TY - JOUR
T1 - Glucose Transporter Type I Deficiency (G1D) at 25 (1990-2015)
T2 - Presumptions, Facts, and the Lives of Persons With This Rare Disease
AU - Pascual, Juan M.
AU - Ronen, Gabriel M.
N1 - Funding Information:
J.M.P. and G.M.R. had full access to all the data in the study and take responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis. J.M.P. acknowledges the generous support of the Glut1 Deficiency Foundation and the Dallas Women's Foundation (Billingsley Fund). He also thanks Drs. Levi Good, Qian Ma, and Richard Wang for generating some of the figures. He is also supported by National Institutes of Health (NIH) grants NS077015 , NS067015 , NS078059 , MH084021 , RR002584 , and RR024982 and by the NIH Office of Rare Diseases Research Glucose transporter type I deficiency syndrome (G1D) collaboration, education, and test translation (CETT) program for rare genetic diseases. The antibody used in Fig 2 was kindly provided by Dr. Richard Wang. None of the acknowledged persons or institutions participated in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; or preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript; or decision to submit the manuscript for publication. Author contributions: J.M.P.: design, data collection and interpretation, and manuscript draft. G.M.R.: Design, data collection and interpretation, and manuscript draft.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2015 Elsevier Inc.
PY - 2015/11
Y1 - 2015/11
N2 - Background As is often the case for rare diseases, the number of published reviews and case reports of glucose transporter type I deficiency (G1D) approaches or exceeds that of original research. This can indicate medical interest, but also scientific stagnation. Methods In assessing this state of affairs here, we focus not on what is peculiar or disparate about G1D, but on the assumptions that have reigned thus far undisputed, and critique them as a potential impediment to progress. To summarize the most common G1D phenotype, we trace the 25-year story of G1D in parallel with the natural history of one of two index patients, identified in 1990 by one of us (G.M.R.) and brought up to date by the other (J.M.P.) while later examining widely repeated but little-scrutinized statements. Among them are those that pertain to assumptions about brain fuels; energy failure; cerebrospinal glucose concentration; the purpose of ketogenic diet; the role of the defective blood-brain barrier; genotype-phenotype correlations; a bewildering array of phenotypes; ictogenesis, seizures, and the electroencephalograph; the use of mice to model the disorder; and what treatments may and may not be expected to accomplish. Results We reach the forgone conclusion that the proper study of mankind - and of one of its ailments (G1D) - is man itself (rather than mice, isolated cells, or extrapolated inferences) and propose a framework for rigorous investigation that we hope will lead to a better understanding and to better treatments for this and for rare disorders in general. Conclusions These considerations, together with experience drawn from other disorders, lead, as a logical consequence, to the nullification of the view that therapeutic development (i.e., trials) for rare diseases could or should be accelerated without the most vigorous scientific scrutiny: trial and error constitute an inseparable couple, such that, at the present time, hastening the former is bound to precipitate the latter.
AB - Background As is often the case for rare diseases, the number of published reviews and case reports of glucose transporter type I deficiency (G1D) approaches or exceeds that of original research. This can indicate medical interest, but also scientific stagnation. Methods In assessing this state of affairs here, we focus not on what is peculiar or disparate about G1D, but on the assumptions that have reigned thus far undisputed, and critique them as a potential impediment to progress. To summarize the most common G1D phenotype, we trace the 25-year story of G1D in parallel with the natural history of one of two index patients, identified in 1990 by one of us (G.M.R.) and brought up to date by the other (J.M.P.) while later examining widely repeated but little-scrutinized statements. Among them are those that pertain to assumptions about brain fuels; energy failure; cerebrospinal glucose concentration; the purpose of ketogenic diet; the role of the defective blood-brain barrier; genotype-phenotype correlations; a bewildering array of phenotypes; ictogenesis, seizures, and the electroencephalograph; the use of mice to model the disorder; and what treatments may and may not be expected to accomplish. Results We reach the forgone conclusion that the proper study of mankind - and of one of its ailments (G1D) - is man itself (rather than mice, isolated cells, or extrapolated inferences) and propose a framework for rigorous investigation that we hope will lead to a better understanding and to better treatments for this and for rare disorders in general. Conclusions These considerations, together with experience drawn from other disorders, lead, as a logical consequence, to the nullification of the view that therapeutic development (i.e., trials) for rare diseases could or should be accelerated without the most vigorous scientific scrutiny: trial and error constitute an inseparable couple, such that, at the present time, hastening the former is bound to precipitate the latter.
KW - G1D
KW - Glut1 deficiency
KW - blood brain barrier
KW - natural history
KW - triheptanoin
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84945485263&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84945485263&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.pediatrneurol.2015.08.001
DO - 10.1016/j.pediatrneurol.2015.08.001
M3 - Review article
C2 - 26341673
AN - SCOPUS:84945485263
SN - 0887-8994
VL - 53
SP - 379
EP - 393
JO - Pediatric Neurology
JF - Pediatric Neurology
IS - 5
ER -