Protein biomarkers for multiple sclerosis: semi-quantitative analysis of cerebrospinal fluid candidate protein biomarkers in different forms of multiple sclerosis
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online August, 2012
Protein biomarkers for multiple sclerosis: semi-quantitative analysis of cerebrospinal fluid candidate protein biomarkers in different forms of multiple sclerosis
The complex pathogenesis of multiple sclerosis, combined with an unpredictable prognosis, requires identification of disease-specific diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers.
Objective:
To determine whether inflammatory proteins, such as neurofilament light chain, myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein and myelin basic protein, and neurodegenerative proteins, such as tau and glial fibrillary acidic protein, can serve as biomarkers for predicting the clinical subtype and prognosis of MS.
Methods:
Cerebrospinal fluid and serum samples were collected from patients with a diagnosis of clinically isolated syndrome (n = 46), relapsing–remitting MS (n = 67) or primary-progressive MS (n = 22) along with controls having other non-inflammatory neurological disease (n = 22). Western blot analyses were performed for the listed proteins. Protein levels were compared among different clinical subtypes using one-way analysis of variance analysis. The k-nearest neighbour algorithm was further used to assess the predictive use of these proteins for clinical subtype classification.
Results:
The results showed that each of tau, GFAP, MOG and NFL protein concentrations differed significantly (p < 0.001) in multiple sclerosis clinical subtypes compared with the controls. Levels of the proteins also differed between the multiple sclerosis clinical subtypes, which may be associated with the underlying disease process. Classification studies revealed that these proteins might be useful for identifying multiple sclerosis clinical subtypes.
Conclusions:
We showed that select biomarkers may have potential in identifying multiple sclerosis clinical subtypes. We also showed that the predictive value of the prognosis increased when using a combination of the proteins versus using them individually.
LucchinettiCBrückWParisiJ, et al. Heterogeneity of multiple sclerosis lesions: implications for the pathogenesis of demyelination. Ann Neurol2000; 47: 707–717.
2.
SivaA. The spectrum of multiple sclerosis and treatment decisions. Clin Neurol Neurosurg2006; 108: 333–338.
3.
PetersonLKFujinamiRS. Inflammation, demyelination, neurodegeneration and neuroprotection in the pathogenesis of multiple sclerosis. J Neuroimmunol2007; 184: 37–44.
4.
BergerTReindlM. Multiple sclerosis: disease biomarkers as indicated by pathophysiology. J Neurol Sci2007; 259: 21–26.
5.
ImitolaJChitnisTKhourySJ. Insights into the molecular pathogenesis of progression in multiple sclerosis: potential implications for future therapies. Arch Neurol2006; 63: 25–33.
BrückWSchmiedMSuchanekG, et al. Oligodendrocytes in the early course of multiple sclerosis. Ann Neurol1994; 35: 65–73.
8.
LucchinettiCFBrückWRodriguezM, et al. Distinct patterns of multiple sclerosis pathology indicates heterogeneity in pathogenesis. Brain Pathol1996; 6: 259–274.
9.
LublinFDReingoldSCand National Multiple Sclerosis Society Advisory Committee on Clinical Trials of New Agents in Multiple Sclerosis. Defining the clinical course of multiple sclerosis: results of an international survey. Neurology1996; 46: 907–911.
10.
FioriniMZanussoGBenedettiMD, et al. Cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers in clinically isolated syndromes and multiple sclerosis. Proteomics Clin Appl2007; 1: 963–971.
11.
BielekovaBMartinR. Development of biomarkers in multiple sclerosis. Brain2004; 127: 1463–1478.
12.
OttervaldJFranzénBNilssonK, et al. Multiple sclerosis: identification and clinical evaluation of novel CSF biomarkers. J Proteomics2010; 73: 1117–1132.
13.
DumontDNobenJ-PRausJ, et al. Proteomic analysis of cerebrospinal fluid from multiple sclerosis patients. Proteomics2004; 4: 2117–2124.
14.
HammackBNFungKYHunsuckerSW, et al. Proteomic analysis of multiple sclerosis cerebrospinal fluid. Mult Scler2004; 10: 245–260.
15.
StoevringBVangOChristiansenM. [alpha]B-crystallin in cerebrospinal fluid of patients with multiple sclerosis. Clin Chim Acta2005; 356: 95–101.
16.
TeunissenCEIacobaeusEKhademiM, et al. Combination of CSF N-acetylaspartate and neurofilaments in multiple sclerosis. Neurology2009; 72: 1322–1329.
17.
PålB-HBodvarVMagneF, et al. Calprotectin levels in the cerebrospinal fluid reflect disease activity in multiple sclerosis. J Neuroimmunol2009; 216: 98–102.
18.
SellebjergFBornsenLKhademiM, et al. Increased cerebrospinal fluid concentrations of the chemokine CXCL13 in active MS. Neurology2009; 73: 2003–2010.
19.
WagnerMNaikDPothenA, et al. Computational protein biomarker prediction: a case study for prostate cancer. BMC Bioinform2004; 5: 26.
20.
SomanTBobbieP. Classification of arrhythmia using machine learning techniques. WSEAS Trans Comp2005; 4: 548–552.
21.
PolmanCHReingoldSCEdanG, et al. Diagnostic criteria for multiple sclerosis: 2005 revisions to the ‘McDonald Criteria’. Ann Neurol2005; 58: 840–846.
22.
