| Literature DB >> 34489947 |
Yijun Shi1, Yaowei Ding1, Guoge Li1, Lijuan Wang1,2,3, Rasha Alsamani Osman1, Jialu Sun1, Lingye Qian1, Guanghui Zheng1,2,3, Guojun Zhang1,2,3.
Abstract
Objective: Here, we aimed to identify protein biomarkers that could rapidly and accurately diagnose multiple sclerosis (MS) using a highly sensitive proteomic immunoassay.Entities:
Keywords: IGFBP7; SST; biomarker; differentially expressed proteins; multiple sclerosis; proteomics
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34489947 PMCID: PMC8417809 DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2021.700031
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Immunol ISSN: 1664-3224 Impact factor: 7.561
Demographic and clinical data for the participates included in the study.
| Variable | Discovery Cohort | Validation Cohort | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MS (N = 10) | NINCs (N = 10) | MS (N = 40) | NINCs (N = 40) | HC (N = 40) | ||
| RRMS (N = 23) | SPMS (N = 17) | |||||
| N, CSF; Serum | 10; 0 | 10; 0 | 23; 23 | 17; 17 | 40; 0 | 0; 40 |
| Age (year), mean ± SD | 32.9 ± 10.4 | 41.9 ± 15.9 | 39.8 ± 14.0 | 33.1 ± 11.3 | 36.6 ± 9.9 | 38.2 ± 11.6 |
| Male (%) | 4 (40%) | 6 (60%) | 8 (34.8%) | 6 (35.3%) | 13 (32.5%) | 14 (35%) |
| Disease duration (year), mean ± SD | 4.3 ± 4.1 | – | 3.6 ± 3.8 | 14.2 ± 8.1 | – | – |
| EDSS, mean ± SD | 2.5 ± 1.2 | – | 2.8 ± 1.5 | 5.4 ± 1.2 | – | – |
| MRI lesion | – | – | – | |||
| 0-8 lesions, n, n% | 4, 40.0% | 13, 56.5% | 7, 41.2% | |||
| ≥9 lesions, n, n% | 6, 60.0% | 10, 43.5% | 10, 58.8% | |||
Figure 1Volcano plot (A) and heatmap (B) of patients with MS vs NINCs. (A) The volcano plot was drawn using two factors, the fold change (Log2) between the two groups of samples and the p-value (−Log10) obtained from the t-test, to show the significance of differences in the data between the two groups of samples. The orange dots and blue dots in the figure are proteins that were significantly upregulated and downregulated, respectively; the gray dots are proteins with no significant difference. (B) Hierarchical clustering analysis of DEPs in CSF between patients with MS (orange) and NINCs (blue). Each row in the figure represents a protein, and each column represents a sample. Red, high expression; dark blue, low expression. Two main clusters of proteins were observed, one of which was downregulated and one of which upregulated in patients with MS.
Figure 2GO (A) and KEGG pathway analyses (B) of MS-related proteins. Classification of 83 DEPs based on biological processes, molecular functions, cellular components (A) and KEGG pathways (B). (A) The abscissa represents the number of DEPs in each functional classification. (B) The ordinate represents the significantly enriched KEGG pathway, and the abscissa represents the number of genes enriched in the KEGG pathway/total number of genes. The colors in the figure indicate the magnitude of the p-value. The size of the point represents the gene number.
Figure 3Direct PPI network. Sixty of the 83 DEPs were predicted to participate in direct PPIs, and the interactions were based on the ‘evidence’ mode and a moderate level of confidence. Nodes represent proteins and edges represent PPIs. The degree determines the node size, where orange represents upregulated and blue represents downregulated.
Figure 4Dot Plots showing levels of IGFBP7, SST and IGF2 in serum and CSF samples of MS and controls. (A) IGFBP7 measurements in the serum and CSF of patients with MS and controls. (B) SST measurements in the serum and CSF of patients with MS and controls. (C) IGF2 measurements in the serum and CSF of patients with MS and controls. For simplicity, only significant differences are shown. Statistical significance was defined as ***P < 0.001.
Figure 5IGFBP7 and SST measurements in study subjects. (A) IGFBP7 measurements in the serum and CSF of patients with RRMS and SPMS. (B) SST measurements in the serum and CSF of patients with RRMS and SPMS. For simplicity, only significant differences are shown. Statistical significance was defined as *P < 0.05.
Figure 6Comparison and correlation between IGFBP7 in the serum and matched CSF of MS patients. (A) IGFBP7 measurements in CSF and matched serum samples collected from 40 patients. (B) Correlation plots between CSF and serum IFGBP7 in individual MS patients (n=40). Pearson’s correlation coefficients (R) and P-values are shown. Statistical significance was defined as ***P < 0.001.
Diagnostic value of SST and IGFBP7 in MS.
| Biomarkers | AUC (95% CI) | |
|---|---|---|
| MS | RRMS | |
| CSF SST | 0.986 (0.966-1.000)* | 0.552 (0.363-0.742) |
| Serum SST | 0.578 (0.451-0.704) | 0.506 (0.320-0.693) |
| CSF IGFBP7 | 0.931 (0.871-0.992)* | 0.707 (0.542-0.872)* |
| Serum IGFBP7 | 0.770 (0.664-0.876)* | 0.747 (0.580-0.894)* |
*P < 0.05.
Figure 7The diagnostic value of IGFBP7 and SST in MS. (A) ROC curvers for diagosing MS. (B) ROC curves for distinguishing SPMS from RRMS.
Biomarker characteristics.
| Biomarkers | MS | RRMS | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cut-off point* (ng/mL) | Sensitivity (%) | Specificity (%) | Cut-off point* (ng/mL) | Sensitivity (%) | Specificity (%) | |
| CSF SST | 2.0 | 97.5% | 92.5% | 0.4 | 58.8% | 65.2% |
| Serum SST | 12.3 | 37.5% | 82.5% | 12.1 | 47.1% | 69.6% |
| CSF IGFBP7 | 13.8 | 90% | 87.5% | 17.2 | 58.8% | 78.3% |
| Serum IGFBP7 | 3.7 | 80% | 67.5% | 4.3 | 76.5% | 69.6% |
*Cut-off point=maximum of (sensitivity + specificity -1).