proteomics
First Molecular Profiles of Severe COVID-19 Infections
Posted on by Dr. Francis Collins
To ensure that people with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) get the care they need, it would help if a simple blood test could predict early on which patients are most likely to progress to severe and life-threatening illness—and which are more likely to recover without much need for medical intervention. Now, researchers have provided some of the first evidence that such a test might be possible.
This tantalizing possibility comes from a study reported recently in the journal Cell. In this study, researchers took blood samples from people with mild to severe COVID-19 and analyzed them for nearly 2,000 proteins and metabolites [1]. Their detailed analyses turned up hundreds of molecular changes in blood that differentiated milder COVID-19 symptoms from more severe illness. What’s more, they found that they could train a computer to use the most informative of the proteins and predict the disease severity with a high degree of accuracy.
The findings come from the lab of Tiannan Guo, Westlake University, Zhejiang Province, China. His team recognized that, while we’ve learned a lot about the clinical symptoms of COVID-19 and the spread of the illness around the world, much less is known about the condition’s underlying molecular features. It also remains mysterious what distinguishes the 80 percent of symptomatic infected people who recover with little to no need for medical care from the other 20 percent, who suffer from much more serious illness, including respiratory distress requiring oxygen or even more significant medical interventions.
In search of clues, Guo and colleagues analyzed hundreds of molecular changes in blood samples collected from 53 healthy people and 46 people with COVID-19, including 21 with severe disease involving respiratory distress and decreased blood-oxygen levels. Their studies turned up more than 470 proteins and metabolites that differed in people with COVID-19 compared to healthy people. Of those, levels of about 300 were associated with disease severity.
Further analysis revealed that the majority of proteins and metabolites on the list are associated with the suppression or dysregulation of one of three biological processes. Two processes are related to the immune system, including early immune responses and the function of particular scavenging immune cells called macrophages. The third relates to the function of platelets, which are sticky, disc-shaped cell fragments that play an essential role in blood clotting. Such biological insights might help pave the way for potentially effective new ways to treat COVID-19 down the road.
Next, the researchers turned to “machine learning” to explore the possibility that such molecular changes also might be used to predict mild versus severe COVID-19. Machine learning involves the use of computers to discern patterns, or molecular signatures, in large data sets that a human being couldn’t readily pick out. In this case, the question was whether the computer could “learn” to tell the difference between mild and severe COVID-19 based on molecular data alone.
Their analyses showed that a computer, once trained, could differentiate mild and severe COVID-19 based on just 22 proteins and 7 metabolites. Their model correctly classified all but one person in the original training set, for an accuracy of about 94 percent. And importantly, in further prospective validation tests, they confirmed that this model accurately identified mild versus severe COVID-19 in most cases.
While these findings are certainly encouraging, there’s much more work to do. It will be important to explore these molecular signatures in many more people. It also will be critical to find out how early in the course of the disease such telltale signatures arise. While we await those answers, I find encouragement in all that we’re learning—and will continue to learn—about COVID-19 each day.
Reference:
[1] Proteomic and metabolomic characterization of COVID-19 patient sera. Shen B et al. Cell. 28 May 2020. [Epub ahead of publication]
Links:
Coronavirus (COVID-19) (NIH)
Blood Tests (National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute/NIH)
Tiannan Guo Lab (Westlake University, Zhejiang Province, China)
Aging Research: Blood Proteins Show Your Age
Posted on by Dr. Francis Collins
How can you tell how old someone is? Of course, you could scan their driver’s license or look for signs of facial wrinkles and gray hair. But, as researchers just found in a new study, you also could get pretty close to the answer by doing a blood test.
That may seem surprising. But in a recent study in Nature Medicine, an NIH-funded research team was able to gauge a person’s age quite reliably by analyzing a blood sample for levels of a few hundred proteins. The results offer important new insights into what happens as we age. For example, the team suggests that the biological aging process isn’t steady and appears to accelerate periodically—with the greatest bursts coming, on average, around ages 34, 60, and 78.
These findings indicate that it may be possible one day to devise a blood test to identify individuals who are aging faster biologically than others. Such folks might be at risk earlier in life for cardiovascular problems, Alzheimer’s disease, osteoarthritis, and other age-related health issues.
What’s more, this work raises hope for interventions that may slow down the “proteomic clock” and perhaps help to keep people biologically younger than their chronological age. Such a scenario might sound like pure fantasy, but this same group of researchers showed a few years ago that it’s indeed possible to rejuvenate an older mouse by infusing blood from a much younger mouse.
Those and other earlier findings from the lab of Tony Wyss-Coray, Stanford School of Medicine, Palo Alto, CA, raised the tantalizing possibility that certain substances in young blood can revitalize the aging brain and other parts of the body. In search of additional clues in the new study, the Wyss-Coray team tracked how the protein composition of blood changes as people age.
To find those clues, they isolated plasma from more than 4,200 healthy individuals between ages 18 and 95. The researchers then used data from more than half of the participants to assemble a “proteomic clock” of aging. Within certain limits, the clock could accurately predict the chronological age of the study’s remaining 1,446 participants. The best predictions relied on just 373 of the clock’s almost 3,000 proteins.
