In silico approaches for enhancing retrieval analysis as a source for discovery of implant reactivity-related mechanisms and biomarkers
Corresponding Author
Yelizaveta Torosyan
Center for Devices and Radiological Health, Office of Clinical Evidence and Analysis, Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, Maryland
Correspondence to: Y. Torosyan; e-mail: [email protected]Search for more papers by this authorHannah Spece
Center for Devices and Radiological Health, Office of Clinical Evidence and Analysis, Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, Maryland
Drexel University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Search for more papers by this authorNorman Goodacre
Center for Devices and Radiological Health, Office of Clinical Evidence and Analysis, Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, Maryland
Search for more papers by this authorYasameen Azarbaijani
Center for Devices and Radiological Health, Office of Clinical Evidence and Analysis, Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, Maryland
Search for more papers by this authorDanica Marinac-Dabic
Center for Devices and Radiological Health, Office of Clinical Evidence and Analysis, Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, Maryland
Search for more papers by this authorSteven M. Kurtz
Drexel University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Exponent, Inc., Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Search for more papers by this authorCorresponding Author
Yelizaveta Torosyan
Center for Devices and Radiological Health, Office of Clinical Evidence and Analysis, Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, Maryland
Correspondence to: Y. Torosyan; e-mail: [email protected]Search for more papers by this authorHannah Spece
Center for Devices and Radiological Health, Office of Clinical Evidence and Analysis, Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, Maryland
Drexel University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Search for more papers by this authorNorman Goodacre
Center for Devices and Radiological Health, Office of Clinical Evidence and Analysis, Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, Maryland
Search for more papers by this authorYasameen Azarbaijani
Center for Devices and Radiological Health, Office of Clinical Evidence and Analysis, Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, Maryland
Search for more papers by this authorDanica Marinac-Dabic
Center for Devices and Radiological Health, Office of Clinical Evidence and Analysis, Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, Maryland
Search for more papers by this authorSteven M. Kurtz
Drexel University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Exponent, Inc., Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Search for more papers by this authorAbstract
The ability to characterize implant debris in conjunction with corresponding immune and tissue-destructive responses renders retrieval analysis as an important tool for evaluating orthopedic devices. We applied advanced analytics and in silico approaches to illustrate the retrieval-based potential to elucidate host responses and enable discovery of corresponding biomarkers indicative of in vivo implant performance. Hip retrieval analysis was performed using variables based on immunostaining, polarized microscopy, and fretting-corrosion and oxidation analyses. Statistical analyses were performed in R. Hierarchical/k-means clustering and principal component analysis were used for data analysis and visualization. Correlation Engine (CE) and Ingenuity Pathway Analysis (IPA) were employed for in silico corroboration of putative biomarkers. Higher giant cell and histiocyte scores and positivity for CD68 and CD3 indicating infiltration with macrophages and T-cells, respectively, were detected mainly among older generation hips with higher ultra-high-molecular-weight-polyethylene loads. Our in silico analysis using pre-existing data on wear particle-induced loosening substantiated the role of CD68 in implant-induced innate responses and identified the CD68-related molecular signature that can be indicative of development of aseptic loosening and can be further corroborated for diagnostic/prognostic testing in clinical setting. Thus, this study confirmed the great potential of advanced analytics and in silico approaches for enhancing retrieval analysis applications to discovery of new biomarkers for optimizing implant-related preclinical testing and clinical management. © 2019 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Biomed Mater Res Part B: Appl Biomater 108B:263–271, 2020.
