과당 intolerance - 과일 많이 먹으면 탈나는 사람들!!

[문형철]

음식 pathogen 탐구의 지속

과일에는 50% glucose : 50% furctose가 들어 있음

선천적으로 과당 소화효소가 없는 사람들이 있음.

선천적으로 과당 소화효소가 적은 사람들은? 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AkZcUZL0ohI 

World J Clin Pediatr. 2022 Jul 9; 11(4): 321–329.

Published online 2022 Jul 9. doi: 10.5409/wjcp.v11.i4.321

PMCID: PMC9331401

PMID: 36052111

Hereditary fructose intolerance: A comprehensive review

Sumit Kumar Singh and Moinak Sen Sarma

Author information Article notes Copyright and License information PMC Disclaimer

Abstract

Hereditary fructose intolerance (HFI) is a rare autosomal recessive inherited disorder that occurs due to the mutation of enzyme aldolase B located on chromosome 9q22.3. A fructose load leads to the rapid accumulation of fructose 1-phosphate and manifests with its downstream effects. Most commonly children are affected with gastrointestinal symptoms, feeding issues, aversion to sweets and hypoglycemia. Liver manifestations include an asymptomatic increase of transaminases, steatohepatitis and rarely liver failure. Renal involvement usually occurs in the form of proximal renal tubular acidosis and may lead to chronic renal insufficiency. For confirmation, a genetic test is favored over the measurement of aldolase B activity in the liver biopsy specimen. The crux of HFI management lies in the absolute avoidance of foods containing fructose, sucrose, and sorbitol (FSS). There are many dilemmas regarding tolerance, dietary restriction and occurrence of steatohepatitis. Patients with HFI who adhere strictly to FSS free diet have an excellent prognosis with a normal lifespan. This review attempts to increase awareness and provide a comprehensive review of this rare but treatable disorder.

유전성 과당 불내증(HFI)은 염색체 9q22.3에 위치한 효소 알돌라제 B의 돌연변이로 인해 발생하는 희귀한 상염색체 열성 유전 질환입니다. 과당을 과량 섭취하면 과당 1-인산이 빠르게 축적되고 그 후유증으로 나타납니다. 가장 일반적으로 어린이는 위장 증상, 수유 문제, 단 음식에 대한 혐오감 및 저혈당증에 영향을 받습니다. 

간 증상으로는 무증상 트랜스아미나제 증가, 지방간염, 드물게 간부전 등이 있습니다. 신장 침범은 일반적으로 근위 신 세뇨관 산증의 형태로 발생하며 만성 신부전으로 이어질 수 있습니다. 확인을 위해 간 생검 검체에서 알돌라제 B 활성을 측정하는 것보다 유전자 검사를 선호합니다. HFI 관리의 핵심은 과당, 자당, 소르비톨(FSS)이 함유된 식품을 절대적으로 피하는 것입니다. 내성, 식이 제한 및 지방간염 발생과 관련하여 많은 딜레마가 있습니다. FSS가 없는 식단을 엄격하게 준수하는 HFI 환자는 예후가 우수하며 정상적인 수명을 유지합니다. 이 리뷰는 희귀하지만 치료가 가능한 이 질환에 대한 인식을 높이고 종합적인 검토를 제공하고자 합니다.

Keywords: Hereditary, Fructose, Intolerance, Children, Liver, Steatohepatitis, Aldolase

Core Tip: Hereditary Fructose Intolerance is a rare autosomal recessive inherited disorder due to the mutation of enzyme aldolase B. Awareness regarding its diverse manifestations is required to clinically suspect and diagnose this condition. Genetic testing clinches the diagnosis. Treatment is simple and involves only the dietary exclusion of fructose, sucrose and sorbitol. The prognosis is favourable. This review provides a comprehensive understanding of the disease.

Go to:

INTRODUCTION

Fructose is a monosaccharide found in honey, fruits and many vegetables consumed daily. It is also the component of the main sweetening agent, sucrose in the majority of sweets and syrups. Small amounts of fructose are also produced in the human brain via the polyol pathway[1]. After ingestion, fructose is absorbed from the intestine through glucose transport proteins (GLUT) 5 and 2[2]. Subsequent metabolism is carried out predominantly in the liver, kidney and small intestine by the enzymes fructokinase, aldolase B, and triokinase[3]. Hereditary fructose intolerance (HFI) is a pathological condition that occurs due to a deficiency of enzyme aldolase B[3]. It is characterized by hypoglycemia, lactic acidosis, hypophosphatemia, hyperuricemia, hypermagnesemia and hyperalanemia due to dysregulation of gluconeogenesis, glycogenolysis and decreased inorganic phosphate[4].