PetersonGL. A simplification of the protein assay method of Lowry et al. which is more generally applicable. Anal Biochem1977; 83: 346–356.
23.
JiangLHeLFountoulakisM. Comparison of protein precipitation methods for sample preparation prior to proteomic analysis. J Chromatogr A2004; 1023: 317–320.
24.
BurnetteWN. ‘Western blotting’: electrophoretic transfer of proteins from sodium dodecyl sulfate-polyacrylamide gels to unmodified nitrocellulose and radiographic detection with antibody and radioiodinated protein A. Anal Biochem1981; 112: 195–203.
25.
KrugerNJ. The Bradford method for protein quantitation. In: WalkerJM (ed.). The protein protocols handbook. Humana Press, 1996, pp. 15–20
26.
MarkusRSabrinaKRainerE, et al. Serum and cerebrospinal fluid antibodies to Nogo-A in patients with multiple sclerosis and acute neurological disorders. J Neuroimmunol2003; 145: 139–147.
27.
LavračN. Machine learning for data mining in medicine. In: HornWShaharYLindbergG, et al. (eds). Artificial intelligence in medicine. Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer, 1999, pp. 47–62.
28.
FreundYSchapireRAbeN. A short introduction to boosting. J Jap Soc Art Intell1999; 14: 771–780.
29.
HallMFrankEHolmesG, et al. The WEKA data mining software: an update. SIGKDD Explor Newsl2009; 11: 10–18.
30.
LarranagaPCalvoBSantanaR, et al. Machine learning in bioinformatics. Brief Bioinform2006; 7: 86.
31.
BradleyAP. The use of the area under the ROC curve in the evaluation of machine learning algorithms. Patt Recog1997; 30: 1145–1159.
32.
MazurowskiMAHabasPAZuradaJM, et al. Training neural network classifiers for medical decision making: the effects of imbalanced datasets on classification performance. Neural Netw21: 427–436.
33.
ZaffaroniM. Biological indicators of the neurodegenerative phase of multiple sclerosis. Neurol Sci2003; 24: s279–s282.
34.
RostasyKWithutEPohlD, et al. Tau, phospho-tau, and S-100B in the cerebrospinal fluid of children with multiple sclerosis. J Child Neurol2005; 20: 822–825.
35.
Martínez-YélamosASaizABasJ, et al. Tau protein in cerebrospinal fluid: a possible marker of poor outcome in patients with early relapsing–remitting multiple sclerosis. Neurosci Lett2004; 363: 14–17.
36.
KapakiEParaskevasGPMichalopoulouM, et al. Increased cerebrospinal fluid tau protein in multiple sclerosis. Eur Neurol2000; 43: 228–232.
37.
KosikK. Tau protein and neurodegeneration. Mol Neurobiol1990; 4: 171–179.
38.
LiedtkeWEdelmannWBieriPL, et al. GFAP Is necessary for the integrity of CNS white matter architecture and long-term maintenance of myelination. Neuron1996; 17: 607–615.
39.
EngLF. Glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP): the major protein of glial intermediate filaments in differentiated astrocytes. J Neuroimmunol1985; 8: 203–214.
40.
RosengrenLELyckeJAndersenO. Glial fibrillary acidic protein in CSF of multiple sclerosis patients: relation to neurological deficit. J Neurol Sci1995; 133: 61–65.
41.
AxelssonMMalmeströmCNilssonS, et al. Glial fibrillary acidic protein: a potential biomarker for progression in multiple sclerosis. J Neurol2010: 1–7.
42.
PetzoldAEikelenboomMJGvericD, et al. Markers for different glial cell responses in multiple sclerosis: clinical and pathological correlations. Brain2002; 125: 1462–1473.
43.
LyckeJNKarlssonJ-EAndersenO, et al. Neurofilament protein in cerebrospinal fluid: a potential marker of activity in multiple sclerosis. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry1998; 64: 402–404.
44.
MalmeströmCHaghighiSRosengrenL, et al. Neurofilament light protein and glial fibrillary acidic protein as biological markers in MS. Neurology2003; 61: 1720–1725.
45.
TrappBDPetersonJRansohoffRM, et al. Axonal transection in the lesions of multiple sclerosis. New Engl J Med1998; 338: 278–285.
46.
NorgrenNSundströmPSvenningssonA, et al. Neurofilament and glial fibrillary acidic protein in multiple sclerosis. Neurology2004; 63: 1586–1590.
47.
LalivePHMengeTDelarasseC, et al. Antibodies to native myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein are serologic markers of early inflammation in multiple sclerosis. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA2006; 103: 2280–2285.
48.
BergerTRubnerPSchautzerF, et al. Antimyelin antibodies as a predictor of clinically definite multiple sclerosis after a first demyelinating event. New Engl J Med2003; 349: 139–145.
HarauzGIshiyamaNHillCMD, et al. Myelin basic protein – diverse conformational states of an intrinsically unstructured protein and its roles in myelin assembly and multiple sclerosis. Micron2004; 35: 503–542.
52.
AnnunziataPPluchinoSMartinoT, et al. High levels of cerebrospinal fluid IgM binding to myelin basic protein are associated with early benign course in multiple sclerosis. J Neuroimmunol1997; 77: 128–133.
53.
ChamczukAJUrsellMO’ConnorP, et al. A rapid ELISA-based serum assay for myelin basic protein in multiple sclerosis. J Immunol Meth2002; 262: 21–27.
