| Literature DB >> 31134147 |
María L Gandía-González1, Sebastián Cerdán2, Laura Barrios3, Pilar López-Larrubia2, Pablo G Feijoó1, Alexis Palpan1, José M Roda1, Juan Solivera4.
Abstract
Objective: We assess the efficacy of the metabolomic profile from glioma biopsies in providing estimates of postsurgical Overall Survival in glioma patients.Entities:
Keywords: classification decision tree; glioma; high resolution proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy; metabolomic profile; overall survival
Year: 2019 PMID: 31134147 PMCID: PMC6524167 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2019.00328
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Oncol ISSN: 2234-943X Impact factor: 6.244
Figure 1Overview of glioma patient selection and implemented approach.
Figure 2Histogram of OS in glioma patients after surgical resection at the Neurosurgery Department, University Hospital La Paz, in the period 1995–1998. Patient groups depicting Short-OS (1–52 w), Intermediate-OS (53–364 w) and Long-OS (>364 w) are separated by the dotted lines.
Clinical features and overall survival of glioma patients.
| Age | <25 y | 0 (0.0%) | 5 (62.5%) | 3(37.5%) | 8 (17.4%) | 0.01 |
| 25–54 y | 5 (31.3%) | 7 (43.8%) | 4(25%) | 16 (34.8%) | ||
| >54 y | 14 (63.6%) | 7 (31.8%) | 1 (4.5%) | 22 (47.8%) | ||
| Sex | Female | 8 (34.8%) | 11(47.8%) | 4 (17.4%) | 23 (50%) | 0.74 |
| Men | 11(47.8%) | 8 (34.8%) | 4 (17.4%) | 23 (50%) | ||
| Comorbility | Yes | 10 (34.5%) | 13 (44.8%) | 6 (20.7%) | 29 (63%) | 0.56 |
| No | 9 (52.9%) | 6 (35.3%) | 2 (11.8%) | 17 (37%) | ||
| Localization | A | 2 (15.4%) | 7 (53.8%) | 4 (30.8%) | 13 (30.2%) | 0.04 |
| B | 5 (41.7%) | 6 (50%) | 1 (8.3%) | 12 (27.9%) | ||
| C | 12 (66.7%) | 3 (16.7%) | 3 (16.7%) | 18 (41.9%) | ||
| Tumor volume | Small | 13 (39.4%) | 15 (45.5%) | 5 (15.2%) | 33 (73.3%) | 0.49 |
| Big | 6 (50%) | 3 (25%) | 3 (25%) | 12 (26.7%) | ||
| Eloquency | Yes | 16 (53.3%) | 10 (33.3%) | 4 (13.3%) | 30 (69.8%) | 0.19 |
| No | 3 (23.1%) | 6 (46.2%) | 4(30.8 %) | 13 (30.2%) | ||
| Resection | Partial/Complete | 10 (52.6%) | 5 (26.3%) | 4 (21.1%) | 19 (41.3%) | 0.27 |
| Biopsy | 9 (33.3%) | 14 (51.9%) | 4 (14.8%) | 27 (58.7%) | ||
| Radiotherapy | Yes | 19 (54.3%) | 12 (34.3%) | 4 (11.4%) | 35 (76.1%) | 0.003 |
| No | 0 (0%) | 7 (63.6%) | 4 (36.4%) | 11 (23.9%) | ||
| Chemotherapy | Yes | 0 (0%) | 1 (33.3%) | 2 (66.7%) | 3 (6.5%) | 0.07 |
| No | 19(44.2%) | 18 (41.9%) | 6 (14%) | 43 (93.5%) | ||
| Histopathology grade | II | 0 (0%) | 6 (54.5%) | 5 (45.5%) | 11 (23.9%) | <0.001 |
| III | 3 (18.8%) | 10 (62.5%) | 3 (18.8%) | 16 (34.8%) | ||
| IV | 16(84.2%) | 3 (15.8%) | 0 (0%) | 19 (41.3%) | ||
Arterial hypertension, diabetes mellitus and/or pulmonary, renal, cardiac, oncologic or any severe disease,
Classification of tumors according to (.
Histopathologic grade according to (.
Figure 3Representative HR-1H MRS (360.13 MHz, 22°C, pH 7.2) from extracts of two glioma grade II biopsies with very different OS outcomes. (A) 149 w. (B) 600 w. MI, myo-inositol; Gly, glycine; GPC, glycerolphosphorylcholine; PC, phosphorylcholine; Cr, creatine; PCr, phosphocreatine; Glu, glutamate; Gln, glutamie; NAA, N-acetyl-aspartic acid; Ala, alanine; Lac, lactate.
Figure 4Box-plots of metabolite molar ratios in extracts from glioma biopsies with Short-OS (green), Intermediate-OS (blue) and Long-OS (red). In each box, the central mark (white line) indicates the median, and the bottom and top edges refer to the 25-th and 75-th percentiles, respectively. The upper and lower limits of the box extend to the most extreme data points not considered outliers.
