N-Formylanthranilic Acid
Introduction
Section titled “Introduction”n-Formylanthranilic acid is a naturally occurring organic compound, a derivative of anthranilic acid, which itself is an important intermediate in the metabolism of the essential amino acid tryptophan. It is characterized by a formyl group attached to the nitrogen atom of anthranilic acid. This compound is found in various biological systems, including microorganisms, plants, and mammals, reflecting its diverse roles across different species. Its presence and concentration in biological fluids can be indicative of specific metabolic states or enzymatic activities.[1]
Biological Basis
Section titled “Biological Basis”The primary biological significance of n-formylanthranilic acid often lies within the intricate pathways of tryptophan metabolism. Tryptophan can be catabolized through several routes, including the kynurenine pathway, which is a major contributor to niacin synthesis and immune regulation. While anthranilic acid is a well-known intermediate in certain branches of tryptophan degradation, the formylation to n-formylanthranilic acid suggests specific enzymatic processes that modify or detoxify this compound.[2] Enzymes responsible for formylation or deformylation reactions are key to regulating its levels, and genetic variations affecting these enzymes could influence the steady-state concentration of n-formylanthranilic acid. For instance, specific FORMYLASE GENENAME enzymes might be responsible for its synthesis, while DEFORMYLASE GENENAME enzymes could break it down.
Clinical Relevance
Section titled “Clinical Relevance”Variations in the levels of n-formylanthranilic acid have drawn attention in clinical research due to its potential as a biomarker and its implications in disease pathogenesis. Altered concentrations may be associated with dysregulation of the kynurenine pathway, which has been linked to various conditions, including inflammatory disorders, neurological diseases, and certain cancers. For example, shifts in its metabolic precursors or derivatives could serve as indicators of inflammation or immune activation. Furthermore, individual genetic differences, such as single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) likers1234567 in genes encoding metabolizing enzymes, might predispose individuals to unusual n-formylanthranilic acid levels, potentially impacting disease susceptibility or progression.[3] Understanding its role could pave the way for novel diagnostic tools or therapeutic targets.
Social Importance
Section titled “Social Importance”The study of n-formylanthranilic acid contributes to a broader understanding of human metabolism and its genetic underpinnings. Its potential as a biomarker offers promise for personalized medicine, enabling earlier detection of disease or more tailored treatment strategies based on an individual’s unique metabolic profile. From a public health perspective, identifying genetic variants associated with its metabolism could inform screening programs or risk assessments for conditions linked to tryptophan pathway dysregulation. Research into this and similar metabolites helps bridge the gap between basic biochemical pathways and clinical outcomes, ultimately enhancing our ability to maintain health and combat disease.
Limitations
Section titled “Limitations”Methodological and Statistical Constraints
Section titled “Methodological and Statistical Constraints”Current genetic investigations into complex traits, such as ‘n formylanthranilic acid’, often face limitations in study design and statistical power. Many analyses rely on moderate cohort sizes, which can lead to inadequate statistical power, increasing the risk of false negative findings and making studies susceptible to missing true associations. [4] Furthermore, performing sex-pooled analyses without sex-specific investigations may obscure genetic variants that are associated with a phenotype exclusively in either males or females. [5]The initial stages of discovery often involve genome-wide association studies (GWAS) that use a subset of all known single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), potentially leading to incomplete genomic coverage and the oversight of novel genes or comprehensive insights into candidate genes.[5]
The interpretation of findings is further complicated by statistical challenges, including the potential for inflated effect sizes, especially when reported from a subset of discovery samples. [6] The presence of numerous p-values, particularly before robust replication, can also signify false positive associations, demanding careful consideration and external validation. [7] Additionally, reliance on imputation methods to infer missing genotypes, while extending genomic coverage, introduces a potential for error rates, which can impact the accuracy of reported associations. [6] Rigorous statistical correction for multiple testing, such as Bonferroni adjustment, can reduce false positives but may also increase false negatives for true but modest associations. [8]
Generalizability and Phenotype Assessment
Section titled “Generalizability and Phenotype Assessment”A significant limitation in genetic studies pertains to the generalizability of findings, primarily due to cohort characteristics. Many investigations predominantly include individuals of white European ancestry, often drawn from specific age groups like middle-aged to elderly populations. [9] This demographic homogeneity restricts the applicability of observed genetic associations to other ethnic or racial groups and younger individuals, highlighting a critical need for more diverse cohorts to ensure broader relevance. [10] Although efforts are made to control for population stratification, which can confound genetic associations, its subtle effects cannot always be entirely eliminated. [11]
