Inside the Personalized Medicine Toolbox: GCxGC-Mass Spectrometry for High-Throughput Profiling of the Human Plasma
Metabolome
Personalized medicine advocates have been frustrated by the issue of analyte component resolution in biomolecular profiling.
Because complex human biological samples such as plasma, serum, or urine contain ~103–107 unique molecular entities, the analyte capacity of any high-throughput platform is typically exceeded. In our attempt to
overcome this problem, we employed the use of comprehensive two-dimensional gas chromatography (GC×GC) combined with time-of-flight
mass spectrometry (TOF-MS) for high-throughput profiling of the human plasma metabolome. The profiling experiments demonstrated
the capability of a GC×GC-TOF-MS approach with regard to component resolution as well as overall utility for comparative metabolomic
analyses employing plasma samples from a "control" cohort (81 samples) versus a cardiovascular-compromised cohort (15 samples)
of individuals. The use of the GC×GC separation has resulted in a platform that provides more than an order of magnitude greater
resolving power while at the same time not affecting the overall experimental run time. Additionally, the high-throughput
approach provides information-rich datasets that can be used to distinguish the control and disease sample cohorts. Such results
suggest that high-throughput, high-coverage profiling capabilities, such as those afforded by GC×GC-TOF-MS techniques, can
impact the development of personalized medicine in which future disease prevention, diagnosis, and treatment are tailored
to an individual's unique molecular makeup. Challenges to full implementation of high-throughput metabolite profiling by GC×GC-TOF-MS
as well as future directions are discussed.
 Figure 1
|
There is widespread medical, scientific, and general public interest in the rapidly emerging field of personalized medicine
(1). The Personalized Medicine Coalition has defined one aspect of personalized medicine as the ability to manage disease
(and disease predisposition) based upon biomolecular analysis (2). As such, molecular classifications at the genome, transcriptome,
proteome, and/or metabolome levels has taken on ever more importance(2,3). This new paradigm in healthcare has lead to a race
for the identification of efficacious biomarkers, panels of biomarkers or profiles that can be used for preventative, predictive,
diagnosis, and prognosis of disease as well as assessment of overall general health and wellness (1). In part, the development
of personalized medicine has been enabled due to the advent of new analytical and computational tools not available previously.
One can envision that the new tools will provide important information to the individual patient or consumer permitting them
to make informed decisions regarding their general health and well being as well as their ability to manage disease issues
more efficiently. This is captured schematically in Figure 1.
Despite the technological developments of the past decade, the expectation of personalized medicine based upon individual
molecular analyses has been tempered somewhat, due in part to the tremendous analytical challenge presented by the complexity
of human biological samples such as plasma, sera, or urine. For example, it has been estimated that the human metabolome contains
~2000–2500 unique molecular analytes (4–6). This is considerably lower in number than the estimated human proteome (7), but
nonetheless presents a considerable analytical challenge. In addition, there is greater disparity in the physicochemical properties
of the metabolome constituents (8,9). This creates a considerable challenge in terms of utilization of a single analytical
technique to profile the human metabolome (10). Another problem is the presence of incomplete or limited databases as well
as the lack of standardization across databases. Thus, the ability to identify metabolite components based upon database searches
is hindered. A final problem is that the degree of variability in concentrations for many metabolites among different individuals
is largely unknown. Such problems are not so unlike those encountered in proteomics efforts and as such require a similar
solution: high-throughput analyses to determine metabolome variability for a large number of components. However, it has been
argued that a comprehensive understanding of the metabolome would help to discover biomarkers associated with disease as it
(metabolomics) "will more precisely take into account the effects of lifestyle, diet, and the environment" (5). Having noted the difficulties in characterizing the metabolome, it is important to consider the current analytical methods
for individual sample profiling. The most widely used techniques include 1H nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) spectroscopy, direct infusion mass spectrometry (MS), Fourier transform-infrared (FT-IR)
spectroscopy, and liquid chromatography (LC) and gas chromatography (GC) coupled with MS (10,11). Each of these techniques
has its advantages as well as its limitations and for this reason, metabolomic profiling often requires the use of multiple
approaches (10,12–17). The relatively recent technique of comprehensive two-dimensional (2D) GC (GC×GC) (18–23) is gaining
acceptance as a powerful tool for the rapid profiling of complex biological samples (24,25). In addition to the increased
peak capacity, the advantage of the approach is that the extra separation dimension reduces the congestion of eluted peaks,
thereby allowing the resolution of lower signal species (24).
The work reported here presents an evaluation of a GC×GC-TOF-MS analytical approach for human plasma metabolite profiling.
A total of 96 plasma samples have been analyzed using a rapid throughput approach requiring approximately 20 min (the separation
time is ~20 min and the cycle time is ~30 min; see the following) per sample. The analytical platform is evaluated based upon
robustness, resolving power, and metabolome coverage, and to some degree, the quality of the data. We present a comparative
metabolomics study in which the plasma metabolite profiles of 81 control cohort samples are compared to those from a cardiovascular-compromised
patient sample cohort (15 total). The limitations of the approach as they pertain to profiling efficacy and personalized medicine
as well as future directions for the technique are discussed in the following.