Cargando…

Plasma proteomic signatures of a direct measure of insulin sensitivity in two population cohorts

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: The euglycaemic–hyperinsulinaemic clamp (EIC) is the reference standard for the measurement of whole-body insulin sensitivity but is laborious and expensive to perform. We aimed to assess the incremental value of high-throughput plasma proteomic profiling in developing signatures co...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Zanetti, Daniela, Stell, Laurel, Gustafsson, Stefan, Abbasi, Fahim, Tsao, Philip S., Knowles, Joshua W., Zethelius, Björn, Ärnlöv, Johan, Balkau, Beverley, Walker, Mark, Lazzeroni, Laura C., Lind, Lars, Petrie, John R., Assimes, Themistocles L.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10390625/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37329449
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00125-023-05946-z
_version_ 1785082518470393856
author Zanetti, Daniela
Stell, Laurel
Gustafsson, Stefan
Abbasi, Fahim
Tsao, Philip S.
Knowles, Joshua W.
Zethelius, Björn
Ärnlöv, Johan
Balkau, Beverley
Walker, Mark
Lazzeroni, Laura C.
Lind, Lars
Petrie, John R.
Assimes, Themistocles L.
author_facet Zanetti, Daniela
Stell, Laurel
Gustafsson, Stefan
Abbasi, Fahim
Tsao, Philip S.
Knowles, Joshua W.
Zethelius, Björn
Ärnlöv, Johan
Balkau, Beverley
Walker, Mark
Lazzeroni, Laura C.
Lind, Lars
Petrie, John R.
Assimes, Themistocles L.
author_sort Zanetti, Daniela
collection PubMed
description AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: The euglycaemic–hyperinsulinaemic clamp (EIC) is the reference standard for the measurement of whole-body insulin sensitivity but is laborious and expensive to perform. We aimed to assess the incremental value of high-throughput plasma proteomic profiling in developing signatures correlating with the M value derived from the EIC. METHODS: We measured 828 proteins in the fasting plasma of 966 participants from the Relationship between Insulin Sensitivity and Cardiovascular disease (RISC) study and 745 participants from the Uppsala Longitudinal Study of Adult Men (ULSAM) using a high-throughput proximity extension assay. We used the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) approach using clinical variables and protein measures as features. Models were tested within and across cohorts. Our primary model performance metric was the proportion of the M value variance explained (R(2)). RESULTS: A standard LASSO model incorporating 53 proteins in addition to routinely available clinical variables increased the M value R(2) from 0.237 (95% CI 0.178, 0.303) to 0.456 (0.372, 0.536) in RISC. A similar pattern was observed in ULSAM, in which the M value R(2) increased from 0.443 (0.360, 0.530) to 0.632 (0.569, 0.698) with the addition of 61 proteins. Models trained in one cohort and tested in the other also demonstrated significant improvements in R(2) despite differences in baseline cohort characteristics and clamp methodology (RISC to ULSAM: 0.491 [0.433, 0.539] for 51 proteins; ULSAM to RISC: 0.369 [0.331, 0.416] for 67 proteins). A randomised LASSO and stability selection algorithm selected only two proteins per cohort (three unique proteins), which improved R(2) but to a lesser degree than in standard LASSO models: 0.352 (0.266, 0.439) in RISC and 0.495 (0.404, 0.585) in ULSAM. Reductions in improvements of R(2) with randomised LASSO and stability selection were less marked in cross-cohort analyses (RISC to ULSAM R(2) 0.444 [0.391, 0.497]; ULSAM to RISC R(2) 0.348 [0.300, 0.396]). Models of proteins alone were as effective as models that included both clinical variables and proteins using either standard or randomised LASSO. The single most consistently selected protein across all analyses and models was IGF-binding protein 2. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: A plasma proteomic signature identified using a standard LASSO approach improves the cross-sectional estimation of the M value over routine clinical variables. However, a small subset of these proteins identified using a stability selection algorithm affords much of this improvement, especially when considering cross-cohort analyses. Our approach provides opportunities to improve the identification of insulin-resistant individuals at risk of insulin resistance-related adverse health consequences. GRAPHICAL ABSTRACT: [Image: see text] SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains peer-reviewed but unedited supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00125-023-05946-z.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10390625
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-103906252023-08-02 Plasma proteomic signatures of a direct measure of insulin sensitivity in two population cohorts Zanetti, Daniela Stell, Laurel Gustafsson, Stefan Abbasi, Fahim Tsao, Philip S. Knowles, Joshua W. Zethelius, Björn Ärnlöv, Johan Balkau, Beverley Walker, Mark Lazzeroni, Laura C. Lind, Lars Petrie, John R. Assimes, Themistocles L. Diabetologia Article AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: The euglycaemic–hyperinsulinaemic clamp (EIC) is the reference standard for the measurement of whole-body insulin sensitivity but is laborious and expensive to perform. We aimed to assess the incremental value of high-throughput plasma proteomic profiling in developing signatures correlating with the M value derived from the EIC. METHODS: We measured 828 proteins in the fasting plasma of 966 participants from