| Literature DB >> 35208224 |
Eric C Gier1, Alexis N Pulliam2, David A Gaul1,3, Samuel G Moore1,3, Michelle C LaPlaca2,3, Facundo M Fernández1,3.
Abstract
Traumatic brain injury (TBI) poses a major health challenge, with tens of millions of new cases reported globally every year. Brain damage resulting from TBI can vary significantly due to factors including injury severity, injury mechanism and exposure to repeated injury events. Therefore, there is need for robust blood biomarkers. Serum from Sprague Dawley rats was collected at several timepoints within 24 h of mild single or repeat closed head impacts. Serum samples were analyzed via ultra-high-performance liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry (UHPLC-MS) in positive and negative ion modes. Known lipid species were identified through matching to in-house tandem MS databases. Lipid biomarkers have a unique potential to serve as objective molecular measures of injury response as they may be liberated to circulation more readily than larger protein markers. Machine learning and feature selection approaches were used to construct lipid panels capable of distinguishing serum from injured and uninjured rats. The best multivariate lipid panels had over 90% cross-validated sensitivity, selectivity, and accuracy. These mapped onto sphingolipid signaling, autophagy, necroptosis and glycerophospholipid metabolism pathways, with Benjamini adjusted p-values less than 0.05. The novel lipid biomarker candidates identified provide insight into the metabolic pathways altered within 24 h of mild TBI.Entities:
Keywords: animal model; closed head injury; lipidomics; mild traumatic brain injury; ultra-performance liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry
Year: 2022 PMID: 35208224 PMCID: PMC8878543 DOI: 10.3390/metabo12020150
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Metabolites ISSN: 2218-1989
Figure 1Overview of study design, data processing, feature selection and identification. (A) Experimental groups included both male (n = 14) and female (n = 18) sexes and were assigned to sham controls that received no injuries (n = 11), single impact that received one closed head impact (n = 10), or repeat impact that received three separate closed head impacts (n = 11). (B) Injury groups and whole blood collection. (C) Workflow illustrating LC-MS data collection in both positive and negative ion modes (D) Peak alignment, picking and integration were accomplished using Compound Discoverer v.3.0, a Thermo Scientific software. (E) Identification of known lipid species using MSMS spectra collected with data-dependent acquisition (DDA) and in-house databases. (F) Multivariate model development and feature selection using machine learning methods to identify features most relevant to differentiating control and TBI classes. (G) Features identified by two or more machine learning approaches were combined to create the final oPLS-DA models. (H) Features selected in the final panels were imported into LIPEA to determine alignment of lipids with biological pathways altered following TBI.
Figure 2Cloud plot generated in the XCMS web-based application showing positive ion mode retention time versus m/z of features with high fold change and statistical significance between injured (green) and uninjured (red) models. The black traces outline chromatographic retention time on the x-axis and m/z values on the y-axis for each sample. Each bubble in the plot corresponds to one metabolite feature with fold change at or above 1.5 and a p-value at or below 0.05 using a Welch’s t-test. The color and size of each bubble denote the directionality and magnitude of fold change, respectively, with larger bubbles representing larger fold changes. Darker bubbles correspond to features with greater statistical significance. Features with m/z values above 2100 are truncated for ease of visibility.
Figure 3Spider plots of all identified lipids, grouped by lipid classes, shown over the time course of injury progression. Each main lipid class segment contains all three post-injury timepoints, with red, green, and blue bars corresponding to 30 min, 4 and 24 h post-injury timepoints, respectively. Circles within the spider plot correspond to 100 total identified lipids, with the central bold circle corresponding to the zero line. Each post-injury timepoint bar shows the total number of lipids that exhibited either increased median fold change in TBI samples from baseline and fell above the zero line or decreased in TBI samples and fell below the zero line. Darker colors indicate the total number of features with statistically significant changes from baseline after Benjamini–Hochberg correction, and are shown at the tip of each segment. (A) Analysis of identified lipids in the repeat (3×) impact injury model and (B) analysis of identified lipids in the single (1×) impact injury model. Car—acyl carnitines, CE—cholesteryl esters, Cer—ceramides, DG—diacylglycerols, FA—fatty acids, LPC—lysophosphatidylcholine, LPE—lysophosphatidylethanolamine, LPS—lysophosphatidylserine, PC—phosphatidylcholine, PE—phosphatidylethanolamine, PI—phosphatidylinositol, PS—phosphatidylserine, SM—sphingomyelin, TG—triacylglycerol.
Figure 4PCA score plots for all identified lipid species. The distribution of samples in principal component space shows separation between male and female animals along the diagonal of PC1 and PC2 with some overlap between injured and uninjured samples.
