| Literature DB >> 35406630 |
Qingqing Wang1,2, Yexiong Tan3, Tianyi Jiang3, Xiaolin Wang1, Qi Li1, Yanli Li1, Liwei Dong3, Xinyu Liu1, Guowang Xu1.
Abstract
Hepatocarcinogenesis is frequently accompanied by substantial metabolic reprogramming to maximize the growth and proliferation of cancer cells. In this study, we carried out a comprehensive study of metabolomics and lipidomics profiles combined with gene expression analysis to characterize the metabolic reprogramming in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Compared with adjacent noncancerous liver tissue, the enhanced aerobic glycolysis and de novo lipogenesis (DNL) and the repressed urea cycle were underscored in HCC tissue. Furthermore, multiscale embedded correlation analysis was performed to construct differential correlation networks and reveal pathologically relevant molecule modules. The obtained hub nodes were further screened according to the maximum biochemical diversity and the least intraclass correlation. Finally, a panel of ornithine, FFA 18:1, PC O-32:1 and TG (18:1_17:1_18:2) was generated to achieve the prognostic risk stratification of HCC patients (p < 0.001 by log-rank test). Altogether, our findings suggest that the metabolic dysfunctions of HCC detected via metabolomics and lipidomics would contribute to a better understanding of clinical relevance of hepatic metabolic reprogramming and provide potential sources for the identification of therapeutic targets and the discovery of biomarkers.Entities:
Keywords: hepatocellular carcinoma; lipidomics; metabolic reprogramming; metabolomics; prognosis
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35406630 PMCID: PMC8997969 DOI: 10.3390/cells11071066
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Cells ISSN: 2073-4409 Impact factor: 6.600
Clinical and pathological features of HCC patients.
| Characteristic | All | Patients with Follow-Up | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age, mean ± SD | 49.3 ± 10.9 | 49.6 ± 11 | |
| Gender, n (%) | |||
| Female | 21 (12.7%) | 19 (14.0%) | |
| Male | 144 (86.7%) | 117 (86.0%) | |
| na | 1 (0.6%) | 0 | |
| Smoking, n (%) | 80 (48.2%) | 66 (48.5%) | |
| Alcohol abuse, n (%) | 33 (19.9%) | 27 (19.9%) | |
| Family History | 34 (20.5%) | 29 (21.3%) | |
| HBsAg +, n (%) | 136 (81.9%) | 112 (82.4%) | |
| AFP, >400 μg/L, n (%) | 67 (40.4%) | 55 (40.4%) | |
| PLT (×10/L, mean ± SD) | 164.5 ± 63.4 | 165 ± 63.3 | |
| TBA (umol/L, mean ± SD) | 11.6 ± 15.4 | 10.6 ± 13.3 | |
| CEA (μg/L, mean ± SD) | 2.8 ± 2.8 | 3 ± 2.9 | |
| CA19-9 (U/mL, mean ± SD) | 19.6 ± 17.1 | 19.8 ± 17.9 | |
| Tumor Nodules, n (%) | 69 (41.6%) | 58 (42.6%) | |
| MVI, n (%) | 63 (38.0%) | 54 (39.7%) | |
| Multiple Tumor, n (%) | 26 (15.7%) | 19 (14.0%) | |
| Maximum Tumor Diameter, mean ± SD | 7.1 ± 4.6 | 7 ± 4.5 | |
| TNM Stage, n (%) | |||
| Ⅰ | 76 (45.8%) | 64 (47.1%) | |
| Ⅱ | 39 (23.5%) | 31 (22.8%) | |
| Ⅲ | 11 (6.6%) | 7 (5.1%) | |
| IV | 39 (23.5%) | 34 (25%) | |
| na | 1 (0.6%) | 0 | |
| BCLC Stage, n (%) | |||
| A | 107 (64.5%) | 91 (66.9%) | |
| B | 19 (11.4%) | 11 (8.1%) | |
| C | 39 (23.5%) | 34 (25.0%) | |
| na | 1 (0.6%) | 0 | |
| ALBI Grade, n (%) | |||
| 1 | 122 (73.5%) | 104 (76.5%) | |
| 2 | 136 (81.9%) | 29 (21.3%) | |
| na | 8 (4.8%) | 3 (2.2%) |
Data are presented as mean ± SD or n (%) values as appropriate. na: not available. Abbreviations: HBsAg, hepatitis B surface antigen; AFP, alpha-fetoprotein; PLT: platelet; TBA: total bile acids; CEA, carcinoembryonic antigen; CA 19-9: carbohydrate antigen 19-9; MVI, microvascular invasion; TNM: tumor-node-metastasis; BCLC, Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer; ALBI, albumin-bilirubin.
Figure 1Comparative metabolomics and lipidomics profiles of adjacent noncancerous tissue (ANT) and hepatocellular carcinoma tissue (HCT) samples from HCC patients. (A) Score plot of PLS-DA model for ANT samples (orange dots) and HCT samples (green dots) separation (R2X = 0.177, R2Y = 0.755, Q2 = 0.71). Volcano plots of metabolomics (B) and lipidomics data (C) discriminating ANT and HCT samples. Log2 fold change values of normalized mean peak area are plotted against the respective −log10 transformed p values. Ion features with adjusted p < 0.05 were considered as significantly differential expression. The metabolites with |fold change| > 1.5 and lipids with |fold change| > 2 are highlighted with compound name. Detected compounds were compared using a Wilcoxon Signed-rank test for matched samples and the raw p values were adjusted to false discovery rate (FDR) using the Benjamini–Hochberg method.
Figure 2Overview of the lipid biosynthetic and metabolic pathways. Colored dots represent the metabolite and lipid changes in HCT samples compared to ANT samples. Note that the pathway network has been truncated due to space restrictions.
Figure 3Association between HCC and lipid structure. (A) Heatmap of the lipid abundance changes by class between ANT and HCT samples. (B) Alteration of lipids with significant difference by carbon number and double bond number.
Figure 4Differential correlation analyses of tissue metabolites and lipids in HCT relative to ANT. Only molecule pairs with significant differential correlations (p < 0.05) are included. Sign/sign indicates the direction and strength of the correlation in HCT/ANT, and the number that follows indicates the number of molecule pairs in the global networks exhibiting this pattern of change. For instance, the red line +/+− 584 indicates that correlation between two connected molecule pairs was positive (+) in ANT, and the correlation became weaker positive (+−) in HCT. A total of 584 molecule pairs connected by red lines in the global network displayed this pattern of change (+/+−). The hub nodes are labeled with black font.
Figure 5Identification of prognostic panel and the overall survival analysis. (A) The correlation matrix of hub nodes. Values and colors represent Pearson correlation coefficients of log-transformed metabolites with significance. The unsignificant correlations (p > 0.05) are filled with white. The molecules with red font were identified to generate a prognostic panel. (B) Kaplan-Meier curve of overall survival according to the panel of hub nodes identified by MEGENA.