Supporting Information
Filename | Description |
---|---|
jbmb34386-sup-0001-FigureS1.tiffTIFF image, 8.3 MB | Figure S1 Overall heatmap of the retrieval-based device and patient characteristics. |
jbmb34386-sup-0002-FigureS2.tiffTIFF image, 4.9 MB | Figure S2 High CD68 expression in joint synovium (BaseSpace Correlation Engine, or formerly NextBio, Illumina). |
jbmb34386-sup-0003-FigureS3.tiffTIFF image, 5.2 MB | Figure S3 CD68 (encircled in red) as one of the top chitin/chitosan-related genetic markers (BaseSpace Correlation Engine, or formerly NextBio, Illumina).Note: chitin and chitosan shared the same lists of genetic markers. |
jbmb34386-sup-0004-FigureS4.tiffTIFF image, 7.5 MB | Figure S4 CD68 network representing genes/proteins that were identified as potential CD68 interactors detectable in peripheral biofluids (IPA) and significantly altered in aseptic vs. septic prosthesis loosening (BaseSpace Correlation Engine, GSE7103).Known CD68 connections were explored by IPA (Qiagen), using the Grow and Connect tools and the biofluid-related overlays which included serum/blood and excluded bronchopulmonary lavage, cerebrospinal fluid, and “not detected” categories. The IPA-generated image shows CD68-related genes/proteins (IL6, CREB1, GAS6, PTGS2, SNCA, MMP9, APOE, PTPN11) that were found in the Correlation Engine (Illumina) generated list of genes significantly (p < 005) altered in GSE7109 study on aseptic vs. septic prosthesis loosening. The identified CD68 network is presented with IPA overlay for Species and Diseases (as shown on the left), indicating the network's links to Human Inflammatory and Immunological Diseases (as shown by the pink shape outlines for all molecules). Connecting lines (highlighted in blue) indicate CD68 as a potential downstream interactor with the identified network members. Possible direct interaction between CD68 and CREB1 is indicated by a solid connecting line; dotted lines indicate indirect interactions between CD68 and the remaining network members. The network image also shows some known connections between IPA Canonical Pathways (CP) and the identified CD68 network members (e.g., PTPN11 links to Acute Phase Response, Role of Pattern Recognition Receptors, Th1 and Th2 Activation, and Natural Killer Cell Signaling). |
Please note: The publisher is not responsible for the content or functionality of any supporting information supplied by the authors. Any queries (other than missing content) should be directed to the corresponding author for the article.
REFERENCES
- 1Baxter RM, Freeman TA, Kurtz SM, Steinbeck MJ. Do tissues from THA revision of highly crosslinked UHMWPE liners contain wear debris and associated inflammation? Clin Orthop Relat Res 2011; 469(8): 2308–2317.
- 2Migaud H, Putman S, Kern G, Isida R, Girard J, Ramdane N, Delaunay CP, Hamadouche M, SoFCOT Study Group. Do the reasons for ceramic-on-ceramic revisions differ from other bearings in total hip arthroplasty? Clin Orthop Relat Res 2016; 474(10): 2190–2199.
- 3Baxter RM, MacDonald DW, Kurtz SM, Steinbeck MJ. Characteristics of highly cross-linked polyethylene wear debris in vivo. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater 2013; 101(3): 467–475.
- 4Pang HN, Naudie DD, McCalden RW, MacDonald SJ, Teeter MG. Highly crosslinked polyethylene improves wear but not surface damage in retrieved acetabular liners. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2015; 473(2): 463–468.
- 5Hanna SA, Somerville L, McCalden RW, Naudie DD, MacDonald SJ. Highly cross-linked polyethylene decreases the rate of revision of total hip arthroplasty compared with conventional polyethylene at 13 years' follow-up. Bone Joint J 2016; 98-B(1): 28–32.
- 6Paxton EW, Inacio MC, Namba RS, Love R, Kurtz SM. Metal-on-conventional polyethylene total hip arthroplasty bearing surfaces have a higher risk of revision than metal-on-highly crosslinked polyethylene: Results from a US registry. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2015; 473(3): 1011–1021.
- 7Gallo J, Slouf M, Goodman SB. The relationship of polyethylene wear to particle size, distribution, and number: A possible factor explaining the risk of osteolysis after hip arthroplasty. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater 2010; 94(1): 171–177.
- 8Liu A, Richards L, Bladen CL, Ingham E, Fisher J, Tipper JL. The biological response to nanometre-sized polymer particles. Acta Biomater 2015; 23: 38–51.
- 9Shen C, Tang ZH, Hu JZ, Zou GY, Xiao RC, Yan DX. Does cross-linked polyethylene decrease the revision rate of total hip arthroplasty compared with conventional polyethylene? A meta-analysis. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 2014; 100(7): 745–750.
