Advertisement

Metabolomics

, 14:6 | Cite as

Metabolomic prediction of endometrial cancer

  • Ray O. Bahado-Singh
  • Amit Lugade
  • Jayson Field
  • Zaid Al-Wahab
  • BeomSoo Han
  • Rupasri Mandal
  • Trent C. Bjorndahl
  • Onur Turkoglu
  • Stewart F. Graham
  • David Wishart
  • Kunle Odunsi
Original Article

Abstract

Introduction

Endometrial cancer (EC) is associated with metabolic disturbances including obesity, diabetes and metabolic syndrome. Identifying metabolite biomarkers for EC detection has a crucial role in reducing morbidity and mortality.

Objective

To determine whether metabolomic based biomarkers can detect EC overall and early-stage EC.

Methods

We performed NMR and mass spectrometry based metabolomic analyses of serum in EC cases versus controls. A total of 46 early-stage (FIGO stages I–II) and 10 late-stage (FIGO stages III–IV) EC cases constituted the study group. A total of 60 unaffected control samples were used. Patients and controls were divided randomly into a discovery group (n = 69) and an independent validation group (n = 47). Predictive algorithms based on biomarkers and demographic characteristics were generated using logistic regression analysis.

Results

A total of 181 metabolites were evaluated. Extensive changes in metabolite levels were noted in the EC versus the control group. The combination of C14:2, phosphatidylcholine with acyl-alkyl residue sum C38:1 (PCae C38:1) and 3-hydroxybutyric acid had an area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUC) (95% CI) = 0.826 (0.706–0.946) and a sensitivity = 82.6%, and specificity = 70.8% for EC overall. For early EC prediction: BMI, C14:2 and PC ae C40:1 had an AUC (95% CI) = 0.819 (0.689–0.95) and a sensitivity = 72.2% and specificity = 79.2% in the validation group.

Conclusions

EC is characterized by significant perturbations in important cellular metabolites. Metabolites accurately detected early-stage EC cases and EC overall which could lead to the development of non-invasive biomarkers for earlier detection of EC and for monitoring disease recurrence.

Keywords

Endometrial cancer Metabolomics Biomarker Nuclear magnetic resonance Mass spectrometry 

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no potential conflicts of interest.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. The study protocol was approved by the IRB - I 03103 “RPCI Data Bank and BioRepository (DBBR)”. Samples and de-identified clinical data was distributed for analysis under RPCI IRB-approved protocol BDR 048414 “Metabolomic analysis of gynecologic and non-gynecologic cancers: a pilot study”.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Supplementary material

11306_2017_1290_MOESM1_ESM.docx (111 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 110 KB)
11306_2017_1290_MOESM2_ESM.docx (130 kb)
Supplementary material 2 (DOCX 129 KB)
11306_2017_1290_MOESM3_ESM.docx (90 kb)
Supplementary material 3 (DOCX 90 KB)
11306_2017_1290_MOESM4_ESM.docx (77 kb)
Supplementary material 4 (DOCX 77 KB)
11306_2017_1290_MOESM5_ESM.docx (79 kb)
Supplementary material 5 (DOCX 79 KB)
11306_2017_1290_MOESM6_ESM.docx (120 kb)
Supplementary material 6 (DOCX 119 KB)
11306_2017_1290_MOESM7_ESM.docx (312 kb)
Supplementary material 7 (DOCX 312 KB)
11306_2017_1290_MOESM8_ESM.docx (105 kb)
Supplementary material 8 (DOCX 105 KB)

