Tõnu Esko1,2,3, Joel N Hirschhorn1,3, Henry A Feldman4, Yu-Han H Hsu1,3, Amy A Deik5, Clary B Clish3,5, Cara B Ebbeling6, David S Ludwig7. 1. Center for Basic and Translational Obesity Research. 2. Estonian Genome Center, University of Tartu, Tartu, Estonia. 3. Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, MA; and. 4. Clinical Research Center, and. 5. Metabolomics Platform, Broad Institute, Cambridge, MA. 6. New Balance Foundation Obesity Prevention Center, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, MA. 7. New Balance Foundation Obesity Prevention Center, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, MA; david.ludwig@childrens.harvard.edu.
Abstract
Background: Clinical nutrition research often lacks robust markers of compliance, complicating the interpretation of clinical trials and observational studies of free-living subjects.Objective: We aimed to examine metabolomics profiles in response to 3 diets that differed widely in macronutrient composition during a controlled feeding protocol.Design: Twenty-one adults with a high body mass index (in kg/m2; mean ± SD: 34.4 ± 4.9) were given hypocaloric diets to promote weight loss corresponding to 10-15% of initial body weight. They were then studied during weight stability while consuming 3 test diets, each for a 4-wk period according to a crossover design: low fat (60% carbohydrate, 20% fat, 20% protein), low glycemic index (40% carbohydrate, 40% fat, 20% protein), or very-low carbohydrate (10% carbohydrate, 60% fat, 30% protein). Plasma samples were obtained at baseline and at the end of each 4-wk period in the fasting state for metabolomics analysis by using liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. Statistical analyses included adjustment for multiple comparisons. Results: Of 333 metabolites, we identified 152 whose concentrations differed for ≥1 diet compared with the others, including diacylglycerols and triacylglycerols, branched-chain amino acids, and markers reflecting metabolic status. Analysis of groups of related metabolites, with the use of either principal components or pathways, revealed coordinated metabolic changes affected by dietary composition, including pathways related to amino acid metabolism. We constructed a classifier using the metabolites that differed between diets and were able to correctly identify the test diet from metabolite profiles in 60 of 63 cases (>95% accuracy). Analyses also suggest differential effects by diet on numerous cardiometabolic disease risk factors.Conclusions: Metabolomic profiling may be used to assess compliance during clinical nutrition trials and the validity of dietary assessment in observational studies. In addition, this methodology may help elucidate mechanistic pathways linking diet to chronic disease risk. This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT00315354.
Background: Clinical nutrition research often lacks robust markers of compliance, complicating the interpretation of clinical trials and observational studies of free-living subjects.Objective: We aimed to examine metabolomics profiles in response to 3 diets that differed widely in macronutrient composition during a controlled feeding protocol.Design: Twenty-one adults with a high body mass index (in kg/m2; mean ± SD: 34.4 ± 4.9) were given hypocaloric diets to promote weight loss corresponding to 10-15% of initial body weight. They were then studied during weight stability while consuming 3 test diets, each for a 4-wk period according to a crossover design: low fat (60% carbohydrate, 20% fat, 20% protein), low glycemic index (40% carbohydrate, 40% fat, 20% protein), or very-low carbohydrate (10% carbohydrate, 60% fat, 30% protein). Plasma samples were obtained at baseline and at the end of each 4-wk period in the fasting state for metabolomics analysis by using liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. Statistical analyses included adjustment for multiple comparisons. Results: Of 333 metabolites, we identified 152 whose concentrations differed for ≥1 diet compared with the others, including diacylglycerols and triacylglycerols, branched-chain amino acids, and markers reflecting metabolic status. Analysis of groups of related metabolites, with the use of either principal components or pathways, revealed coordinated metabolic changes affected by dietary composition, including pathways related to amino acid metabolism. We constructed a classifier using the metabolites that differed between diets and were able to correctly identify the test diet from metabolite profiles in 60 of 63 cases (>95% accuracy). Analyses also suggest differential effects by diet on numerous cardiometabolic disease risk factors.Conclusions: Metabolomic profiling may be used to assess compliance during clinical nutrition trials and the validity of dietary assessment in observational studies. In addition, this methodology may help elucidate mechanistic pathways linking diet to chronic disease risk. This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT00315354.