과당은 

꿀, 과일 및 매일 섭취하는 많은 채소에서 발견되는 

단당류입니다. 

또한 대부분의 과자와 시럽에 함유된 주요 감미료인 자당의 성분이기도 합니다.

 소량의 과당은 

폴리올 경로를 통해 

인간의 뇌에서도 생성됩니다[1]. 

섭취 후 과당은 

포도당 수송 단백질(GLUT) 5와 2를 통해 

장에서 흡수됩니다[2]. 

이후 대사는 

주로 간, 신장, 소장에서 

프락토키나아제, 알돌라제 B, 트리오키나아제[3] 효소에 의해 수행됩니다. 

유전성 과당 불내증(HFI)은 

알돌라제 B[3] 효소 결핍으로 인해 발생하는 

병리학적인 상태입니다. 

포도당 생성, 

글리코겐 분해 및 무기 인산염 감소로 인한 저혈당, 

젖산증, 

저인산혈증, 

고요산혈증, 

고마그네슘혈증 및

 고알칼리혈증이 특징입니다[4].

EPIDEMIOLOGY AND GENETICS

HFI is a rare autosomal recessive inherited disorder with an estimated population preval‎ence ranging from 1 in 20000 to 1 in 60000[5]. There is no sex predilection. The gene for the enzyme aldolase B (ALDOB) is located on chromosome 9q22.3. Mutational aberrations include simple missense mutations, deletions, frameshift mutations, and mutations at splicing sites. A systemic review was conducted to assess ALDOB gene variants among patients with HFI[6]. The preval‎ence of HFI was estimated from the carrier frequency of variants described in patients, as well as rare variants predicted as pathogenic by in silico tools. In silico predictive software allows assessing the effect of amino acid substitutions on the structure or function of a protein without conducting functional studies[7]. The application of in silico tools can significantly improve the detection of genes and variation[8]. The studies included in the systematic review described 1426 alleles involved in the pathogenesis of HFI, spread in 29 countries on four continents[6]. 68 variants in ALDOB were identified among patients with HFI distributed in different populations. These variants were detected in 85 different genotypic combinations. Most of the mutations described in patients with HFI are restricted to a single ethnic group. The commonest variants distributed worldwide that account for most of the identified cases are: NM_000035_3:c.178C>T, NP_000026.2:p.(Arg60Ter); NM_000035_3:c.360_363del, NP_000026.2:p.(Asn120LysfsTer32); NM_000035_3:c.448G>C, NP_000026.2:p.(Ala150Pro); NM_000035_3:c.524C>A, NP_000026.2:p.(Ala175Asp) and NM_000035_3:c.1005C>G, NP_000026.2:p.(Asn335Lys). The analyses showed that the variants p.(Ala150Pro) and p.(Ala175Asp) are the most frequent in patients, accounting for approximately 68% of the alleles. The p.(Ala150Pro) variant alone accounts for 53% of all alleles identified worldwide, and has a variable frequency between the different geographic regions.p.(Asn120LysfsTer32) variant is the third most frequent (4.6%)[9-11]. Five novel mutations, (c.324+1G>A, c.112+1delG, c.380-1G>A, c.677G>A, and c.689delA) have been reported from an Indian community[12].

Go to:

PATHOGENESIS

It carries out the reversible conversion of fructose 1-phosphate (F-1P) to glyceraldehyde (GAH) and dihydroxyacetone phosphate (DHAP) as shown in (Figure ​(Figure1).1). Aldolase B also plays a role in gluconeogenesis and glycolytic pathways as it catalyzes fructose 1,6-bisphosphate (F-1,6P2) conversion to DHAP and glyceraldehyde 3-phosphate (G3P) in a reversible manner (Figure ​(Figure1).1). There are two other isoenzymes, aldolase A (predominantly expressed in skeletal muscle and red blood cells) and aldolase C (predominantly expressed in brain and smooth muscle) and both have a high affinity for F-1,6-P2 as a substrate[13]. The deficiency of aldolase A manifests mainly as recurrent rhabdomyolysis which may sometimes be accompanied by hemolysis and termed glycogen storage disorder type 12[14,15]. Aldolase C expression‎ has been found to be associated with certain neuroendocrine tumors and is being studied as a marker of neuroendocrine tumors[16].

