VAMS-Based Blood Capillary Sampling for Mass Spectrometry-Based Human Metabolomics Studies
, Christa Malfertheiner 1, Giulia Caprioli 1, Søren Fjelstrup 2, Peter P. Pramstaller 1, Johannes Rainer 1 and Giuseppe Paglia 3,*
Vincent Richard
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The authors provided a useful validation study assessing the potential time storage of the sample collected by VAMS. I was not aware of this microsampling technique, thus I found the manuscript interesting. However ,I think the title does not reflect the content of the manuscript. The authors showed the results of their time storage validation, but did not establish nor standardized the full workflow in this study. Therefore, the title must be reworded, indicating that optimal sampling, storage and handling conditions were established prior mass spectrometry analysis. Moreover, the introduction is poor as the readers may be interested in knowing in details of the VAMS set up ( a scheme could be useful) and a complete list of other microsampling techniques ( one of them is mentioned in the introduction -DBS- is it the only one available?). Considering the scopus of the journal, the readers are probably not aware of the paramount importance of establishing sampling, storage and handling conditions prior analysis. A short text about this important issue ( especially in a ISO 17025-based quality assurance of the analytical method that includes storage and sampling) is recommended. In this context previous papers about the validation of the storage procedures, best practices and considerations for optimal mass-spectrometry-based metabolic/lipidomic studies to garantee data quality and avoid degradation of informative chemical content could be cited (see for example DOI: 10.1007/s00216-011-5249-z ;
DOI: 10.1002/jms.3231, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41596-021-00566-6, https://doi.org/10.1007/s13361-017-1790-0)
In the abstract please replace the term "classical" with "conventional".
Readers of Metabolites journal already know the aims of metabolomics studies reported in the first 12 lines of the discussion; please remove the paragraph.
Please reword the last sentence of the discussion. It is barely readable.
What about instrumental repeatibility and reproducibility of the VAMS collection? Any clues about these figures of merit?
At the end of conclusions replace the term “ideal” with “powerful”
Author Response
We would like to thank the reviewer for the comments raised while reading our manuscript.
The authors provided a useful validation study assessing the potential time storage of the sample collected by VAMS. I was not aware of this microsampling technique, thus I found the manuscript interesting. However ,I think the title does not reflect the content of the manuscript. The authors showed the results of their time storage validation, but did not establish nor standardized the full workflow in this study. Therefore, the title must be reworded, indicating that optimal sampling, storage and handling conditions were established prior mass spectrometry analysis. Moreover, the introduction is poor as the readers may be interested in knowing in details of the VAMS set up ( a scheme could be useful) and a complete list of other microsampling techniques ( one of them is mentioned in the introduction -DBS- is it the only one available?).
Considering the scopus of the journal, the readers are probably not aware of the paramount importance of establishing sampling, storage and handling conditions prior analysis. A short text about this important issue ( especially in a ISO 17025-based quality assurance of the analytical method that includes storage and sampling) is recommended. In this context previous papers about the validation of the storage procedures, best practices and considerations for optimal mass-spectrometry-based metabolic/lipidomic studies to garantee data quality and avoid degradation of informative chemical content could be cited (see for example DOI: 10.1007/s00216-011-5249-z ; DOI: 10.1002/jms.3231, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41596-021-00566-6, https://doi.org/10.1007/s13361-017-1790-0)
Response: We thank the reviewer for these considerations. We have modified the introduction, including additional information on other microsampling techniques, as well as some comments on the importance of sample collection, handling and storage.
Moreover, we changed the title to “VAMS-based blood capillary sampling for mass spectrometry-based human metabolomics studies”
In the abstract please replace the term "classical" with "conventional".
Response: Thank you. We did that.
Readers of Metabolites journal already know the aims of metabolomics studies reported in the first 12 lines of the discussion; please remove the paragraph.
Response: Thank you. We removed this paragraph and slightly reorganized the beginning of the discussion.
Please reword the last sentence of the discussion. It is barely readable.
We thank the reviewer for this comment. We rephrased the sentence.
What about instrumental repeatibility and reproducibility of the VAMS collection? Any clues about these figures of merit?
Response: We thank the reviewer for this comment. We actually addressed some of these points in our previous work (Volani et al., ABC, 2017).
At the end of conclusions replace the term “ideal” with “powerful”
Response: Thank you. We did that.
Reviewer 2 Report
The authors introduce two different studies in this interesting paper. However it is not enough clear because these two studies are not differenciate in the methods and in the results. It would be more convenient to present clearly the first step and the second step.
The aims of this study were :
1 - investigate short-term stability of VAMS samples
2- evaluate differences of metabolic profiles between VAMS sampled capillary blood to venous whole blood and venous whole blood derived plasma samples
Analysis of the results are correctly presented. Visual presentation of the system is welcome
The conclusions are supported by the data presented.
Author Response
We thank the reviewer for the comments raised while reading our manuscript.
The authors introduce two different studies in this interesting paper. However it is not enough clear because these two studies are not differenciate in the methods and in the results. It would be more convenient to present clearly the first step and the second step.
The aims of this study were :
1 - investigate short-term stability of VAMS samples
2- evaluate differences of metabolic profiles between VAMS sampled capillary blood to venous whole blood and venous whole blood derived plasma samples
Response: We thank the reviewer for this comment. In the Material and Methods part we separated the two aims.
Analysis of the results are correctly presented. Visual presentation of the system is welcome
The conclusions are supported by the data presented.