Authors: Cara B Ebbeling; Janis F Swain; Henry A Feldman; William W Wong; David L Hachey; Erica Garcia-Lago; David S Ludwig Journal: JAMA Date: 2012-06-27 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Anika A M Vaarhorst; Aswin Verhoeven; Claudia M Weller; Stefan Böhringer; Sibel Göraler; Axel Meissner; André M Deelder; Peter Henneman; Anton P M Gorgels; Piet A van den Brandt; Leo J Schouten; Marleen M van Greevenbroek; Audrey H H Merry; W M Monique Verschuren; Arn M J M van den Maagdenberg; Ko Willems van Dijk; Aaron Isaacs; Dorret Boomsma; Ben A Oostra; Cornelia M van Duijn; J Wouter Jukema; Jolanda M A Boer; Edith Feskens; Bastiaan T Heijmans; P Eline Slagboom Journal: Am Heart J Date: 2014-04-04 Impact factor: 4.749
Authors: Alena Stancáková; Mete Civelek; Niyas K Saleem; Pasi Soininen; Antti J Kangas; Henna Cederberg; Jussi Paananen; Jussi Pihlajamäki; Lori L Bonnycastle; Mario A Morken; Michael Boehnke; Päivi Pajukanta; Aldons J Lusis; Francis S Collins; Johanna Kuusisto; Mika Ala-Korpela; Markku Laakso Journal: Diabetes Date: 2012-05-02 Impact factor: 9.461
Authors: Geoffrey A Walford; Yong Ma; Clary Clish; Jose C Florez; Thomas J Wang; Robert E Gerszten Journal: Diabetes Date: 2016-02-09 Impact factor: 9.461
Authors: Julie A Schmidt; Sabina Rinaldi; Pietro Ferrari; Marion Carayol; David Achaintre; Augustin Scalbert; Amanda J Cross; Marc J Gunter; Georgina K Fensom; Paul N Appleby; Timothy J Key; Ruth C Travis Journal: Am J Clin Nutr Date: 2015-10-28 Impact factor: 7.045
Authors: Kaitlyn M Mazzilli; Kathleen M McClain; Loren Lipworth; Mary C Playdon; Joshua N Sampson; Clary B Clish; Robert E Gerszten; Neal D Freedman; Steven C Moore Journal: J Nutr Date: 2020-04-01 Impact factor: 4.798
Authors: Cara B Ebbeling; Gloria L Klein; Patricia K Luoto; Julia M W Wong; Lisa Bielak; Ralph G Eddy; Sarah K Steltz; Courtenay Devlin; Megan Sandman; Bridget Hron; Kim Shimy; Steven B Heymsfield; Robert R Wolfe; William W Wong; Henry A Feldman; David S Ludwig Journal: Contemp Clin Trials Date: 2017-12-09 Impact factor: 2.226
Authors: Mònica Bulló; Christopher Papandreou; Miguel Ruiz-Canela; Marta Guasch-Ferré; Jun Li; Pablo Hernández-Alonso; Estefania Toledo; Liming Liang; Cristina Razquin; Dolores Corella; Ramon Estruch; Emilio Ros; Montserrat Fitó; Fernando Arós; Miquel Fiol; Lluís Serra-Majem; Clary B Clish; Nerea Becerra-Tomás; Miguel A Martínez-González; Frank B Hu; Jordi Salas-Salvadó Journal: J Nutr Date: 2021-01-04 Impact factor: 4.798
Authors: Wasif Abidi; Eirini Nestoridi; Henry Feldman; Margaret Stefater; Clary Clish; Christopher C Thompson; Nicholas Stylopoulos Journal: Dig Dis Sci Date: 2019-08-05 Impact factor: 3.199
Authors: Zsu-Zsu Chen; Jinxi Liu; Jordan Morningstar; Brandy M Heckman-Stoddard; Christine G Lee; Samuel Dagogo-Jack; Jane F Ferguson; Richard F Hamman; William C Knowler; Kieren J Mather; Leigh Perreault; Jose C Florez; Thomas J Wang; Clary Clish; Marinella Temprosa; Robert E Gerszten Journal: Diabetes Date: 2019-10-03 Impact factor: 9.461