| Literature DB >> 29802315 |
Dicky L Tahapary1,2,3,4, Karin de Ruiter5, Farid Kurniawan6,7, Yenny Djuardi8,9, Yanan Wang10, Siti M E Nurdin11, Elisa Iskandar8,9, Dominggus Minggu12, Em Yunir6,7, Bruno Guigas5, Taniawati Supali8,9, Patrick C N Rensen10, Erliyani Sartono5, Pradana Soewondo6,7, Dante S Harbuwono6,7, Johannes W A Smit7,13, Maria Yazdanbakhsh14.
Abstract
Epidemiological studies have indicated that rural living might be protective against type 2 diabetes development. We compared the metabolic profile and response to a short-term high-fat high-calorie diet (HFD) of men with the same genetic background living in an urban and rural area of Indonesia. First, we recruited 154 Floresian male subjects (18-65 years old), of whom 105 lived in a rural area (Flores) and 49 had migrated and lived in urban area (Jakarta) for more than 1 year. The urban group had significantly higher whole-body insulin resistance (IR), as assessed by homeostatic-model-assessment of IR (HOMA-IR), [mean difference (95% CI), p-value: 0.10 (0.02-0.17), p = 0.01]. Next, we recruited 17 urban and 17 rural age-and-BMI-matched healthy-young-male volunteers for a 5-day HFD challenge. The HOMA-IR increased in both groups similarly -0.77 (-2.03-0.49), p = 0.22]. Neither rural living nor factors associated with rural living, such as current helminth infection or total IgE, were associated with protection against acute induction of IR by HFD.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29802315 PMCID: PMC5970191 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-018-25092-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Comparison of metabolic profiles between subjects living in urban and rural area.
| Urban (n = 49) | Rural (n = 105) | |
|---|---|---|
| Duration in urban (in years) | 20.7 (1.0-40.0) | — |
| Age (in years) | 39.3 (13.5) | 44.5 (12.2)* |
| HOMA-IR | 1.45 (1.06–1.90) | 0.96 (0.80–1.13)* |
| Fasting Insulin (mU/L) | 4.9 (3.8–6.4) | 3.1 (2.5–3.8)** |
| Fasting Blood Glucose (mmol/L) | 5.7 (1.4) | 5.4 (0.9) |
| 2h-Blood Glucose (mmol/L) | 7.7 (3.2) | 5.9 (1.9)** |
| HbA1c# (mmol/L) | 37.9 (14.3) | 32.3 (6.6)* |
| HbA1c# (%) | 5.6 (1.3) | 5.1 (0.6)* |
| Body Mass Index (kg/m2) | 24.3 (4.9) | 22.7 (4.0)* |
| Waist Circumference (cm) | 84.9 (13.8) | 79.3 (11.9)* |
| Adiponectin (µg/mL) | 4.38 (3.31–5.78) | 3.54 (3.09–4.07) |
| Leptin (ng/mL) | 5.62 (3.98–7.92) | 2.64 (2.06–3.38)* |
| CRP (mg/L) | 1.57 (1.17–2.05) | 1.67 (1.29–2.11) |
| Total IgE (IU/mL) | 168 (105–271) | 931 (702–1,235)** |
| Prevalence of STH (%, n/N) | 5 (2/42) | 57 (52/92)** |
All variables are presented as mean and its standard deviation, however, HOMA-IR, fasting insulin, adiponectin, leptin, CRP, and total IgE level are presented as geomean (95%CI) and were log transformed for analysis, while duration in urban is presented as mean (range). Analysis for the difference between urban and rural group was performed using independent t-test (*p < 0.05, **p < 0.0001) #Hba1c measurements were available in 42 and 95 of urban and rural subjects respectively. Abbreviation: HOMA-IR = the homeostatic model assessment of insulin resistance, CRP = C-reactive protein, STH = soil-transmitted helminth.
Figure 1The association between length of stay in urban area with adiposity. The association between length of time in urban area with (A) body mass index (BMI) and (B) waist circumference are presented in scatter plot graphs (n = 49), and analysed using age-adjusted linear regression. The dotted line represents 95% confidence intervals. Each year increase of a time spent in urban area was associated with a significant increase in both (a) BMI [0.152 (0.036–0.269) kg/m2, p = 0.012] and (b) Waist Circumference [0.449 (0.135–0.762) cm, p = 0.006].
Associations between living in urban and rural area with HOMA-IR, leptin, and waist circumference.
| Variables | Differences for each variable between urban and rural (rural group as the reference group)* | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Crude | Model 1 | Model 2 | Model 3 | Model 4 | Model 5 | |
| HOMA-IR$ | 0.10 (0.02–0.17), p = 0.010 | 0.09 (0.02–0.17), p = 0.016 | 0.08 (−0.00–0.17), p = 0.061 | 0.02 (−0.04–0.08), p = 0.545 | 0.04 (−0.03–0.11), p = 0.294 | 0.01 (−0.06–0.07), p = 0.774 |
| Leptin (ng/mL)$ | 0.33 (0.14–0.51), p = 0.001 | 0.36 (0.18–0.55), p < 0.0001 | 0.10 (−0.03–0.24), p = 0.137 | 0.11 (−0.01–0.22), p = 0.076 | 0.08 (−0.05–0.21), p = 0.216 | — |
| Waist Circumference (cm) | 5.6 (1.3–9.9), p = 0.010 | 7.2 (3.0–11.3), p = 0.001 | 4.2 (−0.5–8.8), p = 0.077 | — | — | — |
*Beta coefficient (95% CI) from linear regression. $HOMA-IR and leptin level were log transformed for analysis. Model 1: adjusted for age. Model 2: adjusted for model 1 plus total IgE level. Model 3: adjusted for model 1 plus waist circumference. Model 4: adjusted for model 2 plus waist circumference. Model 5: adjusted for model 3 plus leptin level. Abbreviation: HOMA-IR = the homeostatic model assessment of insulin resistance.
Figure 2Comparison of Metabolic Responses to High-Fat Diet. HOMA-IR and adipose-IR index are presented as geometric mean and its corresponding 95% confidence interval, while CETP levels are presented as mean with its standard deviation. There were no significant differences in the increase of HOMA-IR (A), adipose-IR index (B) between urban and rural group, however, the increase in CETP level (C) was higher in the urban group. Furthermore, in rural group, there were no significant differences in the increase of HOMA-IR (D), adipose-IR index (E), and CETP level (F) between STH-infected and uninfected group. The difference between before and after intervention for each group was analysed using paired t-test, while the difference in the magnitude of changes for each parameter was analysed using linear mixed model (*p < 0.05, NS: p > 0.05).
Figure 3Conceptual framework. In the cross-sectional study (A), we assessed whether the differences in past or current exposure to helminths contribute to the difference in insulin resistance (IR) between subjects living in urban and rural area, and whether the observed difference in IR is independent from adiposity. In the high-fat diet (HFD) study (B), first, we assessed whether past or current exposure to helminths protect against the HFD-associated increase in IR, independent of adiposity. Next, we also assessed whether the presence of current helminth infection protect against the HFD-associated increase in IR. *Past and current exposure to helminths was assessed by measuring serum total IgE level, a general marker for Th2 responses, commonly induced by soil-transmitted helminth (STH). **Current exposure to helminths was assessed using stool PCR. #Other factors that were not specifically assessed in this study.