Classifier performance and selected features used to build models for distinguishing serum-derived lipids from injured and uninjured animals. Classifier and feature selection pairs were run independently for male and female animals. Cross-validation estimates were calculated using the average area under the curve (AUC) of five random subsets and served to evaluate performance of each model on previously unseen data. When models were trained on the full dataset (all samples), AUC estimates approached unity. Features selected by two or more feature selection methods are shown in bold and were used to create the final classification models.
| Classifier | Feature Selection Method | Sex | Number of Features | Cross-Validation Estimate, AUC (SD) | All Samples, AUC | Selected Features |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Linear SVM | RFE | M | 27 | 0.875 (0.133) | 0.980 | |
| Logistic Regression | RFE | M | 24 | 0.840 (0.174) | 0.992 | 88, |
| oPLS-DA | GA | M | 31 | 0.941 (0.062) | 1.000 | 17, |
| oPLS-DA | iPLS | M | 20 | 0.891 (0.090) | 0.992 | 61, 101, |
| Linear SVM | RFE | F | 28 | 0.766 (0.140) | 0.953 | |
| Logistic Regression | RFE | F | 29 | 0.752 (0.120) | 0.976 | |
| oPLS-DA | GA | F | 29 | 0.949 (0.156) | 0.993 | |
| oPLS-DA | iPLS | F | 24 | 0.880 (0.110) | 0.943 |
Figure 5(A) PCA and (B) oPLS-DA score plot of the 20-lipid panel differentiating sera from injured and uninjured male animals with 2 orthogonal components. (C) PCA and (D) oPLS-DA score plot of the 19-lipid panel differentiating sera from injured and uninjured female animals with 2 orthogonal components. Both panels were created with 10 iterations of Venetian blinds cross-validation and 200 iterations of permutation testing. Both procedures supported a lack of evidence for overfitting.
a: Annotation of the final 20-lipid panel in male rats. b: Annotation of final 19-lipid panel in female rats. Retention time, observed exact mass with instrumental error, observed electrospray adduct, predicted elemental formula, significant p-values for timepoints between repeat TBI and baseline, and fold change (FC) are reported. Positive FC values correspond to increased abundance in serum from injured animals vs. baseline samples, and negative FC values correspond to decreased abundance in injured animals. Fatty acid chain information is provided based on MS/MS information. Detailed MS/MS fragmentation information is provided in the supporting information (Table S2a,b).
| Feature Number | Retention Time (min) | Detected Ion | Elemental Formula | Annotation | Fold Change | Time | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||||||
| 63 | 8.893 | 716.6343 | [M+NH4]+ | C49H78O2 | CE(22:5) | 0.0655 | 1.340 | 4 h |
| 89 | 7.303 | 652.6605 | [M+H]+ | C42H85NO3 | Cer(d18:0/24:0) | 0.0292 | −1.553 | 4 h |
| 258 | 2.186 | 601.3349 | [M+H]+ | C27H53O12P | LysoPI(18:0) | 0.0147 | 1.190 | 24 h |
| 365 | 5.442 | 800.6168 | [M+H]+ | C45H86NO8P | PC(18:2_19:0) | 0.245 | −1.042 | 30 min |
| 453 | 4.982 | 880.6071 | [M+HCO2]− | C48H86NO8P | PC(18:0_22:5) | 0.0483 | 1.207 | 4 h * |
| 459 | 4.742 | 878.5919 | [M+HCO2]− | C48H84NO8P | PC(18:0_22:6) | 0.0198 | 1.192 | 4 h |
| 476 | 4.337 | 846.6008 | [M+H]+ | C49H84NO8P | PC(41:7) | 0.0323 | 1.425 | 4 h |
| 497 | 4.127 | 858.6014 | [M+H]+ | C50H84NO8P | PC(42:8) | 0.249 | 1.070 | 4 h |
| 527 | 4.773 | 718.5752 | [M+H]+ | C40H80NO7P | PC(O-16:1/16:0) | 0.146 | −1.603 | 4 h |
