4.2 Article

Serum Metabolomics Analysis of Asthma in Different Inflammatory Phenotypes: A Cross-Sectional Study in Northeast China

期刊

BIOMED RESEARCH INTERNATIONAL
卷 2018, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

HINDAWI LTD
DOI: 10.1155/2018/2860521

关键词

-

资金

  1. Graduate Innovation Fund of Jilin University [2017139]
  2. Provincial School Co-Construction Industrialization Demonstration Project of Jilin Province [SXGJSF2017-1-1(01)]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background and Objective. Asthma as a chronic heterogeneous disease seriously affects the quality of life. Incorrect identification for its clinical phenotypes lead to a huge waste of medical resources. Metabolomic technique as a novel approach to explore the pathogenesis of diseases have not been used to study asthma based on their clear defined inflammatory phenotypes. This study is aimed to distinguish the divergent metabolic profile in different asthma phenotypes and clarify the pathogenesis of them. Methods. Participants including eosinophilic asthmatics (EA, n=13), noneosinophilic asthmatics (NEA, n=16), and healthy controls (HC, n=15) were enrolled. A global profile of untargeted serum metabolomics was identified with Ultra Performance Liquid Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry technique. Results. Multivariate analysis was performed and showed a clear distinction between EA, NEA, and HC. A total of 18 different metabolites were recognized between the three groups based on OPLS-DA model and involved in 10 perturbed metabolic pathways. Glycerophospholipid metabolism, retinol metabolism, and sphingolipid metabolism were identified as the most significant changed three pathways (impact > 0.1 and -log(P) > 4) between the phenotypes. Conclusions. We showed that the different inflammatory phenotypes of asthma involve the immune regulation, energy, and nutrients metabolism. The clarified metabolic profile contributes to understanding the pat hophysiology of asthma phenotypes and optimizing the therapeutic strategy against asthma heterogeneity.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据