2Department of Infectious Diseases, Xiangya Hospital, Central South University Hospital, 87 Xiangya Rd. Changsha, Hunan, China, 410008
Hunan SkyWorld Biotechnologies Co. Ltd. 9 Panpan Rd. Changsha Economic and Technological Development Zone, Changsha, Hunan, China, 410100
Keywords: S-Adenosylmethionine (SAM); Monoclonal Antibody; Competitive ELISA; Liver Disease Diagnosis
Abbreviations: Alanine Transaminase (ALT); Aspartate Aminotransferase (AST); Chronic Hepatitis B (CHB), Competitive ELISA (CELISA); Hematoxylin and Eosin (HE); Hepatocellular Carcinoma (HCC); Homocysteine (HCY); Immunohistochemistry (IHC); Keyhole Limpet Hemocyanin (KLH); L-Methionine(L-Met); Methionine Adenosine Transferase (MAT); Methylthioadenosine (MTA); Optical Density (OD); S-Adenosylhomocysteine(SAH); S-Adenosylmethionine(SAM).
The liver is a metabolic and detoxification organ, and hepatocytes are vulnerable to chemical substances, certain metabolites and pathogenic microorganisms, leading to liver cell damage. SAM is widely used to treat liver diseases [4]. SAM has significant effects on improving hepatitis and intrahepatic cholestasis[9]. SAM prevents hepatocellular carcinoma(HCC) in rats and inhibits the growth of liver cancer cells and is a therapeutic indicator for liver diseases [10-14]. SAM has been shown to control cell growth and death; a short-term decrease in SAM levels stimulates liver cell regeneration as a stress response, whereas a long-term SAM deficiency leads to malignant transformation of cells. Notably, SAM inhibits programmed cell death in normal hepatocytes but promotes apoptosis in hepatomacells [14,15]. Therefore, SAM both protects against adverse effects of chemotherapy and is a therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma, which is very rare among chemotherapeutic medicines. Alcohol disrupts several processes in the normal cycle of methionine metabolism, leading to progressive liver injury. In this process, the levels of S-AdenosylHomocysteine (SAH) and HomoCysteine (HCY) are significantly elevated. Excess SAH significantly inhibits methyltransferase and increases endoplasmic reticulum-dependent programmed cell death and lipid synthesis, leading to increased fat deposition in liver cells, increased apoptosis, the accumulation of harmful proteins, changes in multiple cell signaling pathways, and the inevitable induction of progressive liver injury[15,16].
Alterations in methionine metabolism that involvechanges in the plasma SAM level occur in chronic liver diseases. The downregulatedMethionine Adenosine Transferase(MAT) in liver diseases leads to a decrease in the SAM.One study demonstrated that patients with HCC had higher plasma SAM concentration than did patients with Chronic Hepatitis B (CHB) and normal controls[17]. This might be explained by the possibility that circulating SAM is produced by both abnormal and normal liver cells. Damaged liver cells showed a decrease in SAM levels, but normal liver cells produced more SAM by functional compensation.Meanwhile when liver cells were damaged orwere dying, intracellular SAM was released into the plasma, which contributed to the higher plasma SAM level observed.Thus, the time when plasma samples were obtained for the measurement of SAM may impact the results [18-20].
Although many studies have examined the roles of SAM in liver damage, relevant research on SAM as a diagnostic marker for liver diseases has been rather limited due to limited and impractical methods for quantifying SAM levels in clinical samples. In this study, we successfully generated monoclonal antibodies against SAM and applied them to studies of liver pathogenesis and to measurements of SAM levels in serum samples from patients with various liver diseases using a competitive enzyme-linked immune-absorbent assay (cELISA) to explore its diagnostic value of liver diseases.
