Metabolite information |
|
| HMDB ID | HMDB0000954 |
| Synonyms |
(2E)-3-(4-Hydroxy-3-methoxyphenyl)-2-propenoate(2E)-3-(4-Hydroxy-3-methoxyphenyl)-2-propenoic acid(e)-3-(4-Hydroxy-3-methoxyphenyl)-2-propenoate(e)-3-(4-Hydroxy-3-methoxyphenyl)-2-propenoic acid(e)-4'-Hydroxy-3'-methoxycinnamate(e)-4'-Hydroxy-3'-methoxycinnamic acid(e)-4-Hydroxy-3-methoxy-cinnamate(e)-4-Hydroxy-3-methoxy-cinnamic acid(e)-4-Hydroxy-3-methoxycinnamate(e)-4-Hydroxy-3-methoxycinnamic acid(e)-Ferulate(e)-Ferulic acid3-(4-Hydroxy-3-methoxyphenyl)propenoate3-(4-Hydroxy-3-methoxyphenyl)propenoic acid3-Methoxy-4-hydroxy-trans-cinnamate3-Methoxy-4-hydroxy-trans-cinnamic acid4-Hydroxy-3-methoxycinnamate4-Hydroxy-3-methoxycinnamic acid8,8'-Diferulic acidFerulateFerulic acidFerulic acid, (Z)-isomerFerulic acid, (e)-isomerFerulic acid, monosodium saltSodium ferulatetrans-4-Hydroxy-3-methoxycinnamatetrans-4-Hydroxy-3-methoxycinnamic acidtrans-Ferulate |
| Chemical formula | C10H10O4 |
| IUPAC name | (2E)-3-(4-hydroxy-3-methoxyphenyl)prop-2-enoic acid |
| CAS registry number | 537-98-4 |
| Monoisotopic molecular weight | 194.057908808 |
Chemical taxonomy |
|
| Super class | Phenylpropanoids and polyketides |
| Class | Cinnamic acids and derivatives |
| Sub class | Hydroxycinnamic acids and derivatives |
Biological properties |
|
| Pathways (Pathway Details in HMDB) |
|
| Reference | Country | Specimen | Marker function | Participants (Case) | Participants (Control) | |||||||||
| Cancer type | Stage | Number | Gender (M,F) | Age mean (range) (M/F) | Smoking status | Type | Number | Gender (M,F) | Age mean (range) (M/F) | Smoking status | ||||
| Chen et al. 2015b | China | serum | – | lung cancer (postoperative) | – | 30 | – | 61.58 ± 10.67 | – | healthy | 30 | – | 60.35 ± 12.48 | – |
| Chen et al. 2015b | China | serum | – | lung cancer | – | 30 | – | 61.58 ± 10.67 | – | before vs. after treatment (operation) | 30 | – | 61.58 ± 10.67 | – |
| Xiang et al. 2018 | China | plasma | diagnosis | squamous cell carcinoma | I, II, III, IV | 25 | 21, 4 | 59.8 (43-83) | former, current, non-smoker | healthy | 56 | 35, 21 | 58 (47-80) | former, current, non-smoker |
| Xiang et al. 2018 | China | plasma | diagnosis | adenocarcinoma | I, II, III, IV | 24 | 10, 14 | 59 (43-71) | former, current, non-smoker | healthy | 56 | 35, 21 | 59 (42-79) | former, current, non-smoker |
| Xiang et al. 2018 | China | plasma | diagnosis | adenocarcinoma | I, II, III, IV | 28 | 16, 12 | 59 (44-80) | former, current, non-smoker | healthy | 56 | 35, 21 | 58 (47-80) | former, current, non-smoker |
| Xiang et al. 2018 | China | plasma | diagnosis | squamous cell carcinoma | I, II, III, IV | 22 | 16, 6 | 60.5 (42-73) | former, current, non-smoker | healthy | 56 | 35, 21 | 59 (42-79) | former, current, non-smoker |
| Reference | Chromatography | Ion source | Positive/Negative mode | Mass analyzer | Identification level |
| Chen et al. 2015b | LC | ESI | positive | Q-TOF | – |
| Chen et al. 2015b | LC | ESI | positive | Q-TOF | – |
| Xiang et al. 2018 | LC | ESI | both | LTQ-FT | – |
| Xiang et al. 2018 | LC | ESI | both | LTQ-FT | – |
| Xiang et al. 2018 | LC | ESI | both | LTQ-FT | – |
| Xiang et al. 2018 | LC | ESI | both | LTQ-FT | – |
| Reference | Data processing software | Database search |
| Chen et al. 2015b | Mass Hunter Qualitative Analysis Software (Agilent Technologies) | METLIN |
| Chen et al. 2015b | Mass Hunter Qualitative Analysis Software (Agilent Technologies) | METLIN |
| Xiang et al. 2018 | Analyst software | – |
| Xiang et al. 2018 | Analyst software | – |
| Xiang et al. 2018 | Analyst software | – |
| Xiang et al. 2018 | Analyst software | – |
| Reference | Difference method | Mean concentration (case) | Mean concentration (control) | Fold change (case/control) | P-value | FDR | VIP |
| Chen et al. 2015b | PCA, PLS-DA, independent t test | – | – | 2.93 | 1.00e-03 | – | 1.11 |
| Chen et al. 2015b | PCA, PLS-DA, independent t test | – | – | 0.39 | 4.00e-03 | – | 1.06 |
| Xiang et al. 2018 | independent sample t-tests, OPLS-DA | – | – | 5.97 | 3.06e-10 | – | 1.30 |
| Xiang et al. 2018 | independent sample t-tests, OPLS-DA | – | – | 5.11 | 4.93e-08 | – | 1.67 |
| Xiang et al. 2018 | independent sample t-tests, OPLS-DA | – | – | 4.47 | 2.13e-08 | – | 1.46 |
| Xiang et al. 2018 | independent sample t-tests, OPLS-DA | – | – | 4.45 | 3.38e-07 | – | 1.39 |
| Reference | Classification method | Cutoff value | AUROC 95%CI | Sensitivity (%) | Specificity (%) | Accuracy (%) |
| Chen et al. 2015b | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| Chen et al. 2015b | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| Xiang et al. 2018 | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| Xiang et al. 2018 | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| Xiang et al. 2018 | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| Xiang et al. 2018 | – | – | – | – | – | – |