| Literature DB >> 25045415 |
Giovanni Tarantino1, Carmine Finelli2, Franco Scopacasa3, Fabrizio Pasanisi4, Franco Contaldo4, Domenico Capone5, Silvia Savastano4.
Abstract
The present study shows low circulating levels of SIRT4 in obese patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease mirroring its reduced mitochondrial expression in an attempt to increase the fat oxidative capacity and then the mitochondrial function in liver and in muscle. SIRT4 modulates the metabolism of free fatty acids reducing their high circulating levels but, unfortunately, increasing ROS production. Great concentration of free fatty acids, released by adipose tissue, coupled with oxidative stress, directly results in endothelial dysfunction, early atherosclerosis, and coronary artery disease risk factor.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2014 PMID: 25045415 PMCID: PMC4086623 DOI: 10.1155/2014/920676
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Oxid Med Cell Longev ISSN: 1942-0994 Impact factor: 6.543
Figure 1Skeletal muscle image. Echo intensity at ultrasound of a normal muscle (grade I) with related anatomic structures.
Characteristics of the population.
| Population ( | Obese patients (140) | Healthy subjects (20) | Cross-sectional study |
|---|---|---|---|
| Parameter | Mean ± SD or median plus | Mean ± SD or median plus | Significance |
| Age (years) | 46 (32–53) | 23.5 (19–26) |
|
| Gender M/F | 62 | 9 |
|
| Obesity degree I/II/III ( | 20/42/78 | 0 | |
| BMI | 42.1 ± 7.4 | 22.3 ± 1.1 |
|
| WC females cm | 117.8 ± 13.2 | 82.7 ± 3.7 |
|
| WC males cm | 131.6 ± 16 | 82 ± 2.8 |
|
| W-H ratio females | 0.93 ± 0.05 | 1.17 ± 0.03 |
|
| W-H ratio males | 1 ± 0.04 | 1.17 ± 0.04 |
|
| HS grade 1/2/3 US ( | 32/86/22 | 0 | |
| IMTG score I/II/III/IV US ( | 34/96/4/6 | 0 | |
| SIRT4 ng/mL | 1.2 (0.8–1.8) | 8 (1.2–15) |
|
| HOMA | 2.62 (1.53–4.15) | 0.43 (0.41–0.48) |
|
| Triglycerides mg/dL | 128 (93.7–174.5) | 103 (98–128) |
|
| HDL females mg/dL | 49.5 ± 12.9 | 59.5 ± 6.0 |
|
| HDL males mg/dL | 40.0 ± 10.1 | 50 ± 4.3 |
|
| cIMT mm | 0.1 (0.07–0.11) | 0.06 (0.05-0.06) |
|
| CRP mg/mL | 0.52 (0.30–0.08) | 0.12 (0.1–0.18) |
|
| Fibrinogen g/L | 310.7 ± 71.1 | 267.0 ± 33.7 |
|
| Ferritin females ng/mL | 71.1 (21.5–72.29) | 68.2 (26–81.3) |
|
| Ferritin males ng/mL | 116 (78–222.5) | 108 (58.3–207.4) |
|
| SLD cm | 11.28 ± 1.4 | 9.8 ± 0.6 |
|
| RMR/FMM | 39.5 ± 7.5 | 42 ± 3.8 |
|
| ALT U/L | 27 (21–36.5) | 16 (13–20) |
|
| Gamma-GT U/L | 24 (16–36.2) | 15.5 (11–17) |
|
| AP | 75.9 ± 25.5 | 97.5 ± 6.7 |
|
| PCH | 9375 ± 1793 | 8781 ± 1210 |
|
Body mass index (BMI); waist circumference (WC); resting metabolic rate/free fat mass (RMR/FFM); high density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL); common carotid intima-media thickness (IMT); waist-to-hip (WH); hepatic steatosis (HS) score; ultrasound (US); spleen longitudinal diameter (SLD), C-reactive protein (CRP); homeostatic metabolic assessment (HOMA); alanine aminotransferase (ALT); pseudocholinesterase (PCH); alkaline phosphatase (AP); gamma-glutamyl transpeptidase (gamma-GT).
Figure 2Behavior of SIRT4. (a) Behavior of circulating SIRT4 (ng/mL) in the whole population with the distribution of their serum levels; (b) circulating SIRT4 (ng/mL) according to grades of obesity; (c) circulating SIRT4 (ng/mL) according to severity of hepatic steatosis (HS).
