Journal of Clinical and Translational Science (Apr 2024)

488 From discovery to the clinical laboratory: a methodological appraisal of untargeted metabolomics platforms to characterize inborn errors of metabolism.

  • Rachel Wurth,
  • Coleman Turgeon,
  • Zinandré Stander,
  • Devin Oglesbee

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1017/cts.2024.414
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 8
pp. 144 – 144

Abstract

Read online

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: Untargeted metabolomics platforms are powerful biomarker discovery tools. However, the absence of uniform study design, data analysis, and reporting standards limits translation of this research into the clinical lab. The goal was to critically appraise existing untargeted metabolomics platforms that analyzed inborn errors of metabolism. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: A search strategy was conducted in MEDLINE via PubMed from January 16, 2013, to January 16, 2023. The search strategy was limited to primary literature articles written in English that evaluated human subjects with inborn errors of metabolism (IEMs). Articles that performed targeted metabolomic analysis or analyzed non-human samples were excluded. Information on patient cohorts analyzed, sample types, and method design were extracted using a template. Categorical data are summarized as frequencies and percentages. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: A total of 96 distinct IEMs were evaluated by the different untargeted metabolomics methods included in this review. However, most IEMs (55/96, 57%) were evaluated by a single platform, in a single study, with a limited cohort size. Only one study validated their results using a separate, validation cohort. There was considerable diversity in the separation techniques and mass spectrometry instrumentation used by the studies to create their untargeted metabolomics methods. Slightly over half (59%) of the studies identified at least some of the metabolites detected in their samples with the highest level of confidence. Importantly, most of the included studies reported adherence to quality metrics, including use of quality control material (65%) and internal standards in their analysis (61%). DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: Future studies analyzing IEM patient samples with untargeted metabolomics platforms should progress beyond single-subject studies and evaluate the reproducibility of the research using a prospective, or validation cohort as well as confirm metabolite annotations with reference metabolites standards to generate clinically useful data.