Figure 1

Illustrates the pathway of fructose metabolism. Fructose is converted by ketohexokinase to F-1P that acts as substrate for Aldolase B which forms dihydroxyacetone phosphate (DHAP) and glyceraldehyde (GAH) that enter the glycolytic/gluconeogenic pathways. Aldolase B also catalyzes the reversible conversion of F-1,6P2 to DHAP and GAH-3P. Accumulation of F-1P leads to inhibition of glucose -6 P isomerase and along with depletion of inorganic phosphate, inhibits glycogen phosphorylase (red broken line). Similarly, increased IMP inhibits any residual Aldolase B activity if present. F-1P also activated PK which promotes lactic acid production. ADP: Adenosine diphosphate; AMP: adenosine monophosphate; ATP: adenosine triphosphate; DHAP: dihydroxyacetone phosphate; F-6P: Fructose 6-phosphate; F-1P: Fructose 1-phosphate; F-1,6-P2: Fructose 1,6-biphosphate; G-6P: glucose 6-phosphate, GAH glyceraldehyde; GAH-3P: Glyceraldehyde 3-phosphate; IMP: inosine monophosphate; KHK: Ketohexokinase; PEP: Phosphoenolpyruvate; Pi: Inorganic phosphate; PK: Pyruvate kinase.

Metabolic consequences

In a patient with HFI, a fructose load leads to the rapid accumulation of F-1P which results in depletion of intracellular inorganic phosphate (Pi) and adenosine triphosphate (ATP). As a result, adenosine 5’-monophosphate (AMP) degradation is increased, and hence, inosine monophosphate (IMP) and urate are generated rapidly resulting in hyperuricemia which is responsible for gout in patients with HFI (Figure ​(Figure1).1). Increased IMP through specific inhibition of aldolase B creates a vicious cycle leading to a further increase in F-1P. Depletion of ATP also results in increased release of magnesium as well as impaired protein synthesis and ultrastructural lesions which are responsible for hepatic and renal dysfunction. The consequences of increased F-1P are shown in Figure ​Figure22.

Figure 2

Illustrates the consequences of hereditary fructose intolerance.

Increased F-1P along with reduced Pi is also responsible for inhibition of glycogenolysis through impairment of glycogen phosphorylase. This fructose-induced hypoglycemia in HFI is not corrected by the administration of exogenous glucagon which again emphasizes the impaired glycogenolysis pathway. Further, the accumulation of F-1P impedes gluconeogenesis by inhibition of glucose-6-phosphate isomerase (G6PI) (Figure ​(Figure1).1). Overall, when a patient with HFI is given a fructose load, it leads to hypoglycemia due to deranged gluconeogenesis and glycogenolysis. In addition, lactic acidosis occurs due to activation of glycolytic pathway through increased activity of pyruvate kinase by F-1P and inability of aldolase B to convert DHAP and G3P to F-1,6P2. Notably, the metabolic consequences of fructose load also occur after ingestion of sorbitol found in various syrups and those with high glycemic foods such as rice. Sorbitol, through polyol pathways, is responsible for the endogenous production of fructose (Figure ​(Figure11)[1].

Go to:

CLINICAL FEATURES

The genotype-phenotype correlation has not been identified in patients with HFI. Patients with HFI develop symptoms only when exposed to dietary fructose directly or indirectly through sucrose or sorbitol. The classical presentation is described as an infant, otherwise healthy, presenting with nausea, protracted vomiting, poor feeding and lethargy and sometimes with seizures following the introduction of weaning foods containing sugar or starch[17]. Li et al[18] reported four cases of neonatal and early infantile acute liver failure associated with multi-organ failure induced by sucrose-containing common infant formula in patients with undiagnosed HFI. All patients were appropriately grown, born at term after uncomplicated pregnancies and deliveries, and discharged within the first week of life. There was no known consanguinity. One patient had a family history of an older brother who died on day 28 of life with a similar illness, though a specific diagnosis could not be ascertained. Another patient had a maternal half-sister who required a liver transplant for an indeterminate liver failure. Careful dietary history was obtained in all infants, though fructose exposure was unclear in two of the 4 cases due to unreliable history or unclear ingredient labelling, which delayed diagnosis. In all four cases, the newborn screen was normal. The diagnosis was confirmed by ALDOB gene sequencing. All infants were homozygous for the common c.448G>C (p.A150P) pathogenic variant[19]. Sometimes, it may present late in childhood or adulthood owing to the self-imposed strict dietary restriction of fructose-containing food items[19,20]. The child shows a strong aversion to sweets.

