Evaluation of different stool extraction methods for metabolomics measurements in human fecal samples - Erben, Vanessa; Poschet, Gernot; Schrotz-King, Petra; Brenner, Hermann (medRxiv, 2020)
Background Measurement of metabolomics in human stool samples is of great interest for a broad range of applications in biomedical research including early detection of colorectal neoplasms. However, due to the complexity of metabolites there is no consensus on how to process samples for stool metabolomics measurements to obtain a broad coverage of hydrophilic and hydrophobic substances.Methods We used frozen stool samples (50mg) from healthy study participants. Stool samples were processed after thawing using 8 different processing protocols and different solvents. Metabolites were measured afterwards using the MxP® Quant 500 kit (Biocrates). The best performing protocol was subsequently applied to compare stool samples of participants with different dietary habits.Results In this study, we were able to determine up to 340 metabolites of various chemical classes extracted from stool samples of healthy study participants with 8 different protocols. Polar metabolites such as amino acids could be measured with each method while other metabolite classes, particular lipid species, are more dependent on the solvent or combination of solvents used. Only a small number of triglycerides or acylcarnitines were detected in human feces. Extraction efficiency was higher for protocols using isopropanol or those using ethanol or methanol and MTBE including an evaporation and concentration step than for other protocols. We detected significant fecal metabolite differences between vegetarians, semi-vegetarians and non-vegetarians.Conclusion For the evaluation of metabolites in fecal samples we found protocols using solvents like isopropanol and those using ethanol or methanol and MTBE including an evaporation and concentration step to be superior over others tested in this study.Competing Interest StatementThe authors disclose no potential conflict of interests. We received the MxP® Quant 500 Kit (Biocrates Life Sciences AG, Innsbruck, Austria) used in this study free of charge and thank Biocrates for their kind support.Funding StatementThe authors disclose no potential conflict of interests. We received the MxP® Quant 500 Kit (Biocrates Life Sciences AG, Innsbruck, Austria) used in this study free of charge and thank Biocrates for their kind support.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:The study was approved by the ethics committees of the Medical Faculty Heidelberg and of the physicians' boards of Baden-Wuerttemberg and Rhineland Palatinate.All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesnoneCRCcolorectal cancerMTBEmethyl tert-butyl ether