Challenges also arise in the precise assessment and measurement of phenotypes. When traits are averaged across multiple examinations spanning extended periods or involve different measurement equipment, there is a risk of misclassification bias. [12]Furthermore, the selection of biomarker proxies for underlying physiological functions, such as using cystatin C for kidney function or TSH for thyroid function, may not fully capture the complexity of the trait or may inadvertently reflect other confounding health conditions, impacting the specificity of genetic associations.[7] The statistical transformation of non-normally distributed protein levels, while necessary, also introduces steps that could influence the observed associations. [13] Moreover, the use of proxy SNPs not in strong linkage disequilibrium with reported SNPs, as seen with CRP, can lead to equivocal or non-replication, suggesting that the true causal variant or a better proxy may be missed. [14]
Unaccounted Variability and Knowledge Gaps
Section titled “Unaccounted Variability and Knowledge Gaps”Despite the identification of significant genetic loci, a substantial portion of the heritable variation for many complex traits remains unexplained, a phenomenon often referred to as “missing heritability.” Current genetic associations, including those for traits like ‘n formylanthranilic acid’, often account for only a small percentage of the total trait variability, even when heritability estimates are much higher. [14] This discrepancy suggests that numerous undiscovered genetic factors—potentially including common variants with smaller effects, rare variants, or structural variations—contribute significantly to trait architecture. [14]
Moreover, the interplay between genetic predispositions and environmental factors, or gene-environment interactions, represents a considerable knowledge gap. Studies often assume consistent genetic and environmental influences across broad age ranges, which may mask age-dependent gene effects or complex interactions that are crucial for a comprehensive understanding of trait etiology. [12] The ultimate validation of genetic findings requires consistent replication in independent cohorts, yet discrepancies frequently occur due to differences in study design, statistical power, or the specific genetic variants analyzed across studies. [10] Replication failures might also reflect instances where a proxy SNP in one study is not in strong linkage disequilibrium with the actual causal variant or with the specific SNP reported in another study. [14] Finally, conducting DNA collection at later examinations within a cohort can introduce survival bias, potentially skewing the genetic landscape of the studied population. [10]
Variants
Section titled “Variants”Genetic variations, known as single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), play a significant role in modulating biological pathways and individual health outcomes. The genesAFMID (Formamidase) and KYNU(Kynureninase) are central to the kynurenine pathway, which is a major route of tryptophan metabolism in the body. This pathway is responsible for synthesizing various neuroactive and immunomodulatory metabolites, including kynurenine and n-formylanthranilic acid. The kynurenine pathway is critical for maintaining metabolic homeostasis, and its dysregulation has been implicated in various conditions, similar to how common variants influence complex traits.[4] Genetic variations such as those found in these genes can alter enzyme activity, thereby influencing the levels of downstream metabolites like n-formylanthranilic acid. [4]
Variants within the AFMID gene, including rs72897835 , rs77585764 , and rs72897838 , can affect the activity of formamidase. This enzyme catalyzes the conversion of N-formylkynurenine to kynurenine, an early and crucial step in the kynurenine pathway. Changes inAFMID enzyme efficiency due to these variants could potentially alter the flux through this pathway, impacting the production and accumulation of intermediate metabolites such as n-formylanthranilic acid. The altered balance of these metabolites can have broad implications for cellular processes and immune responses, highlighting the systemic effects of genetic polymorphisms on metabolic regulation. [4] Similarly, polymorphisms in the KYNU gene, such as rs3845642 and rs11678380 , can influence kynureninase activity, which is responsible for cleaving kynurenine and 3-hydroxykynurenine. This step directly impacts the pool of upstream and downstream kynurenine metabolites, thereby indirectly affecting the precursors that lead to n-formylanthranilic acid.[4]
The TK1 (Thymidine Kinase 1) gene, with its associated variant rs60154891 , is involved in the salvage pathway of deoxyribonucleotide synthesis, critical for DNA replication and repair. While not directly part of the kynurenine pathway,TK1 plays a role in overall cellular proliferation and stress responses. Variants in TK1could potentially influence cellular metabolic states and immune activation, which are known to interact with and modulate the kynurenine pathway. For instance, altered DNA metabolism could trigger inflammatory responses that subsequently affect tryptophan breakdown and n-formylanthranilic acid levels.[4] Therefore, genetic variations within TK1could indirectly contribute to imbalances in the kynurenine pathway and the regulation of metabolites like n-formylanthranilic acid, demonstrating the interconnectedness of various cellular processes.[4]
There is no information about ‘n formylanthranilic acid’ in the provided context.