SAM standard (nM) |
PLL-aza-SAM |
||||||||
0.2 µg/ml |
0.15 µg/ml |
0.1 µg/ml |
|||||||
Blank |
0.0498 |
0.056 |
0.0522 |
0.0476 |
0.0471 |
0.0482 |
0.0754 |
0.0515 |
0.0476 |
0 |
1.4709 |
1.4344 |
1.4072 |
1.215 |
1.2484 |
1.2651 |
1.0844 |
1.1231 |
1.0633 |
6.25 |
1.365 |
1.3257 |
1.2673 |
1.0789 |
1.0734 |
1.0842 |
0.879 |
0.9122 |
0.8995 |
25 |
1.1769 |
1.1498 |
1.1015 |
0.8231 |
0.844 |
0.8334 |
0.6209 |
0.6561 |
0.6679 |
50 |
1.023 |
0.9856 |
0.9577 |
0.6428 |
0.6362 |
0.6005 |
0.4517 |
0.4555 |
0.5187 |
100 |
0.7687 |
0.7532 |
0.7292 |
0.4292 |
0.4203 |
0.4427 |
0.3036 |
0.3103 |
0.3071 |
Sensitivity |
3.0 nM |
1.7 nM |
1.6 nM |
Spleen cells from the immunized mice were fused with SP2/0 cells, and hybridoma cell lines secreting anti-SAM antibodies were screened and named 118-6 and 84-3. The antibody subclass assessment indicated that clones 118-6 and 84-3 were both of the IgG2b subtype. The relative affinity constants of clones 118-6 and 84-3 measured using the ELISA were 5.75 x 109L/mol and 7.29 x 1010L/mol, respectively. The titers of the supernatant and ascites of hybridoma cells were 1:6400 and 1:51200 for 118-6. The titer of 84-3 was higher than the titer of 118-6.
We compared the use of SAM in identifying liver diseases to that of alanine transaminase (ALT) and aspartate Amino transferase (AST), and found SAM has advantages compared with these markers (Table 3): (1) the AST marker was negative in 11 patients diagnosed with liver diseases, but the SAM levels were positive, regardless of whether the 120nM or 240nM threshold was used. Another 11 patients were detected in the range of 50-100U/L as weak positive results; 8 of them had SAM levels below 120nM (positive results), and all were positively detected when the 240nM threshold was used. (2) Two patients diagnosed with liver diseases were negative by ALT, but were positively detected by SAM regardless of whether the 120nM or 240nM threshold was used. Another 21 patients with a range of 40–100U/L were reported as weak positive results; 18 of them had SAM levels below 120nM, and 20 of them were reported as positive by SAM when the 240nM threshold was used. (3) For the combination of AST and ALT, two patients with liver diseases were not identified by either AST or ALT but were detected by SAM at a threshold of 120nM. The use of AST or ALT alone had a higher risk of false negative results. Among 16 patients with weak positive by AST or ALT, 15 displayed SAM levels less than 120nM, and all SAM levels
Group |
Case# |
SAM (nM) |
SAM = 240 nM cutoff |
SAM = 120 nM cutoff |
|||
Avg |
SD |
Sensitivity2 |
Specificity2 |
Sensitivity1 |
Specificity1 |
||
Normal |
81 |
386.66 |
216.20 |
30.86% |
|
3.70% |
|
Hepatitis |
46 |
101.42 |
83.12 |
95.65% |
69.14% (56/81) |
80.43% (37/46) |
96.30% (78/81) |
Cancer |
14 |
104.96 |
82.63 |
92.86% |
69.14% (56/81) |
71.43% (10/14) |
96.30% (78/81) |
Cirrhosis |
20 |
92.95 |
62.41 |
95.00% |
69.14% (56/81) |
85.00% (17/20) |
96.30% (78/81) |
Liver failure |
19 |
66.46 |
29.77 |
100% |
69.14% (56/81) |
100% |
96.30% (78/81) |
Specificity2: the probability that an individual without the disease is screened negative (SAM < 240 nM);
Sensitivity2:the probability that an individual with the disease is screened positive (SAM < 240nM);
Specificity1: the probability that an individual without the disease is screened negative (SAM < 120 nM);
Sensitivity1:the probability that an individual with the disease is screened positive (SAM< 120 nM).
