Investigates biochemical adaptations in GSD type Ia and Ib mouse models, suggesting differences in metabolic disturbance severity.
Glycogen storage disease type I (GSD I) is an autosomal recessive inborn error of carbohydrate metabolism. Patients with GSD type Ia and Ib exhibit overlapping and distinct symptoms and complications. Notably, GSD Ia patients show more severe hypertriglyceridemia and higher risk of hepatic tumors than GSD Ib patients. Given the liver's pivotal role in these processes, this study utilized hepatocyte-specific CRISPR/Cas9-mediated somatic gene editing to explore the pathophysiological and biochemical adaptations in hepatic GSD Ia and Ib side-by-side. Additionally, hepatic histology, transcriptomics, and proteomics analysis was performed. Compared to controls, hepatic GSD Ia and Ib mice showed hepatomegaly, fasting hypoglycemia, hyperlactatemia, and increased uric acid in plasma, which was somewhat more pronounced in GSD Ia than Ib. Both GSD I subtypes showed similar reductions in hepatic acetyl-CoA precursor pool enrichment and increases in de novo biosynthesis of hepatic stearate and oleate. Interestingly, only GSD Ia mice showed mildly elevated plasma triglyceride and hepatic phosphate sugars. Metabolic changes were reflected at the transcriptomic and proteomic levels, with largely similar responses between GSD Ia and Ib livers. Moreover, altered mRNAs and protein levels related to nucleotide-binding oligomerization domain (NOD) signaling pathways, infection and inflammation, liver disease, and chemical carcinogenesis were somewhat more pronounced in hepatic GSD Ia than in GSD Ib mice. Overall, the metabolic disturbance was more severe in hepatocyte-specific GSD Ia than in GSD Ib mice, consistent with the clinical phenotype in patients. The metabolic disorders and specific metabolites, genes, and proteins identified in this study provided new insights into the pathophysiological and biochemical phenotypes of GSD I subtypes in the liver.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Krishnamurthy et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: