Showing paper detailed information
Citation Information
J Proteome Res. 2021 Sep 3;20(9):4346-4356. doi: 10.1021/acs.jproteome.1c00310. Epub 2021 Aug 3.
High-Throughput Salivary Metabolite Profiling on an Ultralow Noise Tip-Enhanced Laser Desorption Ionization Mass Spectrometry Platform for Noninvasive Diagnosis of Early Lung Cancer.
Jiang X, Chen X, Chen Z, Yu J, Lou H, Wu J.
Analytical methods | ||
|---|---|---|
| Comparative study | #1 | |
| Chromatography | – | |
| Ion source | MALDI | |
| Positive/Negative mode | negative | |
| Mass analyzer | TOF/TOF | |
| Identification level | MS/MS | |
Sample information | ||
|---|---|---|
| Comparative study | #1 | |
| Country | China | |
| Specimen | Saliva | |
| Marker function | diagnosis | |
| Participants(Case) | Cancer type | lung cancer |
| Stage | I | |
| Number | 45 | |
| Gender (M,F) | 16, 29 | |
| Mean age (range) (M,F) | Median: 57.8 | |
| Smoking status | smoker, non-smoker | |
| Participants(Control) | Type | healthy |
| Number | 25 | |
| Gender (M,F) | 10, 15 | |
| Mean age (range) (M,F) | Median: 52.9 | |
| Smoking status | smoker, non-smoker | |
Data processing and metabolite identification | |
|---|---|
| Data processing software | FlexAnalysis, ClinproTools software, R script |
| Database search | HMDB |
Statistical analysis | |
|---|---|
| Differential analysis method | Student’s t-test, PCA, Cluster analysis by Matlab. OPLS-DA |
| Classification method | ROC analysis |
| Survival analysis method | – |
Lung cancer-related metabolites identified in the paper
| Metabolite | Author-emphasized biomarkers | Mean concentration (case) | Mean concentration (control) | Fold change (case/control) | P-value | FDR | VIP |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GABA | – | – | – | – | 1.27e-04 | 3.90e-04 | 1.04 |
| serine | – | – | – | – | 7.70e-17 | 1.37e-15 | 1.85 |
| cytosine | – | – | – | – | 1.12e-14 | 1.64e-13 | 1.93 |
| uracil | – | – | – | – | 1.53e-09 | 8.47e-09 | 1.69 |
| creatinine | – | – | – | – | 2.15e-05 | 7.42e-05 | 1.18 |
| proline | – | – | – | – | 2.04e-04 | 6.05e-04 | 1.88 |
| valine | – | – | – | – | 3.87e-13 | 3.21e-12 | 1.61 |
| pyroglutamic xa0acid | – | – | – | – | 2.81e-07 | 1.32e-06 | 1.38 |
| ketoleucine | – | – | – | – | 3.90e-11 | 2.62e-10 | 1.66 |
| adenine | – | – | – | – | 1.99e-13 | 1.77e-12 | 1.72 |
| imidazolepropionicxa0acid | – | – | – | – | 4.57e-15 | 7.11e-14 | 1.86 |
| allysine | – | – | – | – | 5.87e-07 | 2.48e-06 | 1.43 |
| Phenylglyoxylicxa0acid | – | – | – | – | 1.82e-13 | 1.68e-12 | 1.72 |
| guanine | – | – | – | – | 4.77e-11 | 3.04e-10 | 1.58 |
| xanthine | – | – | – | – | 9.95e-30 | 1.24e-27 | 2.45 |
| 3-hydroxyanthranilic xa0acid | – | – | – | – | 3.85e-05 | 1.30e-04 | 1.14 |
| gentisicxa0acid | – | – | – | – | 1.03e-17 | 1.97e-16 | 2.04 |
| NAcetylproline | – | – | – | – | 4.03e-12 | 2.95e-11 | 1.74 |
| arginine | – | – | – | – | 9.74e-09 | 5.05e-08 | 1.41 |
| NAcetyltaurine | – | – | – | – | 7.42e-41 | 1.85e-38 | 2.74 |
| N-acetyl-L-glutamic xa0acid | – | – | – | – | 7.82e-27 | 4.87e-25 | 2.39 |
| N-acetylhistidine | – | – | – | – | 1.21e-10 | 7.53e-10 | 1.61 |
| glycylphenylalanine | – | – | – | – | 1.92e-22 | 5.98e-21 | 2.27 |
| Metabolite | Author-emphasized biomarkers | Cutoff value | AUROC (95%CI) | Sensitivity (%) | Specificity (%) | Accuracy (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GABA | – | – | 0.986 (Combination) | 97.2 (Combination) | 92% (Combination) | – |
| serine | – | – | 0.986 (Combination) | 97.2 (Combination) | 92% (Combination) | – |
| cytosine | – | – | 0.986 (Combination) | 97.2 (Combination) | 92% (Combination) | – |
| uracil | – | – | 0.986 (Combination) | 97.2 (Combination) | 92% (Combination) | – |
| creatinine | – | – | 0.986 (Combination) | 97.2 (Combination) | 92% (Combination) | – |
| proline | – | – | 0.986 (Combination) | 97.2 (Combination) | 92% (Combination) | – |
| valine | – | – | 0.986 (Combination) | 97.2 (Combination) | 92% (Combination) | – |
| pyroglutamic xa0acid | – | – | 0.986 (Combination) | 97.2 (Combination) | 92% (Combination) | – |
| ketoleucine | – | – | 0.986 (Combination) | 97.2 (Combination) | 92% (Combination) | – |
| adenine | – | – | 0.986 (Combination) | 97.2 (Combination) | 92% (Combination) | – |
| imidazolepropionicxa0acid | – | – | 0.986 (Combination) | 97.2 (Combination) | 92% (Combination) | – |
| allysine | – | – | 0.986 (Combination) | 97.2 (Combination) | 92% (Combination) | – |
| Phenylglyoxylicxa0acid | – | – | 0.986 (Combination) | 97.2 (Combination) | 92% (Combination) | – |
| guanine | – | – | 0.986 (Combination) | 97.2 (Combination) | 92% (Combination) | – |
| xanthine | – | – | 0.986 (Combination) | 97.2 (Combination) | 92% (Combination) | – |
| 3-hydroxyanthranilic xa0acid | – | – | 0.986 (Combination) | 97.2 (Combination) | 92% (Combination) | – |
| gentisicxa0acid | – | – | 0.986 (Combination) | 97.2 (Combination) | 92% (Combination) | – |
| NAcetylproline | – | – | 0.986 (Combination) | 97.2 (Combination) | 92% (Combination) | – |
| arginine | – | – | 0.986 (Combination) | 97.2 (Combination) | 92% (Combination) | – |
| NAcetyltaurine | – | – | 0.986 (Combination) | 97.2 (Combination) | 92% (Combination) | – |
| N-acetyl-L-glutamic xa0acid | – | – | 0.986 (Combination) | 97.2 (Combination) | 92% (Combination) | – |
| N-acetylhistidine | – | – | 0.986 (Combination) | 97.2 (Combination) | 92% (Combination) | – |
| glycylphenylalanine | – | – | 0.986 (Combination) | 97.2 (Combination) | 92% (Combination) | – |
Paper graphical summary