An intermittent dietary restriction can have a subtle presentation in the form of isolated hepatomegaly or intermittent elevations in transaminases[21]. Thus, a dietary history of fructose intake and the presence of fatty liver are important clues to suspect an underlying HFI in infants. Chronic liver disease in form of fatty liver, steatohepatitis and even cirrhosis may occur in patients with HFI who are fed regularly on a fructose-rich diet. Examination typically shows growth failure and hepatomegaly with or without jaundice. Renal involvement usually occurs in the form of proximal renal tubular acidosis and may lead to chronic renal insufficiency. Metabolic derangements include hypoglycemia, lactic acidosis, hypophosphatemia, hyperuricemia and hypermagnesemia[6]. HFI presenting as relapsing acute axonal neuropathy has also been reported recently, which improves after dietary fructose omission[22].

In contrast to the classical presentation of the above acute symptoms, some patients with residual enzymatic activity may remain asymptomatic or require a larger burden of fructose to become symptomatic. HFI can also remain masked in the presence of concomitant diseases. Aldag et al[23] reported an infant developing unexplained liver failure and metabolic dysfunction soon after a successful pyloromyotomy for hypertrophic pyloric stenosis and the diagnosis was confirmed by genetic testing. Similarly, Bobrus-Chociej reported that elevated transaminases and fatty liver may continue to prevail despite a compliant gluten-free diet in patients with celiac disease. In such a situation, a strong degree of suspicion for HFI is required[24].

Heterozygotes with HFI do not present with classical manifestations of HFI. It has been shown that there are significant but occult metabolic derangements in HFI heterozygous carriers. Randomized cross-over trials show that a high fructose diet (1.4 g/kg/d) increased postprandial plasma uric acid, insulin and hepatic insulin resistance index as compared to those on a low fructose diet (< 10 g/d). This analysis provides insight as to the extent of metabolic damages that can take place in homozygotes in whom these trials are deemed unethical[25]. There are several reports of gouty arthritis due to hyperuricemia in children with heterozygous mutation for HFI[26].

Go to:

EVAL‎UATION

A meticulous history revealing a clear correlation between exposure to dietary fructose and the onset of symptoms is the key to suspecting the possibility of underlying HFI. There are various pitfalls in the diagnosis of HFI. Kim et al[27] in their case series of 5 patients with subtle symptoms and aversion to sweets. They make a pertinent point that emphasis of classic teaching on infantile acute liver failure and biochemical derangements, such as hypoglycemia and hypophosphatemia, after the first exposure to fructose may inadvertently increase the likelihood of missing cases of HFI characterized by other manifestations. Hence index of suspicion must be high and wide screening must be employed. HFI should be looked for in any patient with unexplained reasons for failing to thrive. HFI is also often misdiagnosed with other nongenetic and genetic conditions, including an eating disorder, recurrent hepatitis, and glycogen storage disease. Moreover, fructose intolerance may not be pathognomonic for HFI alone, given the description of rare patients with fruit-induced, food protein-induced enterocolitis syndrome. Furthermore, the lack of a specific and practical biomarker for HFI means that neither newborn screening nor biochemical testing can be used to establish the diagnosis. Compliance, discrimination and psychosocial issues may be specific problems in adolescence[28].

Detection of non-glucose-reducing substances in the urine sample while on a fructose-containing diet is a bedside screening test. The presence of reducing sugars (glucose/fructose/Lactose) in urine can be detected by Benedict’s test[29]. While glucose can be detected in urine by glucose dipsticks, a positive Benedict’s test in urine with a negative glucose dipstick test points to the presence of other reducing sugars like fructose/Lactose. Provocative fructose tolerance tests in young children are cumbersome and fraught with the dangers of hypoglycemia. Are there simpler biochemical ways to screen for HFI? Untreated HFI patients present abnormal transferrin (Tf) glycosylation patterns due to the inhibition of mannose-6-phosphate isomerase by fructose-1-phosphate. Hence, elevated serum carbohydrate-deficient Tf (CDT) may allow the prompt detection of HFI. The CDT values improve when an FSS-restrictive diet is followed. Cano et al[30] showed that by capillary zone electrophoresis method, asialoTf correlated with dietary intake of sucrose and that pentasialoTf + hexasialoTf negatively correlated with dietary intake of fructose in patients with HFI. Moreover, the tetrasialoTf/disialoTf ratio also differentiated treated HFI patients from healthy controls. However some patients with HFI have been initially misdiagnosed with type 1 congenital disorders of glycosylation[31].

Liver biopsy in patients with HFI shows macro vesicular steatosis with or without changes in inflammation and fibrosis[32]. For confirmation, a genetic test is favoured over the measurement of aldolase B activity in liver biopsy specimens as later is invasive and not widely available. Genetic testing has high sensitivity and specificity and includes single gene sequencing, multi-gene panels, and genomic testing[33].

