| Literature DB >> 28149499 |
Bernadette E Grayson1, Ruth Gutierrez-Aguilar2, Joyce E Sorrell3, Emily K Matter3, Michelle R Adams4, Philip Howles5, Rebekah Karns6, Randy J Seeley7, Darleen A Sandoval7.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Eighty percent of patients who receive bariatric surgery are women, yet the majority of preclinical studies are in male rodents. Because sex differences drive hepatic gene expression and overall lipid metabolism, we sought to determine whether sex differences were also apparent in these endpoints in response to bariatric surgery.Entities:
Keywords: Bariatric surgery; Liver; Sex difference; Triglycerides; Vertical sleeve gastrectomy
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28149499 PMCID: PMC5273842 DOI: 10.1186/s13293-017-0126-x
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biol Sex Differ ISSN: 2042-6410 Impact factor: 5.027
Real-time QPCR validation of genes using hepatic samples in cohort 1
| Gene Name | Catalog # | Female | Male | Statistics (two-way ANOVA) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sham | VSG | Sham | VSG | |||
|
| ||||||
| ACOX1 | Rn01460628_m1 | 100 ± 7a | 75 ± 5b | 91 ± 3 | 94 ± 7 |
|
| CD36 | Rn01442639_m1 | 100 ± 10a | 49 ± 6b | 2 ± 1c | 4 ± 1c |
|
| CPT1A | Rn00580702_m1 | 100 ± 9 | 72 ± 11 | 90 ± 6 | 79 ± 12 | NS |
| DGAT2 | Rn00584870_m1 | 100 ± 6a | 73 ± 6b | 54 ± 4b | 53.1 ± 4b |
|
| FASN | Rn00569117_m1 | 100 ± 12 | 70 ± 11 | 17 ± 5 | 14 ± 2 |
|
| LDLR | Rn00598442_m1 | 100 ± 8a | 64 ± 5c | 29 ± 3b | 31 ± 3b |
|
| MGAT | Rn00585985_s1 | 100 ± 4 | 82 ± 6 | 68 ± 5 | 67 ± 6 |
|
| PGC1 | Rn00590984_m1 | 100 ± 12 | 104 ± 12 | 35 ± 3 | 68 ± 7 |
|
| PPARα | Rn00566193_m1 | 100 ± 9 | 59 ± 8 | 106 ± 10 | 102 ± 11 |
|
| PPARγ | Rn00440945_m1 | 100 ± 13 | 67 ± 10 | 85 ± 13 | 75 ± 11 |
|
| SREBP | Rn01495769_m1 | 100 ± 6 | 68 ± 7 | 70 ± 10 | 58 ± 5 |
|
|
| ||||||
| ACAT2 | Rn01759928_g1 | 100 ± 11a | 66 ± 7b | 20 ± 1c | 21 ± 3c |
|
| CYP7a1 | Rn00564065_m1 | 100 ± 24 | 85 ± 11 | 40 ± 7 | 44 ± 15 |
|
| MTTP | Rn01522970_m1 | 100 ± 7a | 64 ± 5b | 35 ± 2c | 37 ± 3c |
|
| LRH1 | Rn00572649_m1 | 100 ± 15a | 57 ± 5b | 91 ± 7a | 92 ± 6a |
|
|
| ||||||
| Erα | Rn00433142_m1 | 100 ± 6a | 75 ± 5b | 81 ± 4b | 76 ± 5b |
|
| FGFR1 | Rn00577234_m1 | 100 ± 10 | 106 ± 6 | 88 ± 5 | 116 ± 8 |
|
| FXR | Rn00572658_m1 | 100 ± 7a | 59 ± 8b | 74 ± 6b | 64 ± 5b |
|
|
| ||||||
| G6PC | Rn01529640_g1 | 100 ± 4 | 80 ± 4 | 106 ± 6 | 93 ± 7 | P(surgery) < 0.01 |
| PCK1 | Rn01529009_g1 | 100 ± 8 | 92 ± 12 | 158 ± 13 | 185 ± 16 | P(sex) < 0.001 |
Data are presented as mean ± SEM. Groups with different superscript letters are significantly different via Tukey post hoc analysis
Fig. 1a Hepatic triglyceride content in the two cohorts of rats studied. Cohort 1 (n = 3/grp), Cohort 2 (n = 8–10/grp) b. Heat map of hepatic gene expression in Sham male vs. female and VSG male vs. female rats as quantified by Affymetrix array (n = 3/group). ***p < 0.001. Data are presented as mean ± SEM
Fig. 2a Hepatic gene changes in males vs. females following VSG. Gray bars designate categories that were down-regulated in VSG females vs. VSG males. Black bars designate genes that were up-regulated in VSG females vs. VSG males. b Gene lists for categories of gene changes exhibited in panel a (n = 3/group)
