4.6 Article

Improved Dried Blood Spot-Based Metabolomics: A Targeted, Broad-Spectrum, Single-Injection Method

期刊

METABOLITES
卷 10, 期 3, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/metabo10030082

关键词

metabolomics; dried blood spots; targeted; broad-Spectrum; MELAS

资金

  1. UCSD Christini Fund
  2. Lennox Foundation
  3. UCSD Mitochondrial Disease Research Fund
  4. Jane Botsford-Johnson Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Dried blood spots (DBS) have proven to be a powerful sampling and storage method for newborn screening and many other applications. However, DBS methods have not yet been optimized for broad-spectrum targeted metabolomic analysis. In this study, we developed a robust, DBS-based, broad-spectrum, targeted metabolomic method that was able to measure over 400 metabolites from a 6.3 mm punch from standard Whatman 903(TM) filter paper cards. The effects of blood spot volumes, hematocrit, vacutainer chemistry, extraction methods, carryover, and comparability with plasma and fingerstick capillary blood samples were analyzed. The stability of over 400 metabolites stored under varying conditions over one year was also tested. No significant impacts of blood volume and hematocrit variations were observed when the spotted blood volume was over 60 mu L and the hematocrit was between 31% and 50%. The median area under the curve (AUC) of metabolites in the DBS metabolome declined by 40% in the first 3 months and then did not decline further for at least 1 year. All originally detectable metabolites remained within detectable limits. The optimal storage conditions for metabolomic analysis were -80 degrees C with desiccants and without an O-2 scavenger. The method was clinically validated for its potential utility in the diagnosis of the mitochondrial disease mitochondrial encephalomyopathy, lactic acidosis, and stroke-like episodes (MELAS). Our method provides a convenient alternative to freezing, storing, and shipping liquid blood samples for comparative metabolomic studies.

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

4.6
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