Independent variables predicting SIRT4 levels.
| Coefficient | Std. error | 95% CI |
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| WC | −0.98 | 0.34 | −1.6 to −0.30 |
| 0.09 | 0.0050 |
| WC | −1.6 | 0.59 | −2.7 to −0.42 |
| 0.011 | 0.0086 |
| HDL | 0.7 | 0.26 | 0.23 to 1.25 |
| 0.09 | 0.0053 |
| HDL | 1.13 | 0.28 | 0.58 to 1.7 |
| 0.21 | 0.001 |
| HS | −0.049 | 0.013 | −0.077 to −0.02 |
| 0.08 | 0.0005 |
| Age | −0.94 | 0.23 | −1.4 to −0.48 |
| 0.10 | 0.0001 |
| cIMT | −0.0016 | 0.0006 | −0.003 to −0.0004 |
| 0.05 | 0.0075 |
| W-H ratio | − 0.004 | 0.0011 | 0.006 to 0.002 |
| 0.09 | 0.003 |
| VAT at US | −0.19 | 0.08 | −0.36 to −0.03 |
| 0.08 | 0.02 |
| HeS | −0.026 | 0.01 | −0.048 to −0.004 |
| 0.04 | 0.02 |
| BMI | −0.49 | 0.15 | −0.80 to −0.19 |
| 0.07 | 0.0016 |
Body mass index (BMI); waist circumference (WC); resting metabolic rate/free fat mass (RMR/FFM); visceral adipose tissue (VAT); high density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL); common carotid intima-media thickness (cIMT); waist-to-hip (W-H); hepatic steatosis (HS) score; ultrasound (US); Heckmatt score (Hes).
Figure 3Predictions of SIRT4. Scatter diagram and regression lines. Waist circumference (WC); high density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL); hepatic steatosis (HS) common carotid intima-media thickness (IMT); waist-to-hip (WH); ultrasound (US).
Figure 4Other predictions. Scatter diagram and regression lines. Spleen longitudinal diameter (SLD); waist circumference (WC); resting metabolic rate/free fat mass (RMR/FFM); visceral adipose tissue (VAT); homeostatic metabolic assessment (HOMA).
Rotated loading matrix (varimax, gamma = 1.0) of factor analysis.
| Factor | 1 | 2 | 3 |
|---|---|---|---|
| HOMA |
| 0.009 | −0.275 |
| SLD |
| 0.009 | −0.275 |
| AGE | −0.075 | 0.263 |
|
| RMM/FFM | −0.024 | −0.076 | −0.380 |
| SIRT4 | 0.069 | −0.584 | −0.166 |
| IMT | −0.059 | 0.292 |
|
| VAT |
| 0.012 | 0.180 |
| SAT | 0.384 | −0.529 | −0.056 |
| DBP | 0.202 | −0.048 |
|
| SBP | 0.134 | −0.285 |
|
| Ferritin | 0.110 |
| −0.051 |
| fibrinogen | 0.349 | −0.008 | 0.026 |
| CRP |
| 0.046 | 0.206 |
| PCH | −0.115 | 0.318 | 0.100 |
| Gamma-GT | 0.287 | 0.301 | 0.210 |
| ALT | 0.313 | 0.248 | −0.231 |
| HDL | −0.220 | −0.670 | 0.140 |
| W-H ratio | 0.078 |
| 0.168 |
| WC |
| −0.017 | 0.202 |
| BMI |
| −0.359 | 0.242 |
Percent of total variance explained by factors: 1 (17.8); 2 (11.8); 3 (10.6).
High density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL); waist circumference (WC); common carotid intima-media thickness (cIMT); waist-to-hip (W-H); visceral adipose tissue (VAT); subcutaneous adipose tissue (SAT); systolic blood pressure (SBP); diastolic blood pressure (DBP); alanine aminotransferase (ALT); pseudocholinesterase (PCH); C-reactive protein (CRP); spleen longitudinal diameter (SLD); resting metabolic rate/free fat mass (RMR/FFM); homeostatic metabolic assessment (HOMA). The critical value was calculated by doubling Pearson's correlation coefficient for a 1% level of significance (5.152)/square root of the total population (140 + 20) minus 2, that is, 0.410.