Fig. 3Parallel comparison of male (n = 9–10) and female (n = 9–10) body weight, body composition and glucose tolerance after vertical sleeve gastrectomy (VSG) and Sham-VSG (Sham) surgeries. a Body mass was significantly lower from postoperative day 6 to day 165 b. Body mass was significantly lower from postoperative day 6 to day 165 c. Male lean body mass was significantly lower 4 wks but not at 16 wks postoperatively in VSG vs. Sham groups. d % lean mass in males was not significantly different at any time point in VSG vs. sham groups. e & f Female absolute and relative (%) lean body mass was not significantly different between groups at any time point. g, h Male absolute (g) and relative (%) fat mass were significantly lower in VSG vs. Sham at 4 and 16wks postoperatively. i, j Female absolute and relative (%) fat mass were significantly lower in VSG vs. Sham at 4 and 16wks postoperatively. k Basal blood glucose after 6 h fasting was significantly lower in VSG vs. Sham in both males and females. l Blood glucose levels during an oral glucose tolerance test were significantly lower in VSG vs. sham in males only. m Integrated glucose area under the curver during the OGTT in H. *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001. Data are presented as mean ± SEM
Plasma metabolite measurements *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001. Data are presented as mean ± SEM
| Metabolite | Female | Male | 2-Way ANOVA Statistics | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sham | VSG | Sham | VSG | ||
| Triglycerides (mg/dl) | 339 ± 44 | 107 ± 21 | 439 ± 55 | 153 ± 27 |
|
| Cholesterol (mg/dl) | 91 ± 4 | 87 ± 3 | 71 ± 4 | 62 ± 5 |
|
| β-Hydroxybutyrate (ng/ml) | 1.5 ± 0.1 | 1.5 ± 0.1 | 1.9 ± 0.1 | 1.7 ± 0.2 | NS |
| NEFA (mEq/L) | 1.8 ± 0.1 | 1.6 ± 0.1 | 2.3 ± 0.1 | 1.9 ± 0.1 |
|
| Total bile acids (μM/L) | 23 ± 3 | 93 ± 19 | 13 ± 5 | 45 ± 9 |
|
| Fat absorption (%) | 93 ± 2 | 82 ± 5 | 90 ± 4 | 82 ± 3 |
|
| Estradiol (pg/ml) | 70 ± 11 | 39 ± 4 | 28 ± 2 | 20 ± 3 |
|
| Progesterone (ng/ml) | 6.4 ± 1.5 | 4.9 ± 0.6 | ND | ND | NS |
Fig. 4Postprandial lipid uptake. Plasma triglyceride levels in ad libitum fed rats (t = 0) and following 4, 8, and 24 h of fasting in a males and b females. c Plasma triglycerides in males and females following the 3H glycerol trioleate + olive oil gavage. d Plasma 3H in male rats following a 100μCi + 5ml/kg olive oil gavage. e Tissue 3H content 2h after the gavage in the male and female liver, gastrocnemius (Gastroc), subcutaneous fat (Sfat), and gonadal fat (Gfat). (n = 9-10 per group). *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001. Data are presented as mean ± SEM
Fig. 5Intestinal and hepatic contribution to plasma triglycerides. a Postprandial chylomicron production as indexed by the plasma triglyceride response to poloxomer 407 in fed rats. b Slope of the rise in triglycerides in a (n = 8-10/grp). c Hepatic VLDL production as indexed by plasma triglyceride response to poloxamer 407 in fasted rats. d Slope of triglyceride appearance based on the results in c. *p < 0.05 VSG vs. sham; **p < 0.05 sham females vs. all other groups; +p < 0.05 VSG male vs. Sham male; &VSG female vs. VSG male. Data are presented as mean ± SEM