Showing paper detailed information
Citation Information
Sci Rep. 2015 Feb 25;5:8607. doi: 10.1038/srep08607.
Plasma metabolite profiling and chemometric analyses of lung cancer along with three controls through gas chromatography-mass spectrometry.
Musharraf SG, Mazhar S, Choudhary MI, Rizi N, Atta-ur-Rahman.
Analytical methods | ||
|---|---|---|
| Comparative study | #1 | |
| Chromatography | GC | |
| Ion source | EI | |
| Positive/Negative mode | – | |
| Mass analyzer | triple quadrupole | |
| Identification level | – | |
Sample information | ||
|---|---|---|
| Comparative study | #1 | |
| Country | Pakistan | |
| Specimen | plasma | |
| Marker function | – | |
| Participants(Case) | Cancer type | adenocarcinoma, squamous cell carcinoma, SCLC, NSCLC, lung cancer |
| Stage | I, II, III | |
| Number | 96 | |
| Gender (M,F) | – | |
| Mean age (range) (M,F) | – | |
| Smoking status | – | |
| Participants(Control) | Type | healthy |
| Number | 384.0 | |
| Gender (M,F) | – | |
| Mean age (range) (M,F) | – | |
| Smoking status | – | |
Data processing and metabolite identification | |
|---|---|
| Data processing software | Agilent Mass Hunter Qualitative Analysis, Mass Hunter |
| Database search | Wiley registry NIST 11, Fiehn RTL libraries |
Statistics and concentration information | |
|---|---|
| Differential analysis method | one way ANOVA, Turkey’s honest Significance Difference |
| Classification method | Hierarchical clustering, Partial Least Square Discrimination |
| Survival analysis method | – |
Metabolites identified in the paper
| Metabolite | Comparative study | Author-emphasized biomarkers | Mean concentration (case) | Mean concentration (control) | Fold change (case/control) | P-value | FDR | VIP |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| altrose | – | – | – | – | 51519.4653027583 | 0.001 | – | – |
| benzoic acid | – | – | – | – | 30348.3403082544 | 0.001 | – | – |
| D-glucose | – | – | – | – | 111939.524579634 | 0.001 | – | – |
| lactic acid | – | – | – | – | 33086.8424909471 | 0.001 | – | – |
| octadecanoic acid | – | – | – | – | 8233.15687386947 | 0.001 | – | – |
| palmitic acid | – | – | – | – | 364785.78854355 | 0.001 | – | – |
| stearic acid | – | – | – | – | 357826.324090908 | 0.001 | – | – |
| 1-propene | – | – | – | – | 0.206499472297055 | 5.55e-21 | – | – |
| naphthalene | – | – | – | – | 38.4119686460894 | 4.98e-23 | – | – |
| phosphoric acid | – | – | – | – | 2669.45589959065 | 4.46e-34 | – | – |
| cholesterol | – | – | – | – | 175648.289281136 | 0 | – | – |
| Metabolite | Comparative study | Author-emphasized biomarkers | Cutoff value | AUROC (95%CI) | Sensitivity (%) | Specificity (%) | Accuracy (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| altrose | – | – | – | – | 96.2 | 92 | 93.1 |
| benzoic acid | – | – | – | – | 96.2 | 92 | 93.1 |
| D-glucose | – | – | – | – | 96.2 | 92 | 93.1 |
| lactic acid | – | – | – | – | 96.2 | 92 | 93.1 |
| octadecanoic acid | – | – | – | – | 96.2 | 92 | 93.1 |
| palmitic acid | – | – | – | – | 96.2 | 92 | 93.1 |
| stearic acid | – | – | – | – | 96.2 | 92 | 93.1 |
| 1-propene | – | – | – | – | 96.2 | 92 | 93.1 |
| naphthalene | – | – | – | – | 96.2 | 92 | 93.1 |
| phosphoric acid | – | – | – | – | 96.2 | 92 | 93.1 |
| cholesterol | – | – | – | – | 96.2 | 92 | 93.1 |
Paper graphical summary
