The role of the Human Metabolome Database in inborn errors of metabolism
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Metabolomics holds considerable promise to advance our understanding of human disease, including our understanding of inborn errors of metabolism (IEM). The application of metabolomics in IEM research has already led to the discovery of several novel IEMs and the identification of novel IEM biomarkers. However, with hundreds of known IEMs and more than 700 associated IEM metabolites, it is becoming increasingly challenging for clinical researchers to keep track of IEMs, their associated metabolites, and their corresponding metabolic mechanisms. Furthermore, when using metabolomics to assist in IEM biomarker discovery or even in IEM diagnosis, it is becoming much more difficult to properly identify metabolites from the complex NMR and MS spectra collected from IEM patients. To that end, comprehensive, open access metabolite databases that provide up-to-date referential information about metabolites, metabolic pathways, normal/abnormal metabolite concentrations, and reference NMR or MS spectra for compound identification are essential. Over the last few years, a number of compound databases, including the Human Metabolome Database (HMDB), have been developed to address these challenges. First described in 2007, the HMDB is now the world's largest and most comprehensive metabolomic resource for human metabolic studies. The latest release of the HMDB contains 114,100 metabolite entries (with 247 being relevant to IEMs), thousands of metabolite concentrations (with 600 being relevant to IEMs), and ~33,000 metabolic and disease-associated pathways (with 202 being relevant to IEMs). Here we provide a summary of the HMDB and offer some guidance on how it can be used in metabolomic studies of IEMs.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".