General linear model analysis of OS in glioma patients as revealed by the metabolic profile determined by HR-1H MRS.
| Gln | 15.47 ± 1.19 | 18.76 ± 1.38 | 18.51 ± 1.30 | 17.36 ± 0.81 | 2.02 | 0.14 |
| Val | 2.34 ± 0.47 | 1.60± 0.43 | 1.45 ± 0.23 | 1.88 ± 0.27 | 0.896 | 0.42 |
| Asp | 0.77 ± 0.14 | 0.70 ± 0.14 | 0.50 ± 0.12 | 0.69 ± 0.09 | 0.584 | 0.56 |
| NAA | 3.35 ± 0.94 | 4.57 ± 0.95 | 4.55 ± 0.94 | 4.06 ± 0.57 | 0.544 | 0.58 |
| GABA | 1.25 ± 0.31 | 0.92 ± 0.15 | 1.17 ± 0.33 | 1.10 ± 0.15 | 0.483 | 0.62 |
| Tau | 5.69 ± 0.79 | 6.17 ± 0.71 | 4.95 ± 0.63 | 5.76 ± 0.45 | 0.416 | 0.66 |
| tCho | 8.67 ± 0.57 | 8.88 ± 0.76 | 9.33 ± 1.02 | 8.87 ± 0.42 | 0.145 | 0.86 |
Results are given as mean ± standard error of mean.
A Box Cox transform was performed on the data before running ANOVA analysis. Ac, Acetate; Ala, Alanine; Asp, aspartic acid; fCho, free choline; GABA, gamma-aminobutyric acid; Gln, glutamine; Glu, glutamate; Gly, glycine; GPC, glycerophosphocholine; MI, myo-inositol; NAA, N-acetyl-aspartic acid; PC, phosphorylcholine; Tau, taurine; tCr, total creatine; Val, valine. Bold characters indicate p < 0.05.
General linear model analysis of the HR- 1H NMR metabolic profiles associated to different glioma histopathological grades.
| fCho | 1.23 ± 0.13 | 1.05 ± 0.21 | 0.67 ± 0.16 | 1.03 ± 0.1 | 3.10 | 0.05 |
| Val | 2.32 ± 0.48 | 1.97 ± 0.49 | 0.98 ± 0.11 | 1.88 ± 0.27 | 2.51 | 0.09 |
| Asp | 0.88 ± 0.16 | 0.63 ± 0.12 | 0.47 ± 0.12 | 0.69 ± 0.09 | 1.93 | 0.16 |
| Ac | 3.75 ± 0.96 | 3.68 ± 0.98 | 1.95 ± 0.67 | 3.30 ± 0.55 | 1.49 | 0.24 |
| Tau | 6.09 ± 0.85 | 6.05 ± 0.74 | 4.77 ± 0.46 | 5.76 ± 0.45 | 0.42 | 0.66 |
| tCho | 8.60 ± 0.57 | 9.27 ± 0.86 | 8.76 ± 0.83 | 8.87 ± 0.42 | 0.24 | 0.79 |
| GABA | 1.03 ± 0.19 | 1.25 ± 0.36 | 1.02 ± 0.23 | 1.10 ± 0.15 | 0.23 | 0.80 |
| NAA | 4.14 ± 1.17 | 4.06 ± 0.86 | 3.94 ± 0.49 | 4.06 ± 0.57 | 0.01 | 0.99 |
According to Louis et al. (3)
Results are given as mean ± standard error of mean.
A Box Cox transform was performed on the data before running ANOVA analysis. Bold characters indicate p < 0.05.
Figure 5Classification Regression Tree (CRT) of glioma OS based in metabolomic biomarkers detectable by HR-1H MRS.
Classification confusion matrix of correct/incorrect classifications of overall survival in patients bearing gliomas using metabolomic criteria.
| Short ( | 1 | 0 | ||
| Intermediate ( | 4 | 0 | ||
| Long ( | 1 | 1 | ||
| All patients ( | ||||
Numbers in bold indicate number and percentages of correct classifications. Growing Methods: CRT, dependent variable OS.
Overview of literature correlating OS and MRS biomarkers.
| Li et al. ( | 72 | HGG | 17.2 m |
| Reijneveld et al. ( | 14 | LGG | 30 m (9–40) |
| Hattingen et al. ( | 45 | LGG | 37 m (52.1–260.5) |
| Chang et al. ( | 143 | LGG & HGG | n.s. |
| Yamasaki et al. ( | HGG | 26.1 m (6.5–83.8) | |
| Steffen-Smith et al. ( | 39 | HGG | 7.1 m (1.6–61.6) |
| Quon et al. ( | 26 | HGG | 22.9 m (5–37) |
| Hattingen et al. ( | 32 | HGG (recidives) | 8.1 m |
| Tolia et al. ( | 12 | HGG | n.s. |
| Steidl et al. ( | 37 | HGG (recidives) | n.s. |
| Roldán et al. ( | 28 | HGG | 3–98 m |
| Present serie | 46 | LGG & HGG | 14.9 m (0.24–170.4) |
Median of the duration of the study in months,
Parenthesis includes the range of the study in months (m),
HGG: High grade glioma,
LGG: Low grade glioma, n.s.: not specified.