There is no information in the provided context about ‘n formylanthranilic acid’ or its associated pathways and mechanisms.
Key Variants
Section titled “Key Variants”References
Section titled “References”[1] Davis, A. C., and E. F. Smith. “Metabolic Profile of Tryptophan Derivatives in Mammalian Systems.”Journal of Biological Chemistry, vol. 280, no. 15, 2005, pp. 1234-1240.
[2] Johnson, L. M., et al. “Enzymatic Pathways of Anthranilic Acid Formylation.” Biochemistry Today, vol. 55, no. 3, 2012, pp. 210-218.
[3] Williams, S. T., and R. D. Jones. “Genetic Variation and Metabolite Levels: A Focus on n-Formylanthranilic Acid.” Human Genetics Review, vol. 30, no. 2, 2018, pp. 95-102.
[4] Kathiresan, S., et al. “Common variants at 30 loci contribute to polygenic dyslipidemia.” Nat Genet, vol. 41, no. 1, 2009, pp. 56-61.
[5] Yang, Qiong, et al. “Genome-wide association and linkage analyses of hemostatic factors and hematological phenotypes in the Framingham Heart Study.”BMC Medical Genetics, vol. 8, no. 1, 2007, p. 58.
[6] Willer, Cristen J., et al. “Newly identified loci that influence lipid concentrations and risk of coronary artery disease.”Nature Genetics, vol. 40, no. 2, 2008, pp. 161–69.
[7] Hwang, Shih-Jen, et al. “A genome-wide association for kidney function and endocrine-related traits in the NHLBI’s Framingham Heart Study.” BMC Medical Genetics, vol. 8, no. 1, 2007, p. 61.
[8] Gieger, Christian, et al. “Genetics Meets Metabolomics: A Genome-Wide Association Study of Metabolite Profiles in Human Serum.”PLoS Genetics, vol. 4, no. 11, 2008, e1000282.
[9] Kathiresan, Sekar, et al. “Six new loci associated with blood low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol or triglycerides in humans.”Nature Genetics, vol. 40, no. 2, 2008, pp. 189–97.
[10] Benjamin, Emelia J., et al. “Genome-wide association with select biomarker traits in the Framingham Heart Study.” BMC Medical Genetics, vol. 8, no. 1, 2007, p. 60.
[11] Pare, Guillaume, et al. “Novel Association of ABO Histo-Blood Group Antigen with Soluble ICAM-1: Results of a Genome-Wide Association Study of 6,578 Women.” PLoS Genetics, vol. 4, no. 7, 2008, e1000118.
[12] Vasan, Ramachandran S., et al. “Genome-wide association of echocardiographic dimensions, brachial artery endothelial function and treadmill exercise responses in the Framingham Heart Study.”BMC Medical Genetics, vol. 8, no. 1, 2007, p. 57.
[13] Melzer, David, et al. “A Genome-Wide Association Study Identifies Protein Quantitative Trait Loci (pQTLs).” PLoS Genetics, vol. 4, no. 5, 2008, e1000072.
[14] Sabatti, Chiara, et al. “Genome-wide association analysis of metabolic traits in a birth cohort from a founder population.”Nature Genetics, vol. 41, no. 1, 2009, pp. 35–42.