| Literature DB >> 35456991 |
Nicola Antonio di Meo1, Davide Loizzo1,2, Savio Domenico Pandolfo2,3, Riccardo Autorino2, Matteo Ferro4, Camillo Porta5, Alessandro Stella5, Cinzia Bizzoca6, Leonardo Vincenti6, Felice Crocetto7, Octavian Sabin Tataru8, Monica Rutigliano1, Michele Battaglia1, Pasquale Ditonno1, Giuseppe Lucarelli1.
Abstract
Metabolomic analysis has proven to be a useful tool in biomarker discovery and the molecular classification of cancers. In order to find new biomarkers, and to better understand its pathological behavior, bladder cancer also has been studied using a metabolomics approach. In this article, we review the literature on metabolomic studies of bladder cancer, focusing on the different available samples (urine, blood, tissue samples) used to perform the studies and their relative findings. Moreover, the multi-omic approach in bladder cancer research has found novel insights into its metabolic behavior, providing excellent start-points for new diagnostic and therapeutic strategies. Metabolomics data analysis can lead to the discovery of a "signature pathway" associated with the progression of bladder cancer; this aspect could be potentially valuable in predictions of clinical outcomes and the introduction of new treatments. However, further studies are needed to give stronger evidence and to make these tools feasible for use in clinical practice.Entities:
Keywords: biomarker; bladder cancer; metabolomics
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35456991 PMCID: PMC9030452 DOI: 10.3390/ijms23084173
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Mol Sci ISSN: 1422-0067 Impact factor: 6.208
Summary of molecular subtypes of non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer.
| Refs. | Staging | Differentiation | Marker | Subtypes | Main Genes Mutated | Prognosis |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| [ | NMIBC | Luminal | UPKS PPARG, GRHL3, BAMBISPINK1 | Class I | FGF3 | Good |
| UPKs, PPARG. KRT20,GRHL3, BAMBI, SPINK1 | Class II | TP53, ERCC2, APOBEC | Poor | |||
| Basal | KRT5, KRT14,KRT15,CD44 | Class III | FGF3 | Intermediate/Poor | ||
| [ | MIBC | Luminal | KRT20, UPK1A, | Papillary (LumP) | FGF3, TP53 | Good |
| Non-specified (LumNS) | ELF3, TP53 | Poor | ||||
| Unstable (LumU) | PPARG, ERBB2 | Intermediate | ||||
| Basal | KRT5/6, KRT14, | Stroma-Rich | TP53, RB1 | Intermediate | ||
| Basal/Squamous (Ba/Sq) | Poor | |||||
| Neuronal | CGA, CD56, | Neuroendocrine-like (NE-like) | TP53, RB1 | Poor |
APOBEC: apolipoprotein B MRNA-editing enzyme catalytic subunit; BAMBI: BMP and activin membrane-bound inhibitor; KRT: cytokeratin; UPK: uroplakin; PPAR: peroxisome proliferation-activated receptor gamma; CGA: glycoprotein hormones, alpha polypeptide; CD: cluster differentiation; ESR: estrogen receptor beta; ELF: E74-like ETS transcription factor; ERBB: erythroblastic oncogene B; ERCC2: excision repair 2, FGF: fibroblast growth factor; FOX: forkhead box; GATA: GATA-binding protein; GRHL: grainyhead-like transcription factor; RB: retinoblastoma transcriptional corepressor; SPINK: serine peptidase inhibitor, Kazal type; STAT: signal transducer activation of transcription; TFIIH: core complex helicase subunit; TP: tumor protein.
Summary of MS techniques—separation-coupled and NMR coupled.
| Technique | Employment | Pros | Cons |
|---|---|---|---|
| GC-MS | Detection and quantification of a wide range of metabolites (volatiles and non-volatiles) without modifications. | High resolution, fit for complex biological samples. | Not effective on thermolabile compounds. Difficulties with the identification of unknown compounds. |
| LC-MS | Detection and quantification of strongly to slightly polar metabolites. | High sensitivity, good resolution, effective on thermolabile compounds. | Need to reduce volatility and to reduce the potential loss of metabolites. |
| CE-MS | Detection and quantification of polar metabolites with small sample volumes. | Small volumes with high resolutions. | Complexity when identifying compounds and buffer incompatibility. |
| NMR-MS | Detection and quantification of monomolecular organic compounds in a large, broad spectrum, using 1H, 13C, and 31P (naturally abundant in biological samples). | Feasible in a wide range of processes for qualitative and quantitative evaluation through a non-biased, fast, and reusable technique. | Cost, and low sensitivity for metabolite detection. |