| Literature DB >> 34028607 |
Michel Kather1,2,3, Sabine Koitzsch4, Bernhard Breit3, Stefan Plontke4, Bernd Kammerer5,6,7,8, Arne Liebau9.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: One approach to dampen the inflammatory reactions resulting from implantation surgery of cochlear implant hearing aids is to embed dexamethasone into the matrix of the electrode carrier. Possible side effects for sensory cells in the inner ear on the metabolomics have not yet been evaluated.Entities:
Keywords: Cochlear implant; Drug delivery; GC–MS; Inner ear; Untargeted profiling
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34028607 PMCID: PMC8144088 DOI: 10.1007/s11306-021-01799-y
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Metabolomics ISSN: 1573-3882 Impact factor: 4.290
Peak sum and cell count for each group
| Group | Peak sum | Cell count |
|---|---|---|
| Prol control | 1.48 × 109 ± 0.119 × 109 | 12.6 × 106 |
| Prol Dex | 7.00 × 108 ± 1.08 × 108 | 11.8 × 106 |
| Diff control | 7.10 × 108 ± 1.44 × 108 | 1.7 × 106 |
| Diff Dex | 1.03 × 109 ± 0.109 × 109 | 2.2 × 106 |
Prol control proliferating condition, control, Prol Dex proliferating condition, dexamethasone, Diff control differentiated condition, control, Diff Dex differentiated condition, dexamethasone. Despite having 5- to 6-fold more cells in the proliferating groups, approximately similar total signal intensities were detected
Fig. 1a Peak sum of peak areas in relation to the proliferation control (Prol control) group. Left, total peak sum in relation to the total amount of Prol control. Right, the ratio of peak sum to cell count in relation to the ratio of Prol control. Bars represent group averages. Error bars depict the standard deviation. b Principal component analysis plot of the four experimental conditions. PC1 separates cell condition (proliferative/differentiated), whereas PC2 separates Dex treatment and control. The QC shows that there was no shift during analysis. n(Prol control) = 5, n(Prol Dex) = 5, n(Diff control) = 6, n(Diff Dex) = 6.
Fig. 2Hierarchical clustering heat map of all confirmed intracellular metabolites after polar extraction. Group averages for each metabolite were z-normalized and depicted in a color code. Dendrograms were generated with Euclidean distance measure and Ward’s clustering algorithm. n(Prol control) = 5, n(Prol Dex) = 5, n(Diff control) = 6, n(Diff Dex) = 6
Fig. 3Log2 fold changes of metabolites in medium due to Dex treatment in different conditions (proliferative/differentiated). The asterisk (*) indicates a significant difference (p < 0.05) in the fold change within the group by ANOVA with Fisher's least significant difference post-hoc test. n(Prol control) = 6, n(Prol Dex) = 6, n(Diff control) = 6, n(Diff Dex) = 6
Fig. 4Log2 fold changes of metabolites in cells due to Dex treatment in different conditions (proliferative/differentiated). The asterisk (*) indicates a significant (p < 0.05) difference in the fold change within the group by ANOVA with Fisher's least significant difference post-hoc test. n(Prol control) = 5, n(Prol Dex) = 5, n(Diff control) = 6, n(Diff Dex) = 6