Single comparison |
SAM (nM) |
Single comparison |
SAM (nM) |
||||||||
AST |
> 240 |
120-240 |
< 120 |
total |
ALT |
> 240 |
120-240 |
< 120 |
total |
||
< 50 |
0 |
0 |
11 |
11 |
< 40 |
0 |
0 |
2 |
2 |
||
50-100 |
0 |
3 |
8 |
11 |
40-100 |
1 |
2 |
18 |
21 |
||
> 100 |
2 |
6 |
32 |
40 |
> 100 |
1 |
7 |
31 |
39 |
||
total |
2 |
9 |
51 |
62 |
total |
2 |
9 |
51 |
62 |
||
AST sensitivity |
81.70% |
ALT sensitivity |
96.70% |
||||||||
SAM sensitivity |
96.10% |
SAM sensitivity |
96.70% |
||||||||
Agreement |
79.00% |
Agreement |
93.50% |
||||||||
Combined comparison |
SAM |
||||||||||
AST or ALT |
> 240 |
120-240 |
<120 |
total |
|||||||
AST < 50 and AST < 40 |
0 |
0 |
2 |
2 |
|||||||
AST ≤ 50 and 40 < ALT < 100 |
0 |
0 |
8 |
8 |
|||||||
50 < AST < 100 and ALT ≤ 100 |
0 |
1 |
7 |
8 |
|||||||
AST > 100 or ALT > 100 |
2 |
8 |
34 |
44 |
|||||||
total |
2 |
9 |
51 |
62 |
We used SAM antibodies to stain sections of normal and cancer tissues (paraffin-embedded) using IHC. Positive staining was shown as brown areas. The blue areas show the HE-counter-stained nuclei. (Figure 3A, 3C)show mostly cytoplasmic and relatively less nuclear SAM-specific staining in normal liver cells.(Figure 3B,3D) show hepatocellular carcinoma tissue sections that were stained side-by-sideusing normal adjacent liver tissue (Figure 3A, 3C). As SAM is a small metabolite with highly dynamic levels, the results may vary with the method and time at which tissue slides were fixed and prepared. Various cancer types, cases and samples may also yield different results as each case is unique in terms of stage and type, the patient’s overall health, treatments, which may contribute to IHC result variation.
The probability of detecting diseases (sensitivity) was very high at the high threshold of 240nM, but the false positive rate was also higher (30.86%). Using the lower threshold of 120 nM, the detection rate for healthy individuals was 3.70% (the false positive rate was lower), but sensitivity for hepatitis, cancer and cirrhosis were also reduced. The accuracy of diagnosis may be improved through comprehensive consideration of the two thresholds. If a detected value fell between 120-240 nM and was near 240nM, it might be likely to represent a normal individual, followed by patients with HCCand hepatitis. If a value was between 120-240nM and near 120nM, it might be more likely to represent hepatocellular carcinoma, followed by hepatitis and cirrhosis.
Nineteen of 20 patients with cirrhosis had SAM lower than 240nM (detection rate 95%); SAM level in the remaining one patient was272.35nM, slightly above the threshold but less than the average normal serum level. SAM levels in 13 of 14 patients with HCCwere less than 240nM (detection rate 92.8%). The SAM level in the remaining one patient was 297nM, less than the normal average. The SAM levels in all patients with liver failure were less than 240nM. The SAM levels in the 81 normal serum samples were significantly higher than in patients with liver disease, with average level of 386.66nM, and 20 of 81 samples had SAM levels less than 240nM. A larger number of samples were needed to obtain more accurate false positive and false negative rates. In addition, due to potential differences between patients and healthy volunteers, the most persuasive method was to compare SAM levels in serum samples collected at multiple time points from the same case. Thus, SAM levels would be measured and dynamically evaluated multiple times, contributing to the timely capture of any changes in liver function or occurrence of disease.