References

  1. Ambrosone, C. B., Nesline, M. K., & Davis, W. (2006). Establishing a cancer center data bank and biorepository for multidisciplinary research. Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention: A Publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology, 15(9), 1575–1577.  https://doi.org/10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-06-0628.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Antonsen, S. L., Hogdall, E., Christensen, I. J., Lydolph, M., Tabor, A., Loft Jakobsen, A., et al (2013). HE4 and CA125 levels in the preoperative assessment of endometrial cancer patients: A prospective multicenter study (ENDOMET). Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica, 92(11), 1313–1322.  https://doi.org/10.1111/aogs.12235.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Bahado-Singh, R. O., Akolekar, R., Mandal, R., Dong, E., Xia, J., Kruger, M., et al. (2012). Metabolomics and first-trimester prediction of early-onset preeclampsia. The Journal of Maternal-Fetal & Neonatal Medicine: The Official Journal of the European Association of Perinatal Medicine, The Federation of Asia and Oceania Perinatal Societies, The International Society of Perinatal Obstetricians, 25(10), 1840–1847.  https://doi.org/10.3109/14767058.2012.680254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bahado-Singh, R. O., Akolekar, R., Mandal, R., Dong, E., Xia, J., Kruger, M., et al. (2013). First-trimester metabolomic detection of late-onset preeclampsia. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2012.11.003.Google Scholar
  5. Bu, Q., Huang, Y., Yan, G., Cen, X., & Zhao, Y. L. (2012). Metabolomics: a revolution for novel cancer marker identification. Combinatorial Chemistry & High Throughput Screening, 15(3), 266–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Fujiwaki, R., Hata, K., Nakayama, K., Fukumoto, M., & Miyazaki, K. (2000). Gene expression for dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase and thymidine phosphorylase influences outcome in epithelial ovarian cancer. Journal of Clinical Oncology: Official Journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, 18(23), 3946–3951.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Furberg, A. S., & Thune, I. (2003). Metabolic abnormalities (hypertension, hyperglycemia and overweight), lifestyle (high energy intake and physical inactivity) and endometrial cancer risk in a Norwegian cohort. International Journal of Cancer, 104(6), 669–676.  https://doi.org/10.1002/ijc.10974.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Furness, S., Roberts, H., Marjoribanks, J., Lethaby, A., Hickey, M., & Farquhar, C. (2009). Hormone therapy in postmenopausal women and risk of endometrial hyperplasia. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews.  https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD000402.pub3.Google Scholar
  9. Garcia, E., Andrews, C., Hua, J., Kim, H. L., Sukumaran, D. K., Szyperski, T., et al. (2011). Diagnosis of early stage ovarian cancer by 1H NMR metabonomics of serum explored by use of a microflow NMR probe. Journal of Proteome Research, 10(4), 1765–1771.  https://doi.org/10.1021/pr101050d.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  10. Gaudet, M. M., Falk, R. T., Stevens, R. D., Gunter, M. J., Bain, J. R., Pfeiffer, R. M., et al. (2012). Analysis of serum metabolic profiles in women with endometrial cancer and controls in a population-based case-control study. The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism, 97(9), 3216–3223.  https://doi.org/10.1210/jc.2012-1490.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  11. Hastie, T., Tibshirani, R., & Friedman, J. H. (2001). The elements of statistical learning: Data mining, inference, and prediction. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hsieh, C. H., ChangChien, C. C., Lin, H., Huang, E. Y., Huang, C. C., Lan, K. C., et al. (2002). Can a preoperative CA 125 level be a criterion for full pelvic lymphadenectomy in surgical staging of endometrial cancer? Gynecologic Oncology, 86(1), 28–33.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Liesenfeld, D. B., Habermann, N., Owen, R. W., Scalbert, A., & Ulrich, C. M. (2013). Review of mass spectrometry-based metabolomics in cancer research. Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention: A Publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology, 22(12), 2182–2201.  https://doi.org/10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-13-0584.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Nagrath, D., Caneba, C., Karedath, T., & Bellance, N. (2011). Metabolomics for mitochondrial and cancer studies. Biochimica et Biophysica Acta, 1807(6), 650–663.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbabio.2011.03.006.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Odunsi, K. (2007). Cancer diagnostics using 1H-NMR-based metabonomics. Ernst Schering Foundation Symposium Proceedings, 4, 205–226.Google Scholar
