Figure legend
Fig 1. LC-MS/MS lipidomics analysis between the mild ICP and
control group. (A) The score plot of the supervised orthogonal
partial least squares discriminant analysis (OPLS-DA) of mild ICP
(yellow) and control (red) group. (B) Permutation analysis. R2x
(cum) and R2y (cum) represent the cumulative interpretation rate of the
model in the x-axis and y-axis directions, respectively. Cum represents
the accumulation of several principal components. Q2 (cum) represents
the cumulative prediction rate of the model. (C) Volcano plots
of the levels of differentially expressed lipids. Red indicates
increased levels, blue indicates decreased levels, and gray indicates no
statistical significance. (D) Hierarchical clustering of each
sample data set showing the differentially expressed lipids.
Fig 2. LC-MS/MS lipidomics analysis between the severe ICP and
control group. (A) The score plot of the OPLS-DA of severe ICP
(blue) and control (red) group. (B) Permutation analysis. R2x
(cum) and R2y (cum) represent the cumulative interpretation rate of the
model in the x-axis and y-axis directions, respectively. Cum represents
the accumulation of several principal components. Q2 (cum) represents
the cumulative prediction rate of the model. (C) Volcano plots
of the levels of differentially expressed lipids. Red indicates
increased levels, blue indicates decreased levels, and gray indicates no
statistical significance. (D) Hierarchical clustering of each
sample data set showing the differentially expressed lipids.
Fig 3. Differentially expressed lipids in the mild and severe
group and the pathway analysis. (A) Venn diagram of the
differentially expressed lipids in ICP placenta and ICP plasma.(B) Pathway analysis of 44 differentially altered lipids.(C) Intensity of differential lipids expression in the control
(blue), mild ICP (red) and severe ICP (green). Data are presented as the
means ± SEMs. Significance was assessed using a two-tailed Student’s
t-test. *P <0.05, **P <0.01, ***P <0.0001vs. the control group.
Fig 4. WGCNA analysis and identification of lipids associated
with the clinical traits of ICP. (A) Pearson correlation analysis of the
lipids module and clinical traits, the red color indicates a positive
correlation and blue indicates negative correlation. The depth of the
color indicates the strength of the correlation. (B) Hub lipids in pink
module was screened out by CytoScape. (C) Intensity of differential hub
lipids expression in the pink module. Data are presented as the means ±
SEMs. Significance was assessed using a two-tailed Student’s t-test.
**P <0.01, ***P <0.0001 vs. the control group.
Fig 5. Diagnostic utility of differential lipids in placenta
from ICP pregnant women. (A) ROC analysis of SM (d42:1).(B) ROC analysis of SM (d18:1/24:1). (C) ROC analysis
of PC (17:0/18:2). (D) ROC analysis of PE (16:0p/22:1).(E) ROC analysis of PE (18:0p/20:1). (F) ROC analysis
of dMePE (20:1p/16:0). Multiple logistic regression analysis showed the
combined ROC analysis of PE (16:0/20:2)/SM (d42:1)/PC (17:0/18:2)(G) and PE (16:0/20:2)/SM (d42:1)/PC (17:0/18:2)/PE
(16:0p/22:1) (H) . AUC, area under the curve; CI, confidence
interval; ROC, receiver operating characteristic.