Diagnostic potential of energy metabolism-related genes in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction

Background Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is associated with changes in cardiac metabolism that affect energy supply in the heart. However, there is limited research on energy metabolism-related genes (EMRGs) in HFpEF. Methods The HFpEF mouse dataset (GSE180065, containing heart tissues from 10 HFpEF and five control samples) was sourced from the Gene Expression Omnibus database. Gene expression profiles in HFpEF and control groups were compared to identify differentially expressed EMRGs (DE-EMRGs), and the diagnostic biomarkers with diagnostic value were screened using machine learning algorithms. Meanwhile, we constructed a biomarker-based nomogram model for its predictive power, and functionality of diagnostic biomarkers were conducted using single-gene gene set enrichment analysis, drug prediction, and regulatory network analysis. Additionally, consensus clustering analysis based on the expression of diagnostic biomarkers was utilized to identify differential HFpEF-related genes (HFpEF-RGs). Immune microenvironment analysis in HFpEF and subtypes were performed for analyzing correlations between immune cells and diagnostic biomarkers as well as HFpEF-RGs. Finally, qRT-PCR analysis on the HFpEF mouse model was used to validate the expression levels of diagnostic biomarkers. Results We selected 5 biomarkers (Chrna2, Gnb3, Gng7, Ddit4l, and Prss55) that showed excellent diagnostic performance. The nomogram model we constructed demonstrated high predictive power. Single-gene gene set enrichment analysis revealed enrichment in aerobic respiration and energy derivation. Further, various miRNAs and TFs were predicted by Gng7, such as Gng7-mmu-miR-6921-5p, ETS1-Gng7. A lot of potential therapeutic targets were predicted as well. Consensus clustering identified two distinct subtypes of HFpEF. Functional enrichment analysis highlighted the involvement of DEGs-cluster in protein amino acid modification and so on. Additionally, we identified five HFpEF-RGs (Kcnt1, Acot1, Kcnc4, Scn3a, and Gpam). Immune analysis revealed correlations between Macrophage M2, T cell CD4+ Th1 and diagnostic biomarkers, as well as an association between Macrophage and HFpEF-RGs. We further validated the expression trends of the selected biomarkers through experimental validation. Conclusion Our study identified 5 diagnostic biomarkers and provided insights into the prediction and treatment of HFpEF through drug predictions and network analysis. These findings contribute to a better understanding of HFpEF and may guide future research and therapy development.