
subcomponents of genes (Figure
8A and B).
However, this behavior resolves to a strictly monophasic response to chronic MPL
administration (Figure 8C).
This observation indicates that some regulatory structures within this pathway may
be overwhelmed by chronic MPL administration and lose the phenotypes that
distinguish monophasic from biphasic mechanisms.
Figure 7.
Cysteine and methionine metabolism pathway response to (A, B) acute and (C,
D) chronic MPL administration. Example of Class 2 pathway which yields both
monophasic and biphasic responses to acute MPL administration. This
complexity indicates that multiple subgroups of genes within this pathway
are regulated by different mechanisms. For the cysteine and methionine
pathway, this complexity is preserved across dosing types.
Figure 8.
Arginine biosynthesis pathway response to (A, B) acute and (C) chronic MPL
administration. Example of Class 2 pathway type which yields both monophasic
and biphasic responses to acute MPL administration. This complexity
indicates that multiple subgroups of genes within this pathway are regulated
by different mechanisms. For the arginine biosynthesis pathway, chronic MPL
administration yields a shift to a monophasic response.
Cysteine and methionine metabolism pathway response to (A, B) acute and (C,
D) chronic MPL administration. Example of Class 2 pathway which yields both
monophasic and biphasic responses to acute MPL administration. This
complexity indicates that multiple subgroups of genes within this pathway
are regulated by different mechanisms. For the cysteine and methionine
pathway, this complexity is preserved across dosing types.Arginine biosynthesis pathway response to (A, B) acute and (C) chronic MPL
administration. Example of Class 2 pathway type which yields both monophasic
and biphasic responses to acute MPL administration. This complexity
indicates that multiple subgroups of genes within this pathway are regulated
by different mechanisms. For the arginine biosynthesis pathway, chronic MPL
administration yields a shift to a monophasic response.Pathway responses from the remaining pathways within Table 4 are presented in the Supplemental Materials.These results indicate that 16 of the 24 significant pathways exhibited a response
pattern that changed between acute and chronic dosing. Of the 24 pathways, 8
(tryptophan metabolism; valine, leucine, and isoleucine degradation; propanoate
metabolism; peroxisome; fatty acid degradation; steroid hormone biosynthesis; fatty
acid metabolism; and PPAR signaling pathway) exhibit singularly monophasic or
biphasic response to acute MPL administration but increase their complexity,
exhibiting both monophasic and biphasic behavior, in response to chronic MPL
administration. Increasing complexity indicates that a pathway’s response to MPL is
dosing specific, and that different subcomponents (unique groups of genes within a
pathway) exhibit purely DRN binding to GRE regulation, whereas other components
exhibit both DRN to GRE binding and transcription regulation mediated by an
intermediate BS. The pathway cannot be defined by simply one response type. For some
pathways, the response does not change with changing dosing.Of the 24 pathways, 9 (beta-alanine metabolism, glutathione metabolism, proteasome,
retinol metabolism, biosynthesis of amino acids, cysteine and methionine metabolism,
glycolysis/gluconeogenesis, carbon metabolism, and protein processing in endoplasmic
reticulum) exhibit no change in their dynamics, remaining monophasic in response to
both dosing types or remaining chronic in response to both dosing types. This
pathway’s mechanism is sufficiently described by either strictly monophasic (DRN- to
GRE-binding-regulated transcription) or biphasic (DRN- to GRE-binding-regulated
transcription and MPL-influenced intermediate BS-mediating regulation of
transcription); 4 pathways (citrate cycle, pyruvate metabolism, ribosome, and
metabolism of xenobiotics by cytochrome P450) shift from a complex acute response to
chronic biphasic behavior; and 3 pathways (glyoxylate and dicarboxylate metabolism,
arginine biosynthesis, and oxidative phosphorylation) reduce from complex acute
behavior to monophasic behavior in response to chronic MPL. This reduction in
complexity may indicate a dosing dependence in which a system is overwhelmed by a
