| Literature DB >> 31555581 |
Min Zhang1,2, Jiuming He3, Tiegang Li3, Haixu Hu4, Xiaofei Li5, Hao Xing5, Jun Wang6, Fan Yang6, Qunfeng Ma7, Bing Liu4, Chuanhao Tang8, Zeper Abliz3,9, Xiaoqing Liu2.
Abstract
Objectives: Tumor pathology examination especially epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations molecular testing has been integral part of lung cancer clinical practices. However, the EGFR mutations spatial distribution characteristics remains poorly investigated, which is critical to tumor heterogeneity analysis and precision diagnosis. Here, we conducted an exploratory study for label-free lung cancer pathology diagnosis and mapping of EGFR mutation spatial distribution using ambient mass spectrometry imaging (MSI). Materials andEntities:
Keywords: epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR); lipids; mass spectrometry imaging; non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC); tumor heterogeneity
Year: 2019 PMID: 31555581 PMCID: PMC6722907 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2019.00804
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Oncol ISSN: 2234-943X Impact factor: 6.244
Figure 1An overview of MSI platform for label-free NSCLC pathology diagnosis. Definition of regions of interest (ROIs) and strategy for developing an in situ metabolomics method to discover reliable diagnostic biomarkers to classify molecular pathology and map EGFR mutation status in NSCLC tissues.
Summary of the lung cancer specimens used in this study (N = 55).
| 62 (33–79) | |
| Sex, no. (%) | |
| Men | 37 (67.2) |
| Women | 18 (33.8) |
| Current smoker | 20 (36.4) |
| Former smoker | 8 (14.5) |
| Never smoker | 25 (45.5) |
| Unknown | 2 (3.6) |
| AC | 27 (49.1) |
| EGFR 19 exon del | 6 (10.9) |
| EGFR 21 exon L858R | 4 (7.2) |
| EGFR wild | 17 (30.9) |
| SCC | 28 (50.9) |
| I and II | 36 (65.4) |
| IIIA | 11 (20) |
| IIIB | 4 (7.3) |
| IV | 4 (7.3) |
TNM staging is evaluated according to the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer (IASLC) 7th edition.
Potential biomarkers of lung tumors and their tentative identifications results.
| 1 | 99.0091 | [M-H]− | C4H4O3 | 99,72 | Succinic anhydride | 0.751 |
| 2 | 104.0333 | [M-H]− | C3H7NO3 | 104,74,72 | Serine | 0.690 |
| 3 | 151.0244 | [M-H]− | C5H4N4O2 | 151,108 | Xanthine | 0.772 |
| 4 | 206.0537 | [M+Na]+ | C5H14NO4PNa+ | 206,146,86 | [Phosphorylcholine+Na]+ | 0.726 |
| 5 | 222.0272 | [M+K]+ | C5H14NO4PK+ | 222,162,104,86 | [Phosphorylcholine+K]+ | 0.687 |
| 6 | 251.2015 | [M-H]− | C16H28O2 | 251,80,59 | FA(16:2) | 0.740 |
| 7 | 301.2166 | [M-H]− | C20H30O2 | 301,257,203,59 | FA(20:5) | 0.700 |
| 8 | 305.2482 | [M-H]− | C20H34O2 | 305,249,59 | FA(20:3) | 0.612 |
| 9 | 307.2630 | [M-H]− | C20H36O2 | 307,263,59 | FA(20:2) | 0.800 |
| 10 | 327.2317 | [M-H]− | C22H32O2 | 327,283,59 | FA(22:6) | 0.852 |
| 11 | 329.2480 | [M-H]− | C22H34O2 | 329,285,59 | FA(22:5) | 0.881 |
| 12 | 331.2641 | [M-H]− | C22H36O2 | 331,313,287,59 | FA(22:4) | 0.772 |
| 13 | 335.2964 | [M-H]− | C22H40O2 | 335,59 | FA(22:2) | 0.813 |
| 14 | 359.2951 | [M-H]− | C24H40O2 | 359,59 | FA(24:4) | 0.867 |
| 15 | 436.2833 | [M-H]− | C21H44NO6P | 436,239,196,140,78 | PE(16:0/0:0) | 0.612 |
| 16 | 462.3007 | [M-H]− | C23H46NO6P | 462,265,196,140,78 | PE(18:2/0:0) | 0.687 |
| 17 | 464.3141 | [M-H]− | C23H48NO6P | 464,462,196, 78 | PE(18:2/0:0) | 0.810 |
| 18 | 758.5699 | [M+H]+ | C42H81NO8P+ | 575,502,496,478,184,86 | PC(16:0/18:2) | 0.793 |
| 19 | 760.5856 | [M+H]+ | C42H82NO8P | 760,496,184 | PC(16:0/18:1) | 0.824 |
| 20 | 782.5666 | [M+Na]+ | C42H82NO8PNa+ | 782,184 | [PC(34:1)+Na]+ | 0.864 |
| 21 | 784.5832 | [M+Na]+ | C42H84NO8PNa+ | 784, 184, 86 | [PC(34:0)+Na]+ | 0.725 |
(X:Y) represents the number of carbon atoms (X) and the number of double bonds (Y) in the fatty acid chains.
PC, glycerophosphocholine; PE, glycerophosphoethanolamines; FA, fatty acid; AUC, area under the curve.
Figure 2Distributions of representative potential biomarkers (group) across tumors and adjacent normal tissue sections from AC and SCC lung cancer. (A) Xanthine; FA(20:5); FA(20:3); FA(20:2); FA(22:6); FA(22:5); FA(22:4); FA(22:2); FA(24:4); PC(16:0/18:1); [PC(34:1)+Na]+]. (B) Optical images of corresponding H&E stained sections and the amplified figures of tumor and normal lung tissues (× 200).
Figure 3Distributions of representative potential pathology-related biomarkers (A) across AC and SCC tumors and the histogram (B) showed relative expression level of these biomarkers in AC (black box) and SCC tumors (gray box). (C) Optical images of corresponding H&E stained sections the amplified figures (× 200). PC, Phosphorylcholine. *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p <0.001 (t-test).
Figure 4(A) Distributions of representative potential EGFR-related biomarkers (A) across different EGFR mutation status of lung cancer, and histogram (B) the boxplot showed relative expression level of these biomarkers in EGFR-mutated-positive (gray box) and EGFR-wild (black box) samples. (C) Optical images of corresponding H&E stained sections and DNA amplification plot of EGFR by ARMS; *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p <0.001 (t-test).
Figure 5AFADESI-MSI revealed the spatial heterogeneity of EGFR by in situ metabolomics imaging. (A) The tumor-related biomarkers of FA(20:5), FA(20:3), FA(22:4), FA(22:2) were used to showcase the overall contour of cancerous tissue. (B) The EGFR-related biomarkers of PE(16:0/0:0), PE(18:2/0:0), and PE(16:0/18:0) present the EGFR mutation spatial distribution heterogeneity. (C) With region of tissue harbor EGFR mutation delineated by dotted blue line shown in optical image. DNA amplification plot of EGFR by ARMS. (D) EGFR mutant-wild; (E) EGFR mutant positive.