- 10Nich C, Takakubo Y, Pajarinen J, Ainola M, Salem A, Sillat T, Rao AJ, Raska M, Tamaki Y, Takagi M, Konttinen YT, Goodman SB, Gallo J. Macrophages-key cells in the response to wear debris from joint replacements. J Biomed Mater Res A 2013; 101(10): 3033–3045.
- 11Gallo J, Goodman SB, Konttinen YT, Raska M. Particle disease: Biologic mechanisms of periprosthetic osteolysis in total hip arthroplasty. Innate Immun 2013; 19(2): 213–224.
- 12Kandahari AM, Yang X, Laroche KA, Dighe AS, Pan D, Cui Q. A review of UHMWPE wear-induced osteolysis: The role for early detection of the immune response. Bone Res 2016; 4: 16014.
- 13Goldberg JR, Gilbert JL, Jacobs JJ, Bauer TW, Paprosky W, Leurgans S. A multicenter retrieval study of the taper interfaces of modular hip prostheses. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2002; 401: 149–161.
- 14Higgs GB, Hanzlik JA, MacDonald DW, Kane WM, Day JS, Klein GR, Parvizi J, Mont MA, Kraay MJ, Martell JM, Gilbert JL, Rimnac CM, Kurtz SM. Method of characterizing fretting and corrosion at the various taper connections of retrieved modular components from metal-on-metal total hip arthroplasty. metal-on-metal total hip replacement devices, ASTM STP 1560, ASTM International 2013; 146-158.
- 15Baxter RM, Ianuzzi A, Freeman TA, Kurtz SM, Steinbeck MJ. Distinct Immunohistomorphologic changes in periprosthetic hip tissues from historical and highly crosslinked UHMWPE implant retrievals. J Biomed Mater Res A 2010; 95(1): 68–78.
- 16Goodman SB, Chin RC, Chiou SS, Schurman DJ, Woolson ST, Masada MP. A clinical-pathologic-biochemical study of the membrane surrounding loosened and non-loosened total hip arthroplasties. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1989;(244): 182–187.
- 17Baxter RM, Freeman TA, Kurtz SM, Steinbeck MJ. Quantitative Analysis of Innate and Adaptive Immune Response in Periprosthetic THR Retrieval Tissue. Session No. 81, Transactions of the 8th World Biomaterials Congress, Amsterdam, the Netherlands, May 28–June 1; 2008.
- 18Morawietz L, Weimann A, Schroeder JH, Kuban RJ, Ungethuem U, Kaps C, Slevogt H, Gehrke T, Krukemeyer MG, Krenn V. Gene expression in endoprosthesis loosening: Chitinase activity for early diagnosis? J Orthop Res 2008; 26(3): 394–403.
- 19Elieh Ali Komi D, Sharma L, Dela Cruz CS. Chitin and its effects on inflammatory and immune responses. Clin Rev Allergy Immunol 2018; 54(2): 213–223. Review.
- 20Tao B, Jin W, Xu J, Liang Z, Yao J, Zhang Y, Wang K, Cheng H, Zhang X, Ke Y. Myeloid-specific disruption of tyrosine phosphatase Shp2 promotes alternative activation of macrophages and predisposes mice to pulmonary fibrosis. J Immunol 2014; 193(6): 2801–2811.
- 21Di Martino A, Sittinger M, Risbud MV. Chitosan: A versatile biopolymer for orthopaedic tissue-engineering. Biomaterials 2005; 26(30): 5983–5990.
- 22Davis S, Cirone AM, Menzie J, Russell F, Dorey CK, Shibata Y, Wei J, Nan C. Phagocytosis-mediated M1 activation by chitin but not by chitosan. Am J Physiol Cell Physiol 2018. [Epub ahead of print; 315: C62–C72.
- 23Goodman SB, Knoblich G, O'Connor M, Song Y, Huie P, Sibley R. Heterogeneity in cellular and cytokine profiles from multiple samples of tissue surrounding revised hip prostheses. J Biomed Mater Res 1996; 31(3): 421–428.
