| Literature DB >> 26584808 |
Nadia J T Roumans1, Roel G Vink2, Marij Gielen3, Maurice P Zeegers3, Claus Holst4, Ping Wang2,5, Arne Astrup6, Wim H Saris2, Armand Valsesia7, Jörg Hager7, Marleen A van Baak2, Edwin C M Mariman2.
Abstract
The extracellular matrix (ECM) of adipocytes is important for body weight regulation. Here, we investigated whether genetic variation in ECM-related genes is associated with weight regain among participants of the European DiOGenes study. Overweight and obese subjects (n = 469, 310 females, 159 males) were on an 8-week low-calorie diet with a 6-month follow-up. Body weight was measured before and after the diet, and after follow-up. Weight maintenance scores (WMS, regained weight as percentage of lost weight) were calculated based on the weight data. Genotype data were retrieved for 2903 SNPs corresponding to 124 ECM-related genes. Regression analyses provided us with six significant SNPs associated with the WMS in males: 3 SNPs in the POSTN gene and a SNP in the LAMB1, COL23A1, and FBLN5 genes. For females, 1 SNP was found in the FN1 gene. The risk of weight regain was increased by: the C/C genotype for POSTN in a co-dominant model (OR 8.25, 95 % CI 2.85-23.88) and the T/C-C/C genotype in a dominant model (OR 4.88, 95 % CI 2.35-10.16); the A/A genotype for LAMB1 both in a co-dominant model (OR 18.43, 95 % CI 2.35-144.63) and in a recessive model (OR 16.36, 95 % CI 2.14-124.9); the G/A genotype for COL23A1 in a co-dominant model (OR 3.94, 95 % CI 1.28-12.10), or the A-allele in a dominant model (OR 2.86, 95 % CI 1.10-7.49); the A/A genotype for FBLN5 in a co-dominant model (OR 13.00, 95 % CI 1.61-104.81); and the A/A genotype for FN1 in a recessive model (OR 2.81, 95 % CI 1.40-5.63). Concluding, variants of ECM genes are associated with weight regain after weight loss in a sex-specific manner.Entities:
Keywords: Adipocytes; Extracellular matrix; SNPs; Weight regain
Year: 2015 PMID: 26584808 PMCID: PMC4653119 DOI: 10.1007/s12263-015-0506-y
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Genes Nutr ISSN: 1555-8932 Impact factor: 5.523
Changes in subject characteristics at the end of 8-week low-calorie diet compared to baseline, and at the end of 6-month ad libitum diet compared to the end of 8-week low-calorie diet
| Baseline | After 8-week LCD | After 6-month ad libitum diet | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Male | Female | Male | Female | Male | Female | |||||||
| WM | WR | WM | WR | WM | WR | WM | WR | WM | WR | WM | WR | |
|
| 59 | 100 | 135 | 175 | 59 | 100 | 135 | 175 | 59 | 100 | 135 | 175 |
| Age (year) | 43 ± 6 | 43 ± 6 | 41 ± 7 | 42 ± 6 | ||||||||
| Weight (kg) | 111.3 ± 18.5 | 107.9 ± 17.1 | 97.3 ± 18.3 | 92.1 ± 13.1 | 97.7 ± 17.3* | 95.3 ± 15.0* | 86.3 ± 16.6* | 82.6 ± 12* | 93.5 ± 17.5# | 99.8 ± 15.7# | 81.6 ± 15.1# | 86.2 ± 12.6# |
| BMI (kg/m2) | 35.4 ± 4.9 | 33.4 ± 4.6 | 35.1 ± 5.4 | 33.5 ± 4.4 | 31.1 ± 4.6* | 29.6 ± 4.1* | 31.1 ± 4.8* | 30.1 ± 4.0* | 29.8 ± 4.7# | 30.9 ± 4.3# | 29.5 ± 4.5# | 31.4 ± 4.2# |
| WC (cm) | 117.4 ± 12.9 | 111.9 ± 11.8 | 104.9 ± 13.6 | 102.3 ± 10.4 | 105.4 ± 12.7* | 100.5 ± 11.5* | 95.2 ± 12.3* | 93.6 ± 10.1* | 101 ± 12.4# | 104.5 ± 12.0# | 91.8 ± 12.2# | 96.4 ± 10.1# |
| Fat mass (kg) | 39.6 ± 13.4 | 34.1 ± 10.7 | 44 ± 12 | 40.8 ± 9.3 | 30.4 ± 10.6* | 26.7 ± 10.1* | 35.3 ± 10.9* | 33.8 ± 9.3* | 25.3 ± 10.6# | 28.4 ± 10.3# | 30.5 ± 9.4# | 35.6 ± 9.2# |
| WMS | −0.33 ± 0.34 | 0.38 ± 0.25 | −0.42 ± 0.39 | 0.40 ± 0.31 | ||||||||
Values are mean ± SD. Subjects are divided into four groups: male weight maintainers (WM, n = 59), weight regainers (WR, n = 100) and female WM (n = 135) and WR (n = 175). Weight maintenance score (WMS) is calculated at the end of the 6-month ad libitum diet: (weight after 6-month ad libitum diet − weight after LCD)/(weight at baseline − weight after LCD)
WC waist circumference, LCD low-calorie diet, WMS weight maintenance score
* P < 0.001 change from baseline versus after 8-week LCD with dependant t test per group
# P < 0.001 change from after 8-week LCD versus after 6-month ad libitum diet with dependent t test per group
Regression analyses carried out with each SNP allele as a predictor and weight maintenance scores as outcome separately for males and females
