| Literature DB >> 35302894 |
Yida Huang1,2, Shaoqian Du3, Jun Liu3, Weiyi Huang3, Wanshan Liu1,2, Mengji Zhang1,2, Ning Li3, Ruimin Wang1,2, Jiao Wu1,2, Wei Chen1,2, Mengyi Jiang3, Tianhao Zhou3, Jing Cao1,2, Jing Yang1,2, Lin Huang1,2, An Gu1,2, Jingyang Niu1, Yuan Cao3, Wei-Xing Zong5, Xin Wang6, Jun Liu3, Kun Qian1,2, Hongxia Wang3.
Abstract
High-performance metabolic analysis is emerging in the diagnosis and prognosis of breast cancer (BrCa). Still, advanced tools are in demand to deliver the application potentials of metabolic analysis. Here, we used fast nanoparticle-enhanced laser desorption/ionization mass spectrometry (NPELDI-MS) to record serum metabolic fingerprints (SMFs) of BrCa in seconds, achieving high reproducibility and low consumption of direct serum detection without treatment. Subsequently, machine learning of SMFs generated by NPELDI-MS functioned as an efficient readout to distinguish BrCa from non-BrCa with an area under the curve of 0.948. Furthermore, a metabolic prognosis scoring system was constructed using SMFs with effective prediction performance toward BrCa (P < 0.005). Finally, we identified a biomarker panel of seven metabolites that were differentially enriched in BrCa serum and their related pathways. Together, our findings provide an efficient serum metabolic tool to characterize BrCa and highlight certain metabolic signatures as potential diagnostic and prognostic factors of diseases including but not limited to BrCa.Entities:
Keywords: breast cancer; diagnosis; mass spectrometry; prognosis; serum metabolic fingerprints
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35302894 PMCID: PMC8944253 DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2122245119
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A ISSN: 0027-8424 Impact factor: 12.779
Scheme 1.SMFs to decode BrCa. (A) Serum samples were collected from enrolled subjects and microarrayed on chips for NPELDI-MS analysis in metabolic fingerprinting. (B) Machine learning of SMFs was conducted by feature selection and model building to diagnose the BrCa group from the non-BrCa group, and a biomarker panel was identified for pathway analysis. (C) The Cox regression model was applied to build a prognosis prediction model based on SMFs. The Kaplan–Meier (KM) curve, log-rank testing, and time-dependent ROC curve analysis were conducted for survival analysis of low- and high-score groups.
Fig. 1.High-performance serum metabolite characterization by NPELDI-MS. (A) Illustration of NPELDI-MS. The Upper digital image shows the MS chips after microarray printing, and the Bottom image was recorded during NPELDI-MS. (Scale bar, 5 mm.) (B and C) Elemental mappings of the nanoparticle–analyte (His in B and BSA in C) hybrids are shown with O in yellow, Fe in purple, and C in green, respectively. The insert images were high-angle annular dark-field images of nanoparticle–analyte hybrids. (Scale bars, 200 nm.) (D) The similarity scores between 1,000 nL of pristine serum and its dilutions by 10- to 1,000-fold using 100 to 1 nL of pristine serum. The error bars were calculated as SD of five repeated experiments. (E and F) Intensities of five molecular peaks (gray line for [Ala + Na]+ at an m/z of 112.04, red line for [Lys + Na]+ at an m/z of 169.09, blue line for [Arg + Na]+ at an m/z of 197.19, green line for [Glc + Na]+ at an m/z of 203.05, and purple line for [Suc + Na]+ at an m/z of 365.11) for intrachip (ten replicates per sample) in E and interchip (five chips for 5 d, one chip per day) detection in F, respectively. (G and H) CV distribution of intensities for the apparent molecular peaks in ten serum samples (five HDs denoted as HD1 to HD5 and five BrCa patients denoted as BrCa1 to BrCa5) for intrachip (ten replicates per sample) in G and interchip detection (five chips for 5 d, one chip per day) in H, respectively.
Fig. 2.Characterization of BrCa-specific SMFs. (A) The age and stage distribution of 169 BrCa patients and age distribution of 21 BBD patients as well as 135 HDs. (B) Three typical mass spectra at the m/z range of 100 to 400 are shown for serum samples of BrCa, BBD, and HD on the Left, while the frequency distribution of similarity scores on the Right was calculated for each group by SMFs within the same group. (C) A heat map of independent metabolic fingerprints for 325 serum samples was plotted using 301 m/z signals through data preprocessing. The color scale was processed by logarithmic correction. (D) The OPLS-DA classification for the BrCa (red points), BBD (yellow points), and HD (green points) group.
Fig. 3.The machine learning model for BrCa diagnosis. (A) Workflow for building the diagnostic model. (B) The AUCs in the differentiation of BrCa compartments from non-BrCa compartments in the discovery cohort, using three typical algorithms (red line for control, blue line for EN, green line for MI, and purple line for ANOVA F) in feature selection and four typical algorithms in model building (NN, AB, RF, and DT). (C) Model evaluation of four typical machine learning algorithms (NN, AB, RF, and DT) based on 36 features selected by EN, including AUC, sensitivity, specificity, precision, and accuracy. (D and E) The ROC curves for NN modeled by features to diagnose BrCa compartments from non-BrCa compartments of the discovery cohort (D) and validation cohort (E).
Fig. 4.Prognostic prediction of BrCa based on SMFs. (A) Workflow for building the prognostic model for calculating MP-score. (B and C) Overall survival curves of patients with BrCa with low risk (red line) or high risk (black line) of death according to the MP-score (constructed via Cox regression model) in the discovery (B) and validation cohorts (C). (D and E) Time-dependent ROC and corresponding AUCs for 9-mo survival predicted by MP-score (green line) and TNM stage (orange line) in the discovery (D) and validation cohorts (E).
Fig. 5.Biomarker panel construction and pathway analysis. (A) Selection of biomarker candidates according to mean intensity (), hit frequency (f), and P value (p). (B) The violin plot illustrated the differential expression of seven metabolites between the BrCa group (red) and non-BrCa group (green), and P values (***, P < 0.001; *, P < 0.05) are indicated on the Top of each violin plot. (C) The ROC curves showed a higher AUC of 0.865 using the metabolic biomarker panel than a single metabolic biomarker (AUC of 0.680 to 0.766). (D) Score distribution of individuals from the non-BrCa group (labeled as control) and BrCa patients in stage I/II/III/IV. The lines show the average scores of each group. (E) The potential pathways that were differentially regulated in the BrCa group and non-BrCa group; each circle’s color and size were correlated to the P value and pathway impact (PI). A total of three pathways were considered with a pathway impact of >0.1 and hit number ≥1, including 1) pyrimidine metabolism, 2) nicotinate and NAM metabolism, and 3) histidine metabolism.