| Literature DB >> 28830448 |
Maria Notarnicola1,2, Maria Gabriella Caruso3, Valeria Tutino3, Caterina Bonfiglio3, Raffaele Cozzolongo3, Vito Giannuzzi3, Valentina De Nunzio3, Giampiero De Leonardis3, Daniela I Abbrescia3, Isabella Franco3, Vincenza Intini3, Antonella Mirizzi3, Alberto R Osella3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The lipidomic profiling of erythrocyte membranes is expected to provide a peculiar scenario at molecular level of metabolic and nutritional pathways which may influence the lipid balance and the adaptation and homeostasis of the organism. Considering that lipid accumulation in the cell is important in promoting tissue inflammation, the purpose of this study is to analyze the fatty acid profile in red blood cell membranes of patients with Non-Alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease (NAFLD), in order to identify and validate membrane profiles possibly associated with the degree of hepatic damage.Entities:
Keywords: Erythrocyte membrane; Fatty acids profile; Lipidomic analysis; NAFLD; Saturation index
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28830448 PMCID: PMC5568099 DOI: 10.1186/s12944-017-0552-0
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Lipids Health Dis ISSN: 1476-511X Impact factor: 3.876
Clinical and biochemical variables in controls and patients with NAFLD
| Controls ( | Moderate NAFLD ( | Severe NAFLD ( |
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age | 50.8 ± 8.4 | 50.5 ± 10.6 | 50.5 ± 10.6 | 0.4 |
| BMI | 30.9 ± 3.2 | 30.7 ± 2.9 | 32.3 ± 4.9 | 0.02 Controls vs Severe |
| Azotemia | 21.5 ± 21.5 | 36.4 ± 10.2 | 34.6 ± 9.8 | 0.001 Controls vs Moderate and Severe |
| Ferritin | 114.7 ± 148.6 | 137.9 ± 142.2 | 149.4 ± 178.9 | 0.42 |
| ALT | 28.9 ± 20.4 | 29.2 ± 10.3 | 40.7 ± 23.0 | 0.02 Controls vs Severe |
| AST | 21.91 ± 4.18 | 23.53 ± 4.91 | 29.37 ± 10.84 | 0.01 Controls vs Severe |
| GGT | 29.9 ± 46.5 | 23.5 ± 12.1 | 31.9 ± 28.3 | 0.8 |
| Total cholesterol | 198.6 ± 33.3 | 210.6 ± 33.9 | 208.6 ± 35.9 | 0.28 |
| Cholesterol- HDL | 51.6 ± 13.2 | 48.1 ± 13.7 | 41.1 ± 8.3 | 0.001 Controls vs Severe |
| Triglycerides | 100.7 ± 46.5 | 118.7 ± 69.1 | 151.2 ± 89.0 | 0.01 Controls vs Severe |
| Glycemia | 87.4 ± 12.2 | 93.2 ± 6.0 | 98.8 ± 15.1 | 0.001 Controls vs Severe |
| Serum Insulin | 7.18 ± 3.03 | 9.65 ± 3.96 | 13.2 ± 4.8 | 0.04 and 0.001 Controls vs Moderate and Severe, respectively |
| HOMA index | 1.59 ± 0.72 | 2.22 ± 0.90 | 3.16 ± 1.27 | 0.04 and 0.001 Controls vs Moderate and Severe, respectively |
| SFAs | 52.6 ± 8.8 | 52.3 ± 9.6 | 53.1 ± 10.9 | 0.84 |
| MUFAs | 22.4 ± 5.5 | 22.6 ± 6.2 | 22.0 ± 7.2 | 0.8 |
| PUFAs | 24.9 ± 5.7 | 25.0 ± 4.6 | 24.8 ± 5.6 | 0.9 |
Fig. 1Chromatogram profile of fatty acids composition of erythrocytes membrane from a control subject and patient with severe NAFLD
Fig. 2Saturation index (SI) levels (stearic acid/oleic acid ratio) in erythrocytes membranes from controls and patients with moderate and severe NAFLD. Data are expressed as the mean ± SD. P < 0.05, one-way analysis of variance and Tukey’s multiple comparison test
Fig. 3Saturation index n-7 levels (palmitic acid/palmitoleic acid ratio) in erythrocytes membranes from controls and patients with moderate and severe NAFLD. Data are expressed as the mean ± SD. P < 0.05, one-way analysis of variance and Tukey’s multiple comparison test
Fig. 4Levels of Elongase 5 (Elovl5) enzymatic activity in erythrocytes membranes from controls and patients with moderate and severe NAFLD. Data are expressed as the mean ± SD. P < 0.05, one-way analysis of variance and Tukey’s multiple comparison test
Multivariate Regression Analysis: Effect of NAFLD score on red blood cell lipid profile
| SFAs | MUFAs | PUFAs | SI | SI n-7 | Elovl5 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (95% C.I.) | (95% C.I.) | (95% C.I.) | (95% C.I.) | (95% C.I.) | (95% C.I.) | |
| Moderate NAFLD | −2.07 | 0.25 | 1.82 | −0.65* | 16.81 | 0.64 |
| (−8.51,4.37) | (−3.92,4.41) | (−1.66,5.30) | (−1.19,-0.11) | (−19.49,53.11) | (−5.66,6.94) | |
| Severe NAFLD | −1.54 | −0.59 | 2.089 | −0.54* | 25.56 | −0.20 |
| (−7.86,4.85) | (−4.71,3.52) | (−1.34,5.52) | (−1.08,-0.01) | (−10.26,61.38) | (−6.41,6.02) | |
| Age (years) | 0.23 | −0.17 | −0.065 | 0.01 | −0.76 | 0.08 |
| (−0.06,0.52) | (−0.36,0.02) | (−0.22,0.09) | (−0.02,0.03) | (−2.41,0.90) | (−0.02,0.37) | |
| Gender (Female) | 15.34 | −8.20 | −7.110 | −0.25 | −0.40 | 3.83 |
| (−6.95,37.64) | (−22.64,6.22) | (−19.15,4.93) | (−2.13,1.62) | (−126.03,125.24) | (−17.98,25.63) |
(95% C.I.) * p < 0.05; ^Adjusted for Age, Gender and biochemical markers