Go to:

DIFFERENTIAL DIAGNOSIS

Acute presentation of HFI mimics sepsis, acute infectious hepatitis, hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis and other metabolic diseases such as galactosemia, tyrosinemia, organic academia and urea cycle defect. In children presenting with hepatomegaly, fatty liver and raised transaminases, possibilities of Wilson disease, glycogen storage disorder, alpha-1 antitrypsin deficiency should be considered. Presentation as hypoglycemia, acidosis and hepatomegaly mimic fructose 1,6 bisphosphate deficiency, beta-ketothiolase deficiency, pyruvate carboxylase deficiency, congenital disorder of glycosylation, fatty acid oxidation defects and milder variants of respiratory chain defects. Predominant gastrointestinal symptoms and aversion to sweets distinguish HFI from the rest of the differential diagnoses.

Go to:

TREATMENT

Being a complex metabolic disorder, management of HFI needs a multidisciplinary approach with the involvement of a pediatrician, clinical geneticist, dietician with experience in metabolic disorders, hepatologist and nephrologist. The crux of HFI management lies in the absolute avoidance of foods containing fructose, sucrose, and sorbitol (FSS). Patients presenting with an acute metabolic crisis should be admitted to an intensive care setting and initiated intravenous glucose (dextrose), treatment of metabolic acidosis, (if present) and supportive treatment. Strict avoidance of FSS in the diet along with supplementation of other sources of carbohydrate (glucose, corn-starch) results in rapid reversal of symptoms. At length repetitive counselling, clear instructions on dietary restrictions and continuous reinforcement are required to maintain long-term dietary compliance and precipitations of break-through events. Table ​Table11 enlists the food items which should be avoided and which are permitted in patients with HFI. Patients with HFI on a strict FSS elimination diet can develop several nutritional deficiencies, especially vitamins mainly Vitamin C found predominantly in fruits and vitamin B complex. Thus, it is recommended to add multivitamin supplements to prevent the consequences of these deficiencies[34].

Table 1

Food items to be avoided and permitted in hereditary fructose intolerance

Food category

Foods to be avoided

Foods permitted

Open in a separate window

Go to:

CONTROVERSIES IN MANAGEMENT

Diet

Although a strict FSS diet is recommended while treating HFI, there is no clarity as to whether small amounts of fructose can be tolerated in the diet. At what permissible limit of fructose will liver and kidney damage not occur? Restriction of FSS may lead to growth failure even in clinically asymptomatic HFI patients. There is insufficient information about the long-term outcomes of minimal fructose ingestion. A recent study from Italy reported the ten years of follow-up of patients with HFI. Fatty liver (on sonography) persisted in 93.8% of patients despite being on FSS restricted diet of < 1.5 g/d (35). The authors also found that a significant proportion of patients continued to have raised transaminases (37.5%) even when dietary compliant. There are two reasons for the persisting liver abnormalities in patients with HFI. Firstly, fructose may be endogenously produced by the sorbitol-aldose reductase pathway, which can be activated after a glucose-enriched meal, nephrotoxic drugs or stressful conditions like sepsis and major surgery. Secondly, the permissible limits of fructose ingestion may not be safe in asymptomatic patients of HFI. The latter is supported by the determination of CDT by isoelectric focusing among the patients with HFI on an FSS-free diet by Di Dato et al[35]. They showed a significant correlation between the amount of fructose consumed and the percentage of disialoTf and tetrasialoTf/disialoTf ratio. The authors suggested that serum CDT profile could be considered a good tool to monitor FSS intake. In addition, CDT determination could be used to identify the maximum daily fructose tolerability of each HFI patient. However, the lack of widespread availability and high cost are the main barriers to the application of this tool.

Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease and HFI

As evident from the study by Di Dato et al[35], the majority of the patients with HFI despite being on an FSS-free diet continued to have fatty liver. In another cross-sectional study of 16 patients, non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) was found in 9 (56%) patients[32]. The importance lies in the fact that fatty liver may progress to steatohepatitis, hepatic fibrosis and cirrhosis. Moreover, there is an increased risk of type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular diseases[36,37]. The studies in ALDOB-KO mice as well as in patients with HFI have demonstrated that NAFLD may not be the result of direct lipogenic effects of fructose[38,39]. In addition, when ALDOB-KO mice were chronically exposed to small amounts of fructose in the chow (approximately 0.3%), they showed an increased accumulation of hepatic triglycerides, hepatic inflammation and signs of periportal fibrosis[38,40]. Notably, these ALDOB-KO mice also had increased intrahepatic F-1P concentrations[38]. Lanaspa et al[38] also showed the increased hepatic expression‎ of enzymes was seen in de novo lipogenesis with an abundance of cytosolic glucokinase in ALDOB-KO mice. Thus, it can be speculated that the accumulation of F-1P in ALDOB-KO mice may stimulate hepatic glucose uptake, thereby enhancing the storage of glycogen and fat.