10.1002/(SICI)1097-4636(199607)31:3<421::AID-JBM17>3.0.CO;2-L CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
- 24Mahendra G, Pandit H, Kliskey K, Murray D, Gill HS, Athanasou N. Necrotic and inflammatory changes in metal-on-metal resurfacing hip arthroplasties. Acta Orthop 2009; 80(6): 653–659.
- 25Chistiakov DA, Killingsworth MC, Myasoedova VA, Orekhov AN, Bobryshev YV. CD68/macrosialin: Not just a histochemical marker. Lab Invest 2017; 97(1): 4–13.
- 26Gorzelanny C, Pöppelmann B, Pappelbaum K, Moerschbacher BM, Schneider SW. Human macrophage activation triggered by chitotriosidase-mediated chitin and chitosan degradation. Biomaterials 2010; 31(33): 8556–8563.
- 27Landgraeber S, Jäger M, Jacobs JJ, Hallab NJ. The pathology of orthopedic implant failure is mediated by innate immune system cytokines. Mediators Inflamm 2014; 2014: 185150.
- 28Kasraie S, Werfel T. Role of macrophages in the pathogenesis of atopic dermatitis. Mediators Inflamm 2013; 2013: 942375.
- 29Aquino M, Mucci T. Systemic contact dermatitis and allergy to biomedical devices. Curr Allergy Asthma Rep 2013; 13(5): 518–527.
- 30Bueter CL, Lee CK, Rathinam VA, Healy GJ, Taron CH, Specht CA, Levitz SM. Chitosan but not chitin activates the inflammasome by a mechanism dependent upon phagocytosis. J Biol Chem 2011; 286(41): 35447–35455.
- 31Bueter CL, Lee CK, Wang JP, Ostroff GR, Specht CA, Levitz SM. Spectrum and mechanisms of inflammasome activation by chitosan. J Immunol 2014; 192(12): 5943–5951.
- 32Cobelli N, Scharf B, Crisi GM, Hardin J, Santambrogio L. Mediators of the inflammatory response to joint replacement devices. Nat Rev Rheumatol 2011; 7(10): 600–608.
- 33Burton L, Paget D, Binder NB, Bohnert K, Nestor BJ, Sculco TP, Santambrogio L, Ross FP, Goldring SR, Purdue PE. Orthopedic wear debris mediated inflammatory osteolysis is mediated in part by NALP3 inflammasome activation. J Orthop Res 2013; 31(1): 73–80.
- 34Finšgar M, Uzunalić AP, Stergar J, Gradišnik L, Maver U. Novel chitosan/diclofenac coatings on medical grade stainless steel for hip replacement applications. Sci Rep 2016; 6: 26653.
- 35Fong D, Grégoire-Gélinas P, Cheng AP, Mezheritsky T, Lavertu M, Sato S, Hoemann CD. Lysosomal rupture induced by structurally distinct chitosans either promotes a type 1 IFN response or activates the inflammasome in macrophages. Biomaterials 2017; 129: 127–138.
- 36Ravindranathan S, Koppolu BP, Smith SG, Zaharoff DA. Effect of chitosan properties on Immunoreactivity. Mar Drugs 2016; 14(5): E91.
- 37Fong D, Hoemann CD. Chitosan immunomodulatory properties: Perspectives on the impact of structural properties and dosage. Future Sci OA 2017; 4(1): FSO225.
- 38Veleirinho B, Coelho DS, Dias PF, Maraschin M, Pinto R, Cargnin-Ferreira E, Peixoto A, Souza JA, Ribeiro-do-Valle RM, Lopes-da-Silva JA. Foreign body reaction associated with PET and PET/chitosan electrospun nanofibrous abdominal meshes. PLoS One 2014; 9(4): e95293.
- 39Torosyan Y, Bowsher J, Kurtz S, Mihalko W, Marinac-Dabic D. Opportunities and challenges of retrieval analysis: the role of standardized periprosthetic tissue/fluid analysis for assessing an aggravated host response. Symposium: Beyond the Implant Retrieval Analysis Methods for Implant Surveillance. ASTM STP 1606, ASTM International; 2017.