As further validation, the clock also reliably predicted the correct chronological age of four groups of people not in the study. Interestingly, it was possible to make a decent age prediction based on just nine of the clock’s most informative proteins.
The findings show that telltale proteomic changes arise with age, and they likely have important and as-yet unknown health implications. After all, those proteins found circulating in the bloodstream come not just from blood cells but also from cells throughout the body. Intriguingly, the researchers report that people who appeared biologically younger than their actual chronological age based on their blood proteins also performed better on cognitive and physical tests.
Most of us view aging as a gradual, linear process. However, the protein evidence suggests that, biologically, aging follows a more complex pattern. Some proteins did gradually tick up or down over time in an almost linear fashion. But the levels of many other proteins rose or fell more markedly over time. For instance, one neural protein in the blood stayed constant until around age 60, when its levels spiked. Why that is so remains to be determined.
As noted, the researchers found evidence that the aging process includes a series of three bursts. Wyss-Coray said he found it especially interesting that the first burst happens in early mid-life, around age 34, well before common signs of aging and its associated health problems would manifest.
It’s also well known that men and women age differently, and this study adds to that evidence. About two-thirds of the proteins that changed with age also differed between the sexes. However, because the effect of aging on the most important proteins of the clock is much stronger than the differences in gender, the proteomic clock still could accurately predict the ages in all people.
Overall, the findings show that protein substances in blood can serve as a useful measure of a person’s chronological and biological age and—together with Wyss-Coray’s earlier studies—that substances in blood may play an active role in the aging process. Wyss-Coray reports that his team continues to dig deeper into its data, hoping to learn more about the origins of particular proteins in the bloodstream, what they mean for our health, and how to potentially turn back the proteomic clock.
Reference:
[1] Undulating changes in human plasma proteome profiles across the lifespan. Lehallier B, Gate D, Schaum N, Nanasi T, Lee SE, Yousef H, Moran Losada P, Berdnik D, Keller A, Verghese J, Sathyan S, Franceschi C, Milman S, Barzilai N, Wyss-Coray T. Nat Med. 2019 Dec;25(12):1843-1850.
Links:
What Do We Know About Healthy Aging? (National Institute on Aging/NIH)
Cognitive Health (NIA)
Wyss-Coray Lab (Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA)
NIH Support: National Institute on Aging
Creative Minds: A New Chemistry for Aging Research?
Posted on by Dr. Francis Collins
Tony Wyss-Coray / Credit: Stanford School of Medicine
Basic scientists have long studied aging by looking inside of cells. While this research has produced many important leads, they are now starting to look outside the cell for the wealth of biochemical clues contained in the bloodstream.
To introduce you to this exciting frontier in aging research, this blog highlighted a while back the work of Tony Wyss-Coray at Stanford School of Medicine, Palo Alto, CA. He and a colleague had just received a 2013 NIH Director’s Transformative Research Award to explore the effects of exercise on the brains of mice. Their work, in fact, produced one of Science Magazine’s Breakthrough Discoveries of 2014. Their team showed that by fusing the circulatory systems of old and young mice to create a shared blood supply, the young blood triggered new muscle and neural connections in the older mice, while also improving their memories.
As fascinating as this theoretical Fountain of Youth was, Wyss-Coray recognized a critical limitation. He had no way of knowing how factors secreted by the young mouse could actually cross the blood-brain barrier and rejuvenate neurons. To solve this unknown, Wyss-Coray recently received a 2015 NIH Director’s Pioneer Award to build a potentially game-changing tool to track the aging process in mice.
Cystic Fibrosis: Keeping the Momentum Going
Posted on by Dr. Francis Collins
Caption: Lower left, me, Lap-Chee Tsui, and John Riordan celebrating our discovery of the cystic fibrosis gene. Right, Robert J. Beall, me, and Doris Tulcin at a November Cystic Fibrosis Foundation event honoring Dr. Beall.
It’s been more than a quarter-century since my colleagues and I were able to identify the gene responsible for cystic fibrosis (CF), a life-shortening inherited disease that mainly affects the lungs and pancreas [1]. And, at a recent event in New York, I had an opportunity to celebrate how far we’ve come since then in treating CF, as well as to honor a major force behind that progress, Dr. Bob Beall, who has just retired as president and chief executive officer of the Cystic Fibrosis Foundation.
Thanks to the tireless efforts of Bob and many others in the public and private sectors to support basic, translational, and clinical research, we today have two therapies from Vertex Pharmaceuticals that are targeted specifically at CF’s underlying molecular cause: ivacaftor (Kalydeco™), approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in 2012 for people with an uncommon mutation in the CF gene; and the combination ivacaftor-lumacaftor (Orkambi™), approved by the FDA in July for the roughly 50 percent of CF patients with two copies of the most common mutation. Yet more remains to be done before we can truly declare victory. Not only are new therapies needed for people with other CF mutations, but also for those with the common mutation who don’t respond well to Orkambi™. So, the work needs to go on, and I’m encouraged by new findings that suggest a different strategy for helping folks with the most common CF mutation.
