Machine learning-enhanced metabolomics reveals altered metabolic signatures in knee osteoarthritis cartilage


Abstract

Background: The metabolic dysregulation underlying knee osteoarthritis (KOA) is not fully elucidated, particularly the specific molecular shifts occurring within diseased cartilage compared to adjacent healthy tissue. This study aimed to define the distinct metabolomic signature of KOA-affected cartilage using a patient-matched control design, leveraging machine learning to identify key discriminatory metabolites and altered metabolic pathways.
Methods: Articular cartilage samples from both lesional (KOA) and visually healthy areas were collected from 17 patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty. A targeted, broad-spectrum metabolomic analysis was performed using liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry (LC-MS). To distinguish between the two tissue types and identify significant metabolic features, the resulting data were subjected to multivariate statistical analyses, including Partial Least Squares-Discriminant Analysis (PLS-DA) and Orthogonal PLS-DA (OPLS-DA), as well as a Random Forest (RF) machine learning model. Pathway analysis was conducted using the KEGG and SMP databases.
Results: A clear and significant metabolic distinction was found between KOA and healthy cartilage, demonstrating profound metabolic reprogramming in the diseased tissue. The PLS-DA and OPLS-DA models successfully separated the two groups. Pathway analysis revealed that the most significantly disrupted pathways in KOA cartilage included arginine biosynthesis, glutathione metabolism, arginine and proline metabolism, glycerophospholipid metabolism, and alanine, aspartate, and glutamate metabolism. The Random Forest model identified L-kynurenine, lipoic acid, and phosphatidylcholine (PC) (36:1) as top-ranking metabolites for discriminating between healthy and osteoarthritic cartilage. Conclusion: Utilizing a robust patient-matched design, this study reveals significant metabolic reprogramming in KOA cartilage, characterized by major disruptions in amino acid, antioxidant, and lipid metabolism. The metabolites L-kynurenine, lipoic acid, and PC (36:1) were identified as novel and promising biomarker candidates for KOA. These findings enhance our molecular understanding of KOA pathogenesis and pinpoint key metabolic nodes that could serve as future therapeutic targets. Further validation is necessary to confirm the diagnostic potential of these biomarkers and to explore the functional consequences of these metabolic shifts in disease progression.
Ask to review this manuscript

Notes for potential reviewers

  • Volunteering is not a guarantee that you will be asked to review. There are many reasons: reviewers must be qualified, there should be no conflicts of interest, a minimum of two reviewers have already accepted an invitation, etc.
  • This is NOT OPEN peer review. The review is single-blind, and all recommendations are sent privately to the Academic Editor handling the manuscript. All reviews are published and reviewers can choose to sign their reviews.
  • What happens after volunteering? It may be a few days before you receive an invitation to review with further instructions. You will need to accept the invitation to then become an official referee for the manuscript. If you do not receive an invitation it is for one of many possible reasons as noted above.

  • PeerJ does not judge submissions based on subjective measures such as novelty, impact or degree of advance. Effectively, reviewers are asked to comment on whether or not the submission is scientifically and technically sound and therefore deserves to join the scientific literature. Our Peer Review criteria can be found on the "Editorial Criteria" page - reviewers are specifically asked to comment on 3 broad areas: "Basic Reporting", "Experimental Design" and "Validity of the Findings".
  • Reviewers are expected to comment in a timely, professional, and constructive manner.
  • Until the article is published, reviewers must regard all information relating to the submission as strictly confidential.
  • When submitting a review, reviewers are given the option to "sign" their review (i.e. to associate their name with their comments). Otherwise, all review comments remain anonymous.
  • All reviews of published articles are published. This includes manuscript files, peer review comments, author rebuttals and revised materials.
  • Each time a decision is made by the Academic Editor, each reviewer will receive a copy of the Decision Letter (which will include the comments of all reviewers).

If you have any questions about submitting your review, please email us at [email protected].