In the experimental model, almost all the metabolic abnormalities in the ALDOB-KO mice were ameliorated when supplemented with ketohexokinase (KHK), an enzyme involved in the phosphorylation of fructose[38]. Treatment with osthole, a natural KHK inhibitor also showed the same results[41]. Additionally, osthole treatment inhibited de novo lipogenesis in ALDOB KO mice. In humans, a loss of KHK results in essential fructosuria (OMIM #229800) which is a benign condition[42]. Hence, KHK inhibition may serve as a potential therapeutic target for the treatment of NAFLD in patients with HFI. Ghannem et al[43] have unusually reported epithelioid granulomas in association with liver adenomatosis and macrovesicular steatosis in an adult with HFI that yielded negative workup for tuberculosis, sarcoidosis and other infectious diseases. They postulated that the granulomas in the non-tumour liver sections may have developed from the inflammatory stress due to inflammatory hepatocellular adenomas.

Vaccines

There are considerable controversies about the safety concerns of vaccines that contain fructose, sucrose or sorbitol in HFI. Saborido-Fiaño et al[44,45] argue that the safe threshold of fructose was 2.4 mg/kg/dose and various oral rotavirus vaccines would not qualify for that category. This requires the need to revisit the vaccine content. The authors also cautioned against the use of Sars-Cov-2 vaccines in children affected with HFI. Urru et al[46] demonstrated the safety of these vaccines in adults.

Go to:

PROGNOSIS

The data on long-term follow-up of patients with HFI is not available in the literature. However, In a recent study of HFI children with a mean follow-up of 10.3 ± 5.6 years, all of them were asymptomatic but had evidence of fatty liver in the majority and raised transaminases in some of them[26]. Interestingly, fructose intake in these children did not correlate with either of the two findings. The two case reports of HFI being diagnosed in adulthood because of self-imposed restriction to fructose in the diet since infancy may signify that the patients with HFI who adhere strictly to an FSS-free diet may have a good prognosis and normal lifespan[19,20]. On the other hand, when compliance is poor, renal and liver-related complications in the form of chronic renal insufficiency and hepatic fibrosis may ensue.

Go to:

FUTURE RESEARCH

There is a need for data on the long-term outcome of HFI patients on an FSS-restricted diet to provide more insights into the consequences of NAFLD, cardiovascular disease and type 2 diabetes. Recent studies emphasized the role of F-1P in the hepatic fat accumulation of ALDOB-KO mice and the development of NAFLD. However, the exact role of endogenous fructose production (via the polyol pathway) in the accumulation of intrahepatic F-1P remains to be determined in animals as well as humans. Finally, clinical trials are required to show the benefit of KHK inhibition in the treatment of NAFLD in HFI patients.

Go to:

CONCLUSION

HFI has diverse manifestations involving gastrointestinal, liver and renal issues. It mimics many metabolic conditions which present similarly. Other than genetics, there are no reliable laboratory markers that effectively diagnose this condition. A straight-forward FSS-free diet generally leads to a good long-term prognosis. There are however considerable controversies on the effect of dietary therapy on the liver, biochemistry, coexistence of steatosis and permissible levels of fructose in vaccines. Future research should be directed to basic sciences and long-term outcomes of this disease.

Go to:

Footnotes

Conflict-of-interest statement: All the authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Provenance and peer review: Invited article; Externally peer reviewed.

Peer-review model: Single blind

Peer-review started: November 27, 2021

First decision: April 13, 2022

Article in press: June 20, 2022

Specialty type: Gastroenterology and hepatology

Country/Territory of origin: India

Peer-review report’s scientific quality classification

Grade A (Excellent): 0

Grade B (Very good): 0

Grade C (Good): C

Grade D (Fair): 0

Grade E (Poor): 0

P-Reviewer: Barone M, Italy A-Editor: Wang JL, United States S-Editor: Liu JH L-Editor: A P-Editor: Liu JH

Go to:

Contributor Information

Sumit Kumar Singh, Department of Pediatrics, Sri Aurobindo Medical College and PGI, Indore 453555, Madhya Pradesh, India.

Moinak Sen Sarma, Department of Pediatric Gastroenterology, Sanjay Gandhi Postgraduate Institute of Medical Sciences, Lucknow 226014, India. moc.oohay@neskaniom.