  16. Odunsi, K., Wollman, R. M., Ambrosone, C. B., Hutson, A., McCann, S. E., Tammela, J., et al. (2005). Detection of epithelial ovarian cancer using 1H-NMR-based metabonomics. International Journal of Cancer, 113(5), 782–788.  https://doi.org/10.1002/ijc.20651.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Patel, S., & Ahmed, S. (2015). Emerging field of metabolomics: big promise for cancer biomarker identification and drug discovery. Journal of Pharmaceutical and Biomedical Analysis, 107, 63–74.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpba.2014.12.020.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Renehan, A. G., Tyson, M., Egger, M., Heller, R. F., & Zwahlen, M. (2008). Body-mass index and incidence of cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective observational studies. Lancet, 371(9612), 569–578.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(08)60269-X.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Staff, A. C., Trovik, J., Eriksson, A. G., Wik, E., Wollert, K. C., Kempf, T., et al. (2011). Elevated plasma growth differentiation factor-15 correlates with lymph node metastases and poor survival in endometrial cancer. Clinical Cancer Research: An Official Journal of the American Association for Cancer Research, 17(14), 4825–4833.  https://doi.org/10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-11-0715.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Tibshirani, R. (1996). Regression shrinkage and selection via the lasso. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Methodological), 58(1), 267–288.Google Scholar
  21. Turkoglu, O., Zeb, A., Graham, S., Szyperski, T., Szender, J. B., Odunsi, K., et al. (2016). Metabolomics of biomarker discovery in ovarian cancer: A systematic review of the current literature. Metabolomics, 12(4), 60.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11306-016-0990-0.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  22. Urayama, S., Zou, W., Brooks, K., & Tolstikov, V. (2010). Comprehensive mass spectrometry based metabolic profiling of blood plasma reveals potent discriminatory classifiers of pancreatic cancer. Rapid Communications in Mass Spectrometry: RCM, 24(5), 613–620.  https://doi.org/10.1002/rcm.4420.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Vorkas, P. A., Shalhoub, J., Lewis, M. R., Spagou, K., Want, E. J., Nicholson, J. K., et al. (2016). Metabolic phenotypes of carotid atherosclerotic plaques relate to stroke risk: An exploratory study. European Journal of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery: The Official Journal of the European Society for Vascular Surgery, 52(1), 5–10.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejvs.2016.01.022.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Werner, H. M., & Salvesen, H. B. (2014). Current status of molecular biomarkers in endometrial cancer. Current Oncology Reports, 16(9), 403.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11912-014-0403-3.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Wishart, D. S. (2010). Computational approaches to metabolomics. Methods in Molecular Biology, 593, 283–313.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-60327-194-3_14.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Wishart, D. S., Tzur, D., Knox, C., Eisner, R., Guo, A. C., Young, N., et al. (2007). HMDB: the human metabolome database. Nucleic Acids Research, 35(Database issue), D521–D526.  https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkl923.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  27. Xia, J., Broadhurst, D. I., Wilson, M., & Wishart, D. S. (2013). Translational biomarker discovery in clinical metabolomics: An introductory tutorial. Metabolomics, 9(2), 280–299.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11306-012-0482-9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Xia, J., Mandal, R., Sinelnikov, I. V., Broadhurst, D., & Wishart, D. S. (2012). MetaboAnalyst 2.0: A comprehensive server for metabolomic data analysis. Nucleic Acids Research, 40(Web Server issue), W127–W133.  https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gks374.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  29. Xia, J., Psychogios, N., Young, N., & Wishart, D. S. (2009). MetaboAnalyst: a web server for metabolomic data analysis and interpretation. Nucleic Acids Research, 37(Web Server issue), W652–W660.  https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkp356.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ray O. Bahado-Singh
    • 1
  • Amit Lugade
    • 2
  • Jayson Field
    • 3
  • Zaid Al-Wahab
    • 3
  • BeomSoo Han
    • 4
  • Rupasri Mandal
    • 4
  • Trent C. Bjorndahl
    • 4
  • Onur Turkoglu
    • 1
  • Stewart F. Graham
    • 1
  • David Wishart
    • 4
    • 5
  • Kunle Odunsi
    • 2
    • 6
  1. 1.Department of Obstetrics and GynecologyWilliam Beaumont HealthRoyal OakUSA
  2. 2.Center for ImmunotherapyRoswell Park Cancer InstituteBuffaloUSA
  3. 3.Department of Gynecologic OncologyWilliam Beaumont HealthRoyal OakUSA
  4. 4.Departments of Biological SciencesUniversity of AlbertaEdmontonCanada
  5. 5.Department of Computing SciencesUniversity of AlbertaEdmontonCanada
  6. 6.Department of Gynecologic OncologyRoswell Park Cancer InstituteBuffaloUSA

Personalised recommendations