Metabolomic Discovery of Novel Urinary Galabiosylceramide Analogs as Fabry Disease Biomarkers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fabry disease is an X-linked, complex, multisystemic lysosomal storage disorder presenting marked phenotypic and genotypic variability among affected male and female patients. Glycosphingolipids, mainly globotriaosylceramide (Gb(3)) isoforms/analogs, globotriaosylsphingosine (lyso-Gb(3)) and analogs, as well as galabiosylceramide (Ga(2)) isoforms/analogs accumulate in the vascular endothelium, nerves, cardiomyocytes, renal glomerular and tubular epithelial cells, and biological fluids. The search for biomarkers reflecting disease severity and progression is still on-going. A metabolomic study using quadrupole time-of-flight mass spectrometry has revealed 22 galabiosylceramide isoforms/analogs in urine of untreated Fabry patients classified in seven groups according to their chemical structure: (1) Saturated fatty acid; (2) one extra double bond; (3) two extra double bonds; (4) hydroxylated saturated fatty acid; (5) hydroxylated fatty acid and one extra double bond; (6) hydrated sphingosine and hydroxylated fatty acid; (7) methylated amide linkage. Relative quantification of both Ga(2) and Gb(3) isoforms/analogs was performed. All these biomarkers are significantly more abundant in urine samples from untreated Fabry males compared with healthy male controls. A significant amount of Ga(2) isoforms/analogs, accounting for 18% of all glycosphingolipids analyzed (Ga(2) + Gb(3) and respective isoforms/analogs), were present in urine of Fabry patients. Gb(3) isoforms containing saturated fatty acids are the most abundant (60.9%) compared with 26.3% for Ga(2). A comparison between Ga(2) isoforms/analogs and their Gb(3) counterparts also showed that the proportion of analogs with hydroxylated fatty acids is significantly greater for Ga(2) (35.8%) compared with Gb(3) (1.9%). These results suggest different biological pathways involved in the synthesis and/or degradation of Gb(3) and Ga(2) metabolites.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".