A metabolomics study in aqueous humor discloses altered arginine metabolism in Parkinson’s disease

Background The lack of accessible and informative biomarkers results in a delayed diagnosis of Parkinson’s disease (PD), whose symptoms appear when a significant number of dopaminergic neurons have already disappeared. The retina, a historically overlooked part of the central nervous system (CNS), has gained recent attention. It has been discovered that the composition of cerebrospinal fluid influences the aqueous humor composition through microfluidic circulation. In addition, alterations found in the brain of patients with PD have a correlate in the retina. This new paradigm highlights the potential of the aqueous humor as a sample for identifying differentially concentrated metabolites that could, eventually, become biomarkers if also found altered in blood or CSF of patients. In this research we aim at analyzing the composition of the aqueous humor from healthy controls and PD patients. Methods A targeted metabolomics approach with concentration determination by mass spectrometry was used. Statistical methods including principal component analysis and linear discriminants were used to select differentially concentrated metabolites that allow distinguishing patients from controls. Results In this first metabolomics study in the aqueous humor of PD patients, elevated levels of 16 compounds were found; molecules differentially concentrated grouped into biogenic amines, amino acids, and acylcarnitines. A biogenic amine, putrescine, alone could be a metabolite capable of differentiating between PD and control samples. The altered levels of the metabolites were correlated, suggesting that the elevations stem from a common mechanism involving arginine metabolism. Conclusions A combination of three metabolites, putrescine, tyrosine, and carnitine was able to correctly classify healthy participants from PD patients. Altered metabolite levels suggest altered arginine metabolism. The pattern of metabolomic disturbances was not due to the levodopa-based dopamine replacement medication because one of the patients was not yet taking levodopa but a dopamine receptor agonist.