Dysfunction in SAM metabolism is very common in liver diseases. When liver damage occurs, the methionine cycle is destroyed and the SAM level is reduced. Oxidative stress and large amounts of oxygen free radicals are produced, leading to lipid peroxidation in liver cells. In addition, immune cells from the liver (e.g., Kupffer cells, monocytes and macrophages) produce a variety of cytokines, such as tumor necrosis factor, interleukin-6 (IL-6) and IL-1. These cytokines will further damage liver cells and thereby increase the probability that normal liver cells undergo apoptosis and necrosis. The serum SAM level reflects liver damage. Therefore, the significance of measuring SAM clinically is important. Measuring SAM concentrations in blood samples will not only aid in the detection of liver diseases but also serve as a warning signal for liver damage that can be found earlier than by AST and ALT. By monitoring SAM levels, patients could be diagnosed earlier, thereby facilitating early and effective treatment to prevent further damage to the liver.
Traditional methods to measure SAM were HPLC and LC-MS/MS, which require costly equipment, are time-consuming, laborious and specially trained professionals to operate the equipment. The ability to measure SAM in biological samples has been a huge challenge due to its instability. The specificity, sensitivity and accuracy of the HPLC method are poor. The main limitations of HPLC and LC-MS/MS to measure SAM are the sample extraction, pretreatment, and lengthy measurement processes, which involve high temperatures and solvent steps that may cause changes in the molecule being measured, especially the very unstable SAM. A simple, convenient, specific, accurate and inexpensive detection method is required to measure SAM concentrations. In this study, SAM concentrations were quantified using a cELISA. The 118-6 and 84-3 anti-SAM monoclonal antibodies prepared from cell lines in this study have high sensitivity, specificity and affinity, and the established cELISA method was suitable for the quantitative measurement of serum samples obtained from patients with various liver diseases. The immunoassay is simple, fast, sensitive and specific, does not need specialized or expensive equipment, and can be performed by any lab technician. The methylation index can be determined simply, quickly and accurately, which is of great significance to allow researchers to obtain a deeper understanding of biochemical metabolic pathways. These pathways are essential for studies of various organisms (including fauna and flora) to explore the root causes of disease development and assist in diagnosis and therapy.
Ademetionine or Transmeti, which use SAM as the active ingredient, are routinely used as liver-protective medicinesin China, some Asian-Pacific countries and Eastern Europe. Based on the efficacy of these medicines, SAM is clearly important for normal liver function, and reduced SAM level is a common factor in liver damage and diseases. Thus, serum SAM can reflect the severity or status of liver diseases.
- Cantoni GL. Methylation of nicotinamide with a soluble enzyme system from rat liver. Jour Biol Chem. 1951;189: 203-216.
- Mato JM, Lu SC. Role of S-adenosyl-L-methionine in liver health and injury. Hepatolog. 2007;45:1306-1312.
- Pegg AE, Feith DJ, Fong LY, Coleman CS, O'Brien TG, Shantz LM. Transgenic mouse models for studies of the role of polyamines in normal, hypertrophic and neoplastic growth. Biochem Soc Tran .2003; 31:356-360.
- Wang H, Liu H. Clinical observation on treatment of 92 cases of chronic hepatitis B with high jaundice by S-adenosylmethionine. Drugs Clin Med. 2010;7:83.
