4.6 Article

Correlation of Metabolic Profiles of Plasma and Cerebrospinal Fluid of High-Grade Glioma Patients

期刊

METABOLITES
卷 11, 期 3, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/metabo11030133

关键词

glioma; metabolomics; liquid chromatography; tandem mass spectrometry; plasma; cerebrospinal fluid

资金

  1. Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Russian Federation [FSUS-2020-0035]
  2. [0259-2021-0009]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Comparing the metabolic profiles of plasma and cerebrospinal fluid in patients with high-grade gliomas and healthy controls revealed significant correlations in the majority of metabolites. While some metabolites showed high correlation in control samples, this was not observed in glioma patients, possibly due to specific metabolic processes or damaged blood-brain barrier. These findings may contribute to understanding the molecular mechanisms of glioma development and identifying potential biomarkers for minimally invasive diagnostic procedures.
This work compares the metabolic profiles of plasma and the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) of the patients with high-grade (III and IV) gliomas and the conditionally healthy controls using the wide-range targeted screening of low molecular metabolites by HPLC-MS/MS. The obtained data were analyzed using robust linear regression with Huber's M-estimates, and a number of metabolites with correlated content in plasma and CSF was identified. The statistical analysis shows a significant correlation of metabolite content in plasma and CSF samples for the majority of metabolites. Several metabolites were shown to have high correlation in the control samples, but not in the glioma patients. This can be due to the specific metabolic processes in the glioma patients or to the damaged integrity of blood-brain barrier. The results of our study may be useful for the understanding of molecular mechanisms underlying the development of gliomas, as well as for the search of potential biomarkers for the minimally invasive diagnostic procedures of gliomas.

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