Usage Information
Citation Information: JCI Insight. 2024;9(20):e178645. https://doi.org/10.1172/jci.insight.178645.
Abstract
BACKGROUND Mitochondrial diseases belong to the group of inborn errors of metabolism (IEM), with a prevalence of 1 in 2,000–5,000 individuals. They are the most common form of IEM, but, despite advances in next-generation sequencing technologies, almost half of the patients are left genetically undiagnosed.METHODS We investigated a cohort of 61 patients with defined mitochondrial disease to improve diagnostics, identify biomarkers, and correlate metabolic pathways to specific disease groups. Clinical presentations were structured using human phenotype ontology terms, and mass spectrometry–based proteomics was performed on primary fibroblasts. Additionally, we integrated 6 patients carrying variants of uncertain significance (VUS) to test proteomics as a diagnostic expansion.RESULTS Proteomic profiles from patient samples could be classified according to their biochemical and genetic characteristics, with the expression of 5 proteins (GPX4, MORF4L1, MOXD1, MSRA, and TMED9) correlating with the disease cohort, thus acting as putative biomarkers. Pathway analysis showed a deregulation of inflammatory and mitochondrial stress responses. This included the upregulation of glycosphingolipid metabolism and mitochondrial protein import, as well as the downregulation of arachidonic acid metabolism. Furthermore, we could assign pathogenicity to a VUS in MRPS23 by demonstrating the loss of associated mitochondrial ribosome subunits.CONCLUSION We established mass spectrometry–based proteomics on patient fibroblasts as a viable and versatile tool for diagnosing patients with mitochondrial disease.FUNDING The NovoNordisk Foundation, Knut and Alice Wallenberg Foundation, Wellcome Centre for Mitochondrial Research, UK Medical Research Council, and the UK NHS Highly Specialised Service for Rare Mitochondrial Disorders of Adults and Children.
Authors
Sandrina P. Correia, Marco F. Moedas, Lucie S. Taylor, Karin Naess, Albert Z. Lim, Robert McFarland, Zuzanna Kazior, Anastasia Rumyantseva, Rolf Wibom, Martin Engvall, Helene Bruhn, Nicole Lesko, Ákos Végvári, Lukas Käll, Matthias Trost, Charlotte L. Alston, Christoph Freyer, Robert W. Taylor, Anna Wedell, Anna Wredenberg
Usage data is cumulative from September 2024 through February 2025.
| Usage | JCI | PMC |
|---|---|---|
| Text version | 1,707 | 139 |
| 444 | 44 | |
| Figure | 189 | 0 |
| Table | 69 | 0 |
| Supplemental data | 279 | 17 |
| Citation downloads | 55 | 0 |
| Totals | 2,743 | 200 |
| Total Views | 2,943 | |
Usage information is collected from two different sources: this site (JCI) and Pubmed Central (PMC). JCI information (compiled daily) shows human readership based on methods we employ to screen out robotic usage. PMC information (aggregated monthly) is also similarly screened of robotic usage.
Various methods are used to distinguish robotic usage. For example, Google automatically scans articles to add to its search index and identifies itself as robotic; other services might not clearly identify themselves as robotic, or they are new or unknown as robotic. Because this activity can be misinterpreted as human readership, data may be re-processed periodically to reflect an improved understanding of robotic activity. Because of these factors, readers should consider usage information illustrative but subject to change.