- Parsons CJ, Takashima M, Rippe RA. Molecular mechanisms of hepatic fibrogenesis. Gastroen Hepatol 2007;22:S79-84. doi: 10.1111/j.1440-1746.2006.04659.x
- Mischoulon D, Alpert JE, Arning E, Bottiglieri T, Fava M, Papakostas GI.. Bioavailability of S-adenosyl methionine and impact on response in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in major depressive disorder. J Clin Psych. 2012;73(6):843-848. doi: 10.4088/JCP.11m07139
- Murphy BL, Babb SM, Ravichandran C, et al. Oral SAMe in persistent treatment-refractory bipolar depression: a double-blind, randomized clinical trial. ClinPsychopharmacol. 2014;34(3):413-416. doi: 10.1097/JCP.0000000000000064
- Imhoff DJ, Gordon-Evans WJ, Evans RB, Johnson AL, Griffon DJ, Swanson KS. Evaluation of S-adenosylmethionine in a double-blinded, randomized, placebo-controlled, clinical trial for treatment of presumptive osteoarthritis in the dog. Vet Surg. 2011;40(2):228-232. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-950X.2010.00788.x
- Muñoz-Castañeda JR, Túnez I, Herencia C, Ranchal I, González R, Ramírez LM. et al. Melatonin exerts a more potent effect than S-adenosyl-l-methionine against iron metabolism disturbances, oxidative stress and tissue injury induced by obstructive jaundice in rats. Chem Biol Interact. 2008;174:79-87. doi: 10.1016/j.cbi.2008.05.016
- Mato JM, Lu SC. Homocysteine: the badthiol. Hepatol. 2005;41:976-979. doi: 10.1002/hep.20708
- Plauth M, Cabré E, Riggio O, Assis-Camilo M, Pirlich M, Kondrup J, et al. ESPEN Guidelines on Enteral Nutrition: Liver disease. J Clin Nutri. 2006;25(2):285–294.
- Lu SC, José M. Mato, JM. S-adenosylmethionine in liver health, injury, and cancer. Physiol Rev. 2012; 92(4):1515–1542. doi: 10.1152/physrev.00047.2011
- Kiani S, Ebrahimkhani MR, Shariftabrizi A, Doratotaj B, Payabvash S, Riazi K, et al. Opioid system blockade decreases collagenase activity and improves liver injury in a rat model of cholestasis. J Gastroent Hepatol. 2007;22:406–413. doi: 10.1111/j.1440-1746.2006.04260.x
- Anste QM, Day CP. S-adenosylmethionine (SAMe) therapy in liver disease: A review of current evidence and clinical utility. J Hepatol. 2012;57(5):1097–1109. doi: 10.1016/j.jhep.2012.04.041
- Lu SC, José M. Mato, JM. Role of methionine adenosyltransferase and S-adenosylmethionine in alcohol-associated liver cancer. Alcohol. 2005;35:227-234. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.alcohol.2005.03.011
- Kharbanda KK. Alcoholic liver disease and methionine metabolism. Semin Liver Dis. 2009;29(2):155-165. doi: 10.1055/s-0029-1214371
- Li T, Yu G, Guo T, Qi H, Bing Y, Xiao Y et al. The Plasma S-adenosylmethionine Level is Associated With the Severity of Hepatitis B-Related Liver Disease. Medicine. 2015;94(4): e489. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000000489
- Hao X, Huang Y, Qiu M, et al. Measure S-adenosylmethionine and S-adenosylhomocysteine with Immunoassay: Methylation Index as a Biomarker for Disease and Health Status Evaluation. BMC Research Note. 2016;9:498-1013. doi: 10.1186/s13104-016-2296-8
- Salmaggi P, Bressa GM, Nicchia G, Coniglio M, La Greca P, Le Grazie C. Double-blind, placebo-controlled study of S-adenosyl-L-methionine in depressed postmenopausal women. Psychother Psychosom. 1993;59(1):34-40.
- Bressa GM. S-adenosyl-l-methionine (SAMe) as antidepressant: meta-analysis of clinical studies. Acta Neuro Scand. 2009;89:7-14.
- Tang Y, Zhang W, Zhang Y, Wang W, Yao F, Yan J, et al. 5'-Methylthioadenosine attenuates ischemia reperfusion injury after liver transplantation in rats. 2014;37(5):1366-1373. doi: 10.1007/s10753-014-9861-x
- Liu GY, Wang W, Jia WD, Xu GL, Ma JL, Ge YS, et al. Protective effect of S-adenosylmethionine on hepatic ischemia-reperfusion injury during hepatectomy in HCC patients with chronic HBV infection. World J Surg Oncol. 2014;2;12-27. doi: 10.1186/1477-7819-12-27