MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414154152 · doi:10.1021/acsomega.5c07074

Resolving Hexose-Phosphates by LC-MS Leads to New Insights in PGM1-CDG Pathophysiology

2025· article· en· W4414154152 on OpenAlexaff
Karen Driesen, Sam De Craemer, Éva Morava, David Cassiman, Peter Witters, Bart Ghesquière

Bibliographic record

VenueACS Omega · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMetabolomics and Mass Spectrometry Studies
Canadian institutionsIONICS Mass Spectrometry (Canada)
FundersVlaamse regeringKU LeuvenFonds Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek
KeywordsPhosphoglucomutaseMetabolomicsMass spectrometryGlycosylationPosttranslational modificationIdentification (biology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hexose-phosphates play a role in many metabolic pathways, such as glycolysis and glycosylation. To understand the molecular basis of diseases such as congenital disorders of glycosylation (CDG), information about the source and abundance of hexose-phosphates is imperative. Mass spectrometry (MS)-based tracer metabolomics can provide this information, but hexose-phosphates are structural isomers with similar physicochemical properties, which makes them difficult to differentiate using MS. Here, we present and compare two optimized liquid-chromatography-based MS methods for the identification of relevant hexose-phosphates, compatible with tracer metabolomics. A combination of these two methods led to the analysis of eight hexose-monophosphates and two hexose-bisphosphates that can occur in humans. Both methods displayed linearity in 3 to 4 orders of magnitude, with limits of quantification between 0.5 and 50 nM, which is well within the cellular concentration range. The applicability of these methods to biological models was then proven in a study of the effect of galactose treatment in phosphoglucomutase 1 (PGM1)-CDG fibroblasts. Here, we show, for the first time, the hexose-phosphate profiles in CDG and how these change upon treatment.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.351
Threshold uncertainty score0.775

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.238 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACS OmegaSame topicMetabolomics and Mass Spectrometry StudiesFrench-language works237,207