Go to:

References

1. Hwang JJ, Jiang L, Hamza M, Dai F, Belfort-DeAguiar R, Cline G, Rothman DL, Mason G, Sherwin RS. The human brain produces fructose from glucose. JCI Insight. 2017;2:e90508. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

2. Douard V, Ferraris RP. Regulation of the fructose transporter GLUT5 in health and disease. Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab. 2008;295:E227–E237. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

3. Allgöwer M, Leutenegger A. [On the editorial "Parenteral feeding: glucose or glucose replacements? Schweiz Med Wochenschr. 1978;108:1791–1792. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

4. Bouteldja N, Timson DJ. The biochemical basis of hereditary fructose intolerance. J Inherit Metab Dis. 2010;33:105–112. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

5. Schrodi SJ, DeBarber A, He M, Ye Z, Peissig P, Van Wormer JJ, Haws R, Brilliant MH, Steiner RD. Preval‎ence estimation for monogenic autosomal recessive diseases using population-based genetic data. Hum Genet. 2015;134:659–669. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

6. Pinheiro FC, Sperb-Ludwig F, Schwartz IVD. Epidemiological aspects of hereditary fructose intolerance: A database study. Hum Mutat. 2021;42:1548–1566. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

7. Pshennikova VG, Barashkov NA, Romanov GP, Teryutin FM, Solov'ev AV, Gotovtsev NN, Nikanorova AA, Nakhodkin SS, Sazonov NN, Morozov IV, Bondar AA, Dzhemileva LU, Khusnutdinova EK, Posukh OL, Fedorova SA. Comparison of Predictive In Silico Tools on Missense Variants in GJB2, GJB6, and GJB3 Genes Associated with Autosomal Recessive Deafness 1A (DFNB1A) ScientificWorldJournal. 2019;2019:5198931. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

8. Yu B. Role of in silico tools in gene discovery. Mol Biotechnol. 2009;41:296–306. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

9. Coffee EM, Yerkes L, Ewen EP, Zee T, Tolan DR. Increased preval‎ence of mutant null alleles that cause hereditary fructose intolerance in the American population. J Inherit Metab Dis. 2010;33:33–42. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

10. Cross NC, de Franchis R, Sebastio G, Dazzo C, Tolan DR, Gregori C, Odievre M, Vidailhet M, Romano V, Mascali G. Molecular analysis of aldolase B genes in hereditary fructose intolerance. Lancet. 1990;335:306–309. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

11. Caciotti A, Donati MA, Adami A, Guerrini R, Zammarchi E, Morrone A. Different genotypes in a large Italian family with recurrent hereditary fructose intolerance. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2008;20:118–121. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

12. Bijarnia-Mahay S, Movva S, Gupta N, Sharma D, Puri RD, Kotecha U, Saxena R, Kabra M, Mohan N, Verma IC. Molecular Diagnosis of Hereditary Fructose Intolerance: Founder Mutation in a Community from India. JIMD Rep. 2015;19:85–93. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

13. Le TP, Feng J, Ding L, Hu R, Lou XB, Ulrich JN, Cabrera MT. Survey of current retinopathy of prematurity practices in China. Int J Ophthalmol. 2021;14:1241–1247. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

14. Yao DC, Tolan DR, Murray MF, Harris DJ, Darras BT, Geva A, Neufeld EJ. Hemolytic anemia and severe rhabdomyolysis caused by compound heterozygous mutations of the gene for erythrocyte/muscle isozyme of aldolase, ALDOA(Arg303X/Cys338Tyr) Blood. 2004;103:2401–2403. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

15. Mamoune A, Bahuau M, Hamel Y, Serre V, Pelosi M, Habarou F, Nguyen Morel MA, Boisson B, Vergnaud S, Viou MT, Nonnenmacher L, Piraud M, Nusbaum P, Vamecq J, Romero N, Ottolenghi C, Casanova JL, de Lonlay P. A thermolabile aldolase A mutant causes fever-induced recurrent rhabdomyolysis without hemolytic anemia. PLoS Genet. 2014;10:e1004711. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

16. Inagaki H, Eimoto T, Haimoto H, Hosoda S, Kato K. Aldolase C in neuroendocrine tumors: an immunohistochemical study. Virchows Arch B Cell Pathol Incl Mol Pathol. 1993;64:297–302. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

17. Ali M, Rellos P, Cox TM. Hereditary fructose intolerance. J Med Genet. 1998;35:353–365. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

18. Li H, Byers HM, Diaz-Kuan A, Vos MB, Hall PL, Tortorelli S, Singh R, Wallenstein MB, Allain M, Dimmock DP, Farrell RM, McCandless S, Gambello MJ. Acute liver failure in neonates with undiagnosed hereditary fructose intolerance due to exposure from widely available infant formulas. Mol Genet Metab. 2018;123:428–432. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