| SNP | Gene | No. of subjects |
|
| Minor allel | MAF % |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||||
| rs8031741 | ACAN | 159 | 9.57E−26 | <0.001 | G | 0.3 |
| rs2271649 | ADAM12 | 158 | 5.12E−07 | <0.001 | A | 0.9 |
| rs16859850 | CCDC80 | 158 | 4.08E−17 | <0.001 | G | 0.6 |
| rs2300792 | COL12A1 | 157 | 1.43E−22 | <0.001 | C | 0.3 |
| rs16918099 | COL15A1 | 159 | 3.29E−05 | 0.005 | A | 0.2 |
| rs16918124 | COL15A1 | 159 | 6.19E−05 | 0.008 | C | 0.5 |
| rs7863250 | COL15A1 | 159 | 6.19E−05 | 0.008 | C | 0.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| rs12477499 | COL3A1 | 159 | 2.49E−14 | <0.001 | G | 0.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| rs12050562 | FBN1 | 159 | 8.75E−05 | 0.010 | T | 0.8 |
| rs7606877 | GPC1 | 159 | 1.41E−14 | <0.001 | A | 0.5 |
| rs9492168 | LAMA2 | 158 | 7.50E−17 | <0.001 | T | 0.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| rs10911215 | LAMC1 | 159 | 1.11E−09 | <0.001 | T | 1.3 |
| rs2513812 | MATN2 | 159 | 4.36E−09 | <0.001 | G | 1.3 |
| rs1151578 | NID2 | 158 | 2.53E−08 | <0.001 | T | 0.2 |
| rs6480654 | P4HA1 | 157 | 2.67E−12 | <0.001 | A | 0.2 |
| rs1382192 | PDIA4 | 159 | 4.90E−13 | <0.001 | A | 0.5 |
| rs4727007 | PDIA4 | 159 | 4.90E−13 | <0.001 | G | 0.5 |
| rs10197695 | PDIA6 | 159 | 1.26E−14 | <0.001 | G | 0.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| rs7679471 | TLL1 | 159 | 3.36E−07 | <0.001 | C | 0.2 |
|
| ||||||
| rs8031741 | ACAN | 309 | 5.14E−16 | 0.000 | G | 0.3 |
| rs4871046 | COL14A1 | 307 | 5.49E−09 | 0.000 | C | 0.5 |
| rs16918099 | COL15A1 | 310 | 5.75E−44 | 0.000 | A | 0.2 |
| rs12477499 | COL3A1 | 310 | 2.19E−43 | 0.000 | G | 0.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| rs1151578 | NID2 | 310 | 5.19E−06 | 0.002 | T | 0.2 |
| rs11925421 | PLOD2 | 310 | 7.20E−10 | 0.000 | G | 0.6 |
| rs7078493 | TLL2 | 310 | 5.19E−06 | 0.000 | T | 0.2 |
| rs310517 | VCAN | 310 | 1.79E−25 | 0.000 | T | 0.5 |
P values are derived from univariate linear regression analyses, and P corr are P values corrected for false discovery rate. P corr values <0.05 are considered significant, and SNPs with a MAF < 5 % are excluded. SNPs in bold have P corr values <0.05 and MAF > 5 %
MAF minor allel frequency
Fig. 1Percentage weight regain or maintenance phenotype of each genotype for the significant SNPs. Each bar represents the total amount of subjects having a specific genotype for a significant SNP: a COL23A1 (rs2672826), b FBLN5 (rs12589592), c LAMB1 (rs2158836), d POSTN (rs7323378), and e FN1 (rs17516906). a–d represent men, and e represents women. The grey bars indicate the percentage of weight maintainers (WM) with the genotype, and the white bars are for weight regainers (WR). The number within each bar is the count of participants having the specific genotype
Logistic regression analyses used to find the best genetic model of inheritance that describes the effect of the genotypes
| SNP | Model | Genotype | OR (95 % CI) | AIC |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| rs2672826 | Co-dominant | G/G | 1.00 | 206.4 |
| Dominant | G/G | 1.00 | 206.6 | |
| Recessive | G/G–G/A | 1.00 | 211.6 | |
| rs12589592 | Co-dominant | G/G | 1.00 | 202.7 |
| Dominant | G/G | 1.00 | 204.8 | |
| Recessive | G/G–G/A | 1.00 | 206.4 | |
| rs2158836 | Co-dominant | G/G | 1.00 | 199.3 |
| Dominant | G/G | 1.00 | 210.1 | |
| Recessive | G/G–G/A | 1.00 | 197.8 | |
| rs7323378 | Co-dominant | T/T | 1.00 | 192.6 |
| Dominant | T/T | 1.00 | 192.7 | |
| Recessive | T/T–T/C | 1.00 | 203.6 | |
| rs17516906 | Co-dominant | G/G | 1.00 | 409.0 |
| Dominant | G/G | 1.00 | 412.8 | |
| Recessive | G/G–A/G | 1.00 | 410.7 |
Odds ratio, 95 % confidence interval, Akaike information criterion (AIC), and P values were retrieved from logistic regression analyses with the co-dominant, dominant, and recessive models. The best-fitting model has the lowest AIC, and this value is at least 2 lower than the other models. P values <0.05 are considered significant (*)
OR odds ratio, CI confidence interval, NA not available