Identification and validation of a glutamine metabolism-related gene signature as a diagnostic and therapeutic target in osteoarthritis through integrated multi-omics analysis


Abstract

Background. The understanding of osteoarthritis (OA) pathogenesis is often fragmented, with studies focusing on individual tissues. A holistic view integrating multi-tissue molecular changes with systemic metabolic shifts is urgently needed. Glutamine metabolism, a central bioenergetic and biosynthetic hub, represents a critical but largely unexplored nexus in this disease network. This study leverages a multi-omics, multi-tissue approach to deconstruct the role of glutamine metabolism in OA and identify a robust, blood-based signature for potential diagnostic use.

Methods. We conducted a comprehensive bioinformatic investigation by integrating multiple GEO datasets, encompassing transcriptomic and methylation data from cartilage, synovium, subchondral bone, and peripheral blood. A machine learning pipeline, incorporating WGCNA and LASSO regression, was employed to identify a core glutamine metabolism-related gene (GMRG) signature. The signature's clinical relevance was then validated in an independent cohort of 62 subjects using RT-qPCR on peripheral blood samples and targeted plasma metabolomics. Furthermore, we computationally explored its potential regulatory mechanisms and predicted candidate therapeutic compounds.

Results. Our multi-layered analysis identified a core three-gene signature (F13A1, IRS2, RELA). Functional analysis immediately linked this signature to pathways crucial for OA pathogenesis, including extracellular matrix remodeling, energy metabolism, and inflammatory responses. Clinical validation in our independent cohort not only confirmed the significant downregulation of these genes in the peripheral blood of OA patients ( P < .001) but also revealed a negative correlation with disease severity and a direct link to alterations in circulating glutamine-related metabolites. The diagnostic model constructed from this signature demonstrated robust discriminatory performance across both training and validation cohorts. Finally, exploratory analyses suggested potential regulatory links to DNA methylation and identified several candidate drugs capable of modulating the signature's expression.

Conclusions. Our study bridges the gap between localized joint pathology and systemic metabolic dysfunction in OA by identifying a blood-based, multi-omics-derived gene signature. This signature, reflecting systemic dysregulation of glutamine metabolism, serves as a robust biomarker for non-invasive diagnosis and a potential nexus for therapeutic exploration. These findings provide a new framework for understanding OA and offer tangible avenues for patient stratification and future drug discovery.

Ask to review this manuscript

Notes for potential reviewers

  • Volunteering is not a guarantee that you will be asked to review. There are many reasons: reviewers must be qualified, there should be no conflicts of interest, a minimum of two reviewers have already accepted an invitation, etc.
  • This is NOT OPEN peer review. The review is single-blind, and all recommendations are sent privately to the Academic Editor handling the manuscript. All reviews are published and reviewers can choose to sign their reviews.
  • What happens after volunteering? It may be a few days before you receive an invitation to review with further instructions. You will need to accept the invitation to then become an official referee for the manuscript. If you do not receive an invitation it is for one of many possible reasons as noted above.

  • PeerJ does not judge submissions based on subjective measures such as novelty, impact or degree of advance. Effectively, reviewers are asked to comment on whether or not the submission is scientifically and technically sound and therefore deserves to join the scientific literature. Our Peer Review criteria can be found on the "Editorial Criteria" page - reviewers are specifically asked to comment on 3 broad areas: "Basic Reporting", "Experimental Design" and "Validity of the Findings".
  • Reviewers are expected to comment in a timely, professional, and constructive manner.
  • Until the article is published, reviewers must regard all information relating to the submission as strictly confidential.
  • When submitting a review, reviewers are given the option to "sign" their review (i.e. to associate their name with their comments). Otherwise, all review comments remain anonymous.
  • All reviews of published articles are published. This includes manuscript files, peer review comments, author rebuttals and revised materials.
  • Each time a decision is made by the Academic Editor, each reviewer will receive a copy of the Decision Letter (which will include the comments of all reviewers).

If you have any questions about submitting your review, please email us at [email protected].