the Relationship between Insulin Sensitivity and Cardiovascular disease (RISC) study and 745 participants from the Uppsala Longitudinal Study of Adult Men (ULSAM) using a high-throughput proximity extension assay. We used the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) approach using clinical variables and protein measures as features. Models were tested within and across cohorts. Our primary model performance metric was the proportion of the M value variance explained (R(2)). RESULTS: A standard LASSO model incorporating 53 proteins in addition to routinely available clinical variables increased the M value R(2) from 0.237 (95% CI 0.178, 0.303) to 0.456 (0.372, 0.536) in RISC. A similar pattern was observed in ULSAM, in which the M value R(2) increased from 0.443 (0.360, 0.530) to 0.632 (0.569, 0.698) with the addition of 61 proteins. Models trained in one cohort and tested in the other also demonstrated significant improvements in R(2) despite differences in baseline cohort characteristics and clamp methodology (RISC to ULSAM: 0.491 [0.433, 0.539] for 51 proteins; ULSAM to RISC: 0.369 [0.331, 0.416] for 67 proteins). A randomised LASSO and stability selection algorithm selected only two proteins per cohort (three unique proteins), which improved R(2) but to a lesser degree than in standard LASSO models: 0.352 (0.266, 0.439) in RISC and 0.495 (0.404, 0.585) in ULSAM. Reductions in improvements of R(2) with randomised LASSO and stability selection were less marked in cross-cohort analyses (RISC to ULSAM R(2) 0.444 [0.391, 0.497]; ULSAM to RISC R(2) 0.348 [0.300, 0.396]). Models of proteins alone were as effective as models that included both clinical variables and proteins using either standard or randomised LASSO. The single most consistently selected protein across all analyses and models was IGF-binding protein 2. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: A plasma proteomic signature identified using a standard LASSO approach improves the cross-sectional estimation of the M value over routine clinical variables. However, a small subset of these proteins identified using a stability selection algorithm affords much of this improvement, especially when considering cross-cohort analyses. Our approach provides opportunities to improve the identification of insulin-resistant individuals at risk of insulin resistance-related adverse health consequences. GRAPHICAL ABSTRACT: [Image: see text] SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains peer-reviewed but unedited supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00125-023-05946-z. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2023-06-17 2023 /pmc/articles/PMC10390625/ /pubmed/37329449 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00125-023-05946-z Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Article
Zanetti, Daniela
Stell, Laurel
Gustafsson, Stefan
Abbasi, Fahim
Tsao, Philip S.
Knowles, Joshua W.
Zethelius, Björn
Ärnlöv, Johan
Balkau, Beverley
Walker, Mark
Lazzeroni, Laura C.
Lind, Lars
Petrie, John R.
Assimes, Themistocles L.
Plasma proteomic signatures of a direct measure of insulin sensitivity in two population cohorts
title Plasma proteomic signatures of a direct measure of insulin sensitivity in two population cohorts
title_full Plasma proteomic signatures of a direct measure of insulin sensitivity in two population cohorts
title_fullStr Plasma proteomic signatures of a direct measure of insulin sensitivity in two population cohorts
title_full_unstemmed Plasma proteomic signatures of a direct measure of insulin sensitivity in two population cohorts
title_short Plasma proteomic signatures of a direct measure of insulin sensitivity in two population cohorts
title_sort plasma proteomic signatures of a direct measure of insulin sensitivity in two population cohorts
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10390625/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37329449
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00125-023-05946-z
work_keys_str_mv AT zanettidaniela plasmaproteomicsignaturesofadirectmeasureofinsulinsensitivityintwopopulationcohorts
AT stelllaurel plasmaproteomicsignaturesofadirectmeasureofinsulinsensitivityintwopopulationcohorts
AT gustafssonstefan plasmaproteomicsignaturesofadirectmeasureofinsulinsensitivityintwopopulationcohorts
AT abbasifahim plasmaproteomicsignaturesofadirectmeasureofinsulinsensitivityintwopopulationcohorts
AT tsaophilips plasmaproteomicsignaturesofadirectmeasureofinsulinsensitivityintwopopulationcohorts
AT knowlesjoshuaw plasmaproteomicsignaturesofadirectmeasureofinsulinsensitivityintwopopulationcohorts
AT plasmaproteomicsignaturesofadirectmeasureofinsulinsensitivityintwopopulationcohorts
AT zetheliusbjorn plasmaproteomicsignaturesofadirectmeasureofinsulinsensitivityintwopopulationcohorts
AT arnlovjohan plasmaproteomicsignaturesofadirectmeasureofinsulinsensitivityintwopopulationcohorts
AT balkaubeverley plasmaproteomicsignaturesofadirectmeasureofinsulinsensitivityintwopopulationcohorts
AT walkermark plasmaproteomicsignaturesofadirectmeasureofinsulinsensitivityintwopopulationcohorts
AT lazzeronilaurac plasmaproteomicsignaturesofadirectmeasureofinsulinsensitivityintwopopulationcohorts
AT lindlars plasmaproteomicsignaturesofadirectmeasureofinsulinsensitivityintwopopulationcohorts
AT petriejohnr plasmaproteomicsignaturesofadirectmeasureofinsulinsensitivityintwopopulationcohorts
AT assimesthemistoclesl plasmaproteomicsignaturesofadirectmeasureofinsulinsensitivityintwopopulationcohorts