19. Yasawy MI, Folsch UR, Schmidt WE, Schwend M. Adult hereditary fructose intolerance. World J Gastroenterol. 2009;15:2412–2413. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

20. Kim MS, Moon JS, Kim MJ, Seong MW, Park SS, Ko JS. Hereditary Fructose Intolerance Diagnosed in Adulthood. Gut Liver. 2021;15:142–145. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

21. Choi HW, Lee YJ, Oh SH, Kim KM, Ryu JM, Lee BH, Kim GH, Yoo HW. A Novel Frameshift Mutation of the ALDOB Gene in a Korean Girl Presenting with Recurrent Hepatitis Diagnosed as Hereditary Fructose Intolerance. Gut Liver. 2012;6:126–128. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

22. Maitre A, Maw A, Ramaswami U, Morley SL. Relapsing Acute Axonal Neuropathy in Hereditary Fructose Intolerance. Pediatr Neurol. 2016;64:92–93. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

23. Aldag E, Fan EM, Marshall I, Christensen RD, Shayota BJ, Meznarich JA. An Infant With Hereditary Fructose Intolerance and a Novel Presentation of Disseminated Intravascular Coagulopathy following Pyloromyotomy. J Pediatr Hematol Oncol. 2022 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

24. Bobrus-Chociej A, Pollak A, Kopiczko N, Flisiak-Jackiewicz M, Płoski R, Lebensztejn DM. Celiac Disease in Conjunction with Hereditary Fructose Intolerance as a Rare Cause of Liver Steatosis with Mild Hypertransaminasemia-A Case Report. Pediatr Rep. 2021;13:589–593. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

25. Debray FG, Seyssel K, Fadeur M, Tappy L, Paquot N, Tran C. Effect of a high fructose diet on metabolic parameters in carriers for hereditary fructose intolerance. Clin Nutr. 2021;40:4246–4254. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

26. Seegmiller JE, Dixon RM, Kemp GJ, Angus PW, McAlindon TE, Dieppe P, Rajagopalan B, Radda GK. Fructose-induced aberration of metabolism in familial gout identified by 31P magnetic resonance spectroscopy. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1990;87:8326–8330. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

27. Kim AY, Hughes JJ, Pipitone Dempsey A, Sondergaard Schatz K, Wang T, Gunay-Aygun M. Pitfalls in the Diagnosis of Hereditary Fructose Intolerance. Pediatrics. 2020;146 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

28. Izquierdo-García E, Escobar-Rodríguez I, Moreno-Villares JM, Iglesias-Peinado I. Social and health care needs in patients with hereditary fructose intolerance in Spain. Endocrinol Diabetes Nutr (Engl Ed) 2020;67:253–262. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

29. Simoni RD, Hill RL and Vaughan M. "Benedict's Solution, a Reagent for Measuring Reducing Sugars: the Clinical Chemistry of Stanley R. Benedict". J Biol Chem. 2002;277:E5–E6. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

30. Cano A, Alcalde C, Belanger-Quintana A, Cañedo-Villarroya E, Ceberio L, Chumillas-Calzada S, Correcher P, Couce ML, García-Arenas D, Gómez I, Hernández T, Izquierdo-García E, Martínez Chicano D, Morales M, Pedrón-Giner C, Petrina Jáuregui E, Peña-Quintana L, Sánchez-Pintos P, Serrano-Nieto J, Unceta Suarez M, Vitoria Miñana I, de Las Heras J. Transferrin Isoforms, Old but New Biomarkers in Hereditary Fructose Intolerance. J Clin Med. 2021;10 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

31. Adamowicz M, Płoski R, Rokicki D, Morava E, Gizewska M, Mierzewska H, Pollak A, Lefeber DJ, Wevers RA, Pronicka E. Transferrin hypoglycosylation in hereditary fructose intolerance: using the clues and avoiding the pitfalls. J Inherit Metab Dis. 2007;30:407. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

32. Aldámiz-Echevarría L, de Las Heras J, Couce ML, Alcalde C, Vitoria I, Bueno M, Blasco-Alonso J, Concepción García M, Ruiz M, Suárez R, Andrade F, Villate O. Non-alcoholic fatty liver in hereditary fructose intolerance. Clin Nutr. 2020;39:455–459. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

33. Steinmann B, Gitzelmann R, van den Berghe G. Disorders of fructose metabolism. In: Scriver CR, Beaudet AL, Sly WS, Valle D, Childs B, Kinzler K, Vogelstein B. The metabolic and molecular basis of inherited disease. 8th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill; 2001; 1489–1520. [Google Scholar]