Literature DB >> 29513100

Low linoleic and high docosahexaenoic acids in a severe phenotype of transgenic cystic fibrosis mice.

Birgitta Strandvik1, Wanda K O Neal2,3, Mohamed A Ali1, Ulf Hammar4.   

Abstract

Low linoleic acid concentration is a common finding in patients with cystic fibrosis and associated with severe clinical phenotype. Low docosahexaenoic and arachidonic acids are more inconsistently found in patients, but arachidonic/docosahexaenoic ratio is usually high. In animal models with cftr mutations or KO animals for the cftr gene, linoleic acid deficiency has not been consistently reported and some report docosahexaenoic deficiency as the major fatty acid abnormality. We hereby describe fatty acid profile in a severe clinical cystic fibrosis phenotype in mice with a duplication of exon 3 generated in the cystic fibrosis gene of C57B1/6J mice ( cftrm1Bay allele). In 43/50 animals, plasma phospholipid fatty acids were repeatedly analyzed (mean three times/animal) covering ages between 7 and 235 days. Linoleic acid concentrations were significantly lower in cftr-/- mice compared to heterozygotes ( P = 0.03) and wild type mice ( P < 0.001). Females had significantly lower linoleic acid than males, not related to age. Arachidonic acid did not differ but docosahexaenoic acid was higher in cftr-/- than in wild type mice ( P < 0.001). The arachidonic/docosahexaenoic acid ratio did not differ but arachidonic/linoleic acid ratio was higher in cftr-/- mice compared to wild type mice ( P = 0.007). Similar to clinical studies, type of mutation is important for lipid abnormality with low linoleic acid most consistently found in the animals. Rodents differ in metabolism by synthesizing docosahexaenoic acid more efficiently comparing to humans, suggesting greater influence by diet. Precaution seems important when comparing animal and humans. Impact statement In translational research, animal models are important to investigate the effect of genetic mutations in specific diseases and their metabolism. Special attention has to be given to differences in physiology and metabolism between species and humans, which otherwise can hazard the conclusions. Our work illustrates that the different synthesis capacity in mice and humans for DHA would explain different results in different models for cystic fibrosis and different influences of diets. To avoid disappointing clinical results, these facts have to be considered before extensive clinical studies are started based on results from single animal studies.

Entities:  

Keywords:  CFTR; arachidonic acid; genetics; heterozygotes; homozygotes; oleic acid; transgenic mice

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29513100      PMCID: PMC5882031          DOI: 10.1177/1535370218758605

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Exp Biol Med (Maywood)        ISSN: 1535-3699


  53 in total

1.  Effect on renal function of essential fatty acid supplementation in cystic fibrosis.

Authors:  B Strandvik; U Berg; A Kallner; E Kusoffsky
Journal:  J Pediatr       Date:  1989-08       Impact factor: 4.406

2.  A membrane lipid imbalance plays a role in the phenotypic expression of cystic fibrosis in cftr(-/-) mice.

Authors:  S D Freedman; M H Katz; E M Parker; M Laposata; M Y Urman; J G Alvarez
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  1999-11-23       Impact factor: 11.205

3.  Spectrum of mutations in the CFTR gene of patients with classical and atypical forms of cystic fibrosis from southwestern Sweden: identification of 12 novel mutations.

Authors:  B Strandvik; E Björck; M Fallström; E Gronowitz; J Thountzouris; A Lindblad; D Markiewicz; J Wahlström; L C Tsui; J Zielenski
Journal:  Genet Test       Date:  2001

4.  Renal function in rats with essential fatty acid deficiency.

Authors:  L Hjelte; M Larsson; A Alvestrand; A S Malmborg; B Strandvik
Journal:  Clin Sci (Lond)       Date:  1990-10       Impact factor: 6.124

Review 5.  Epigenetics in Cystic Fibrosis: Epigenetic Targeting of a Genetic Disease.

Authors:  Nualpun Sirinupong; Zhe Yang
Journal:  Curr Drug Targets       Date:  2015       Impact factor: 3.465

Review 6.  Mouse models of cystic fibrosis.

Authors:  D J Davidson; M Rolfe
Journal:  Trends Genet       Date:  2001-10       Impact factor: 11.639

7.  Long-term docosahexaenoic acid therapy in a congenic murine model of cystic fibrosis.

Authors:  Satti Beharry; Cameron Ackerley; Mary Corey; Geraldine Kent; Yew-Meng Heng; Hilary Christensen; Catherine Luk; Rhonda K Yantiss; Imad A Nasser; Munir Zaman; Steven D Freedman; Peter R Durie
Journal:  Am J Physiol Gastrointest Liver Physiol       Date:  2006-11-09       Impact factor: 4.052

8.  Serum fatty acid profiles in cystic fibrosis patients and their parents.

Authors:  A B Christophe; W J Warwick; R T Holman
Journal:  Lipids       Date:  1994-08       Impact factor: 1.880

9.  Urinary bile acid excretion in correlation to liver histopathology in cystic fibrosis.

Authors:  B Arborgh; A Eklund; A Norman; B Strandvik
Journal:  Scand J Gastroenterol       Date:  1980       Impact factor: 2.423

10.  Increased tissue arachidonic acid and reduced linoleic acid in a mouse model of cystic fibrosis are reversed by supplemental glycerophospholipids enriched in docosahexaenoic acid.

Authors:  Myriam Mimoun; Thierry C Coste; Jean Lebacq; Patrick Lebecque; Pierre Wallemacq; Teresinha Leal; Martine Armand
Journal:  J Nutr       Date:  2009-10-14       Impact factor: 4.798

View more
  2 in total

1.  Severe Genotype, Pancreatic Insufficiency and Low Dose of Pancreatic Enzymes Associate with Abnormal Serum Sterol Profile in Cystic Fibrosis.

Authors:  Sławomira Drzymała-Czyż; Patrycja Krzyżanowska-Jankowska; Krzysztof Dziedzic; Aleksandra Lisowska; Szymon Kurek; Joanna Goździk-Spychalska; Victoria Kononets; Dagmara Woźniak; Edyta Mądry; Jarosław Walkowiak
Journal:  Biomolecules       Date:  2021-02-19

Review 2.  Specialized Pro-Resolving Lipid Mediators in Cystic Fibrosis.

Authors:  Réginald Philippe; Valerie Urbach
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2018-09-21       Impact factor: 5.923

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.