| 543 | 4.326 | 816.5910 | [M+H]+ | C48H82NO7P | PC(O-18:2_22:6) | 0.0375 | 1.493 | 30 min * |
| 551 | 5.557 | 772.6218 | [M+H]+ | C44H86NO7P | PC(O-18:1/18:1) | 0.277 | 1.035 | 30 min |
| 570 | 5.768 | 798.6379 | [M+H]+ | C46H88NO7P | PC(O-38:3) | 0.221 | 1.054 | 24 h |
| 601 | 4.317 | 818.6062 | [M+H]+ | C48H84NO7P | PC(O-18:1/22:6) | 0.00800 | 1.607 | 4 h ** |
| 651 | 5.588 | 704.5591 | [M+H]+ | C39H78NO7P | PE(O-34:1) | 0.0156 | −1.605 | 4 h * |
| 652 | 6.297 | 704.5590 | [M+H]+ | C39H78NO7P | PE(O-18:1/16:0) | 0.0144 | −1.656 | 4 h * |
| 788 | 3.676 | 689.5595 | [M+H]+ | C38H77N2O6P | SM(d33:1) | 0.0953 | 1.153 | 24 h |
| 792 | 3.978 | 703.5759 | [M+H]+ | C39H79N2O6P | SM(d34:1) | 0.0335 | 1.296 | 24 h |
| 808 | 3.613 | 727.5758 | [M+H]+ | C41H79N2O6P | SM(d36:3) | 0.000266 | 1.632 | 4 h * |
| 1095 | 8.758 | 984.8954 | [M+NH4]+ | C63H114O6 | TG(60:4) | 0.221 | −1.648 | 24 h |
| 1114 | 9.754 | 1014.9420 | [M+NH4]+ | C65H120O6 | TG(18:1_20:1_24:1) | 0.0275 | −1.446 | 4 h |
|
| ||||||||
| 8 | 0.811 | 246.1701 | [M+H]+ | C12H23NO4 | Car(5:0) | 0.0137 | −1.374 | 30 min |
| 27 | 1.325 | 414.3215 | [M+H]+ | C23H43NO5 | Car(16:1-OH) | 0.0932 | 1.660 | 4 h |
| 35 | 1.701 | 442.3528 | [M+H]+ | C25H47NO5 | Car(18:1-OH) | 0.00239 | 2.019 | 4 h |
| 103 | 7.349 | 708.6512 | [M+HCO2]− | C43H85NO3 | Cer(d18:1/25:0) | 0.182 | 1.260 | 4 h |
| 282 | 3.997 | 718.5386 | [M+H]+ | C39H76NO8P | PE(16:0_18:1) | 0.00113 | −2.354 | 4 h ** |
| 328 | 4.598 | 772.5858 | [M+H]+ | C43H82NO8P | PC(17:0_18:2) | 0.156 | −1.407 | 24 h |
| 346 | 4.434 | 784.5856 | [M+H]+ | C44H82NO8P | PC(18:1_18:2) | 0.0471 | −1.381 | 24 h |
| 348 | 4.471 | 828.5764 | [M+HCO2]− | C44H82NO8P | PC(16:0_20:3) | 0.215 | 1.183 | 24 h |
| 388 | 5.752 | 814.6323 | [M+H]+ | C46H88NO8P | PC(18:0_20:2) | 0.113 | 1.077 | 24 h |
| 437 | 4.243 | 864.5763 | [M+HCO2]− | C47H82NO8P | PC(17:0_22:6) | 0.0510 | 1.112 | 24 h |
| 455 | 4.646 | 880.6078 | [M+HCO2]− | C48H86NO8P | PC(18:0_22:5) | 0.125 | 1.382 | 30 min |
| 620 | 4.510 | 742.5392 | [M+H]+ | C41H76NO8P | PE(18:1_18:2) | 0.00600 | −2.169 | 24 h ** |
| 757 | 1.899 | 838.5572 | [M+Na]+ | C44H82NO10P | PS(38:2) | 0.150 | −1.357 | 24 h |
| 813 | 5.578 | 759.6379 | [M+H]+ | C43H87N2O6P | SM(d16:0_ 22:1) | 0.00597 | 1.456 | 4 h * |
| 825 | 5.316 | 771.6381 | [M+H]+ | C44H87N2O6P | SM(d39:2) | 0.0143 | 1.619 | 24 h |
| 874 | 1.840 | 302.3054 | [M+H]+ | C18H39NO2 | Sphinganine (C18) | 0.131 | −1.281 | 4 h |
| 875 | 1.699 | 300.2898 | [M+H]+ | C18H37NO2 | Sphingosine (C18) | 0.205 | −1.508 | 24 h |
| 989 | 8.176 | 898.7861 | [M+NH4]+ | C57H100O6 | TG(18:1_18:2_18:2) | 0.0128 | −2.530 | 4 h |
| 1110 | 8.837 | 998.9114 | [M+NH4]+ | C64H116O6 | TG(61:4) | 0.000911 | −2.341 | 4 h * |
* Feature held statistical significance at one other timepoint under repeat TBI vs. baseline comparison; ** Feature held statistical significance at all timepoints under repeat TBI vs. baseline comparison.
Figure 6LIPEA pathway analysis for lipids contained within the final feature selection panels. The percentage of all KEGG pathway lipids discovered, shown along the x-axis, represents the number of final panel lipids belonging to a specific pathway out of the total number of known pathway lipids. Each of the identified pathways held statistical significance after Benjamini–Hochberg correction (q < 0.10). Colored pathway bubbles denote the total number of lipids in both final panels that can be linked to each pathway. ECS—endocannabinoid signaling, GPL—glycerophospholipid, SL—sphingolipid.