particular magnitude of drug concentration. One mechanism may dominate in response
to constant MPL administration.The pathways that emerged within these classes exist within specific pathway
families. Each of the pathways within the lipid metabolism[34] family (fatty acid degradation, steroid hormone biosynthesis, fatty acid
metabolism, and PPAR signaling pathway) increased in complexity from acute
monophasic to complex chronic responses. The amino acid metabolism[36,37] family yielded
three pathways that increased in complexity from either monophasic or biphasic acute
response to complex chronic response (tryptophan metabolism; valine, leucine, and
isoleucine degradation; and biosynthesis of amino acids), three pathways that
maintained either a monophasic response or a complex response to both dosing types
(beta-alanine metabolism, glutathione metabolism, and cysteine and methionine
metabolism), and one pathway that shifted from a complex acute response to a
singularly monophasic response (arginine biosynthesis). Within the regulation of the
essential organelles family, one pathway (peroxisome) increased in complexity from
acute monophasic to complex chronic response, two pathways maintained the same
response across dosing types either both monophasic or both complex (proteasome and
protein processing in endoplasmic reticulum), and one pathway shifted from a complex
acute response to a chronic biphasic response (ribosome). The retinol metabolism
pathway within metabolism of cofactors and vitamins maintained the same monophasic
response to acute and chronic MPL. The metabolism of xenobiotics by cytochrome P450
pathway within the xenobiotic metabolism family shifted from complex acute response
to chronic biphasic.This investigation uses meta-analysis technique to capture and compare physiological
dynamics at the pathway level. This method provides a more comprehensive survey of
physiological activity than do strictly gene-centric approaches, while capable of
predicting likely regulatory structures. Designed to facilitate comparison of
experiments that differ in platform, time scale, and dosing, this framework enabled
a multiple dosing to identify and compare the influence of MPL within the liver.
Significant influence of MPL is observed within six pathway families: amino acid
metabolism,[36,37] carbohydrate metabolism,[38,39] regulation of essential
organelles,[41-43] lipid
metabolism,[34,35] metabolism of cofactors and vitamins,[40] and xenobiotic metabolism.[44] Within each family, most pathways demonstrate changed dynamics across dosing
regimens. Furthermore, all pathways exhibit some form of dosing dependence easily
identified when comparing acute to chronic responses within a pathway.
Deconstruction of the activity of a pathway using SVD reveals multiple, temporally
related, and co-dominant patterns of activity for each pathway, activity patterns
which correspond to unique subcomponents within a pathway. Thus, this investigation
not only identifies pathways with physiological relevance to the liver and MPL but
also provides a complex, but defined, systemic characterization of the consequences
of MPL within the liver and the possible regulatory structures that govern these
pathways.Click here for additional data file.Supplemental material, Edited_SuppMaterials_010819_xyz14186da01b6ae_(1) for
Pathway-Based Analysis of the Liver Response to Intravenous Methylprednisolone
Administration in Rats: Acute Versus Chronic Dosing by Alison Acevedo, Ana
Berthel, Debra DuBois, Richard R Almon, William J Jusko and Ioannis P
Androulakis in Gene Regulation and Systems Biology
Authors: Rohini Ramakrishnan; Debra C DuBois; Richard R Almon; Nancy A Pyszczynski; William J Jusko Journal: J Pharmacol Exp Ther Date: 2002-01 Impact factor: 4.030
Authors: Shobhitha Ratnam; Kenneth N Maclean; Rene L Jacobs; Margaret E Brosnan; Jan P Kraus; John T Brosnan Journal: J Biol Chem Date: 2002-08-26 Impact factor: 5.157
Authors: Rohini Ramakrishnan; Debra C DuBois; Richard R Almon; Nancy A Pyszczynski; William J Jusko Journal: J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn Date: 2002-02 Impact factor: 2.745
Authors: Alison Acevedo; Panteleimon D Mavroudis; Debra DuBois; Richard R Almon; William J Jusko; Ioannis P Androulakis Journal: J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn Date: 2021-03-25 Impact factor: 2.745