Angela S Koh1, Fei Gao2, Ru S Tan1, Liang Zhong1, Shuang Leng3, Xiaodan Zhao3, Kevin T Fridianto4, Jianhong Ching4, Si Y Lee3, Bryan M H Keng3, Tee Joo Yeo5, Shu Y Tan6, Hong C Tan7, Chin T Lim8, Woon-Puay Koh9, Jean-Paul Kovalik4,7. 1. Department of Cardiology, National Heart Centre Singapore, Duke-NUS Medical School, Singapore. 2. Department of Cardiology, National Heart Centre Singapore, Singapore, Centre for Quantitative Medicine, Duke-NUS Medical School, Singapore. 3. Department of Cardiology, National Heart Centre, Singapore. 4. Cardiovascular and Metabolic Diseases Programme, Duke-NUS Medical School, Singapore. 5. Department of Cardiology, National University Heart Centre Singapore. 6. Department of Family Medicine and Continuing Care, General Hospital, Singapore. 7. Department of Endocrinology, General Hospital, Singapore. 8. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, National University Hospital, Singapore. 9. Health Services and Systems Research, Duke-NUS Medical School, Singapore.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Aerobic capacity is a powerful predictor of cardiovascular disease and all-cause mortality, and it declines with advancing age. HYPOTHESIS: Since physical activity alters body metabolism, metabolism markers will likely differ between subjects with high vs low aerobic capacities. METHODS: Community-based participants without physician-diagnosed heart disease, stroke or cancer underwent same-day multimodal assessment of cardiovascular function (by echocardiography and magnetic resonance feature tracking of left atrium) and aerobic capacity by peak oxygen uptake (VO2 ) metrics. Associations between VO2 and cardiovascular and metabolomics profiles were studied in adjusted models including standard covariates. RESULTS: We studied 141 participants, of whom 82 (58.2%) had low VO2 , while 59 (41.8%) had high VO2 . Compared to participants with high VO2 , participants with low VO2 had more adverse cardiovascular parameters, such as lower ratio of peak velocity flow in early diastole to peak velocity flow in late diastole by atrial contraction of >0.8 (76% vs 35%, adjusted odd ratio [OR] = 4.1, 95% confidence interval [CI] [1.7-9.5], P = 0.001) and lower left atrial conduit strain (11.3 ± 4.0 vs 15.6 ± 6.1%, adjusted OR = 1.1, 95% CI [1.002-1.3], P = 0.045). High VO2 was associated with lower accumulation of wide-spectrum acyl-carnitines (OR = 0.6, 95% CI [0.4-0.9], P = 0.013), alanine (OR = 0.1, 95% CI [0.01-0.9], P = 0.044) and glutamine /glutamate (OR = 0.1, 95% CI [0.01-0.5], P = 0.007), compared to low VO2. CONCLUSION: Elderly adults with low VO2 have adverse cardiovascular and metabolic parameters compared to their counterparts with high VO2 . Combined cardiac and metabolomics phenotyping may be a promising tool to provide insights into physiological states, useful for tracking future interventions related to physical activity among community cohorts.
BACKGROUND: Aerobic capacity is a powerful predictor of cardiovascular disease and all-cause mortality, and it declines with advancing age. HYPOTHESIS: Since physical activity alters body metabolism, metabolism markers will likely differ between subjects with high vs low aerobic capacities. METHODS: Community-based participants without physician-diagnosed heart disease, stroke or cancer underwent same-day multimodal assessment of cardiovascular function (by echocardiography and magnetic resonance feature tracking of left atrium) and aerobic capacity by peak oxygen uptake (VO2 ) metrics. Associations between VO2 and cardiovascular and metabolomics profiles were studied in adjusted models including standard covariates. RESULTS: We studied 141 participants, of whom 82 (58.2%) had low VO2 , while 59 (41.8%) had high VO2 . Compared to participants with high VO2 , participants with low VO2 had more adverse cardiovascular parameters, such as lower ratio of peak velocity flow in early diastole to peak velocity flow in late diastole by atrial contraction of >0.8 (76% vs 35%, adjusted odd ratio [OR] = 4.1, 95% confidence interval [CI] [1.7-9.5], P = 0.001) and lower left atrial conduit strain (11.3 ± 4.0 vs 15.6 ± 6.1%, adjusted OR = 1.1, 95% CI [1.002-1.3], P = 0.045). High VO2 was associated with lower accumulation of wide-spectrum acyl-carnitines (OR = 0.6, 95% CI [0.4-0.9], P = 0.013), alanine (OR = 0.1, 95% CI [0.01-0.9], P = 0.044) and glutamine /glutamate (OR = 0.1, 95% CI [0.01-0.5], P = 0.007), compared to low VO2. CONCLUSION: Elderly adults with low VO2 have adverse cardiovascular and metabolic parameters compared to their counterparts with high VO2 . Combined cardiac and metabolomics phenotyping may be a promising tool to provide insights into physiological states, useful for tracking future interventions related to physical activity among community cohorts.
Authors: Svati H Shah; James R Bain; Michael J Muehlbauer; Robert D Stevens; David R Crosslin; Carol Haynes; Jennifer Dungan; L Kristin Newby; Elizabeth R Hauser; Geoffrey S Ginsburg; Christopher B Newgard; William E Kraus Journal: Circ Cardiovasc Genet Date: 2010-02-19
Authors: Timothy R Koves; John R Ussher; Robert C Noland; Dorothy Slentz; Merrie Mosedale; Olga Ilkayeva; James Bain; Robert Stevens; Jason R B Dyck; Christopher B Newgard; Gary D Lopaschuk; Deborah M Muoio Journal: Cell Metab Date: 2008-01 Impact factor: 27.287
Authors: Douglas E Befroy; Kitt Falk Petersen; Sylvie Dufour; Graeme F Mason; Douglas L Rothman; Gerald I Shulman Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2008-10-20 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Bjarne Martens Nes; Imre Janszky; Lars Johan Vatten; Tom Ivar Lund Nilsen; Stian Thoresen Aspenes; Ulrik Wisløff Journal: Med Sci Sports Exerc Date: 2011-11 Impact factor: 5.411
Authors: Christopher B Newgard; Jie An; James R Bain; Michael J Muehlbauer; Robert D Stevens; Lillian F Lien; Andrea M Haqq; Svati H Shah; Michelle Arlotto; Cris A Slentz; James Rochon; Dianne Gallup; Olga Ilkayeva; Brett R Wenner; William S Yancy; Howard Eisenson; Gerald Musante; Richard S Surwit; David S Millington; Mark D Butler; Laura P Svetkey Journal: Cell Metab Date: 2009-04 Impact factor: 27.287
Authors: Xuemei Sui; Michael J LaMonte; James N Laditka; James W Hardin; Nancy Chase; Steven P Hooker; Steven N Blair Journal: JAMA Date: 2007-12-05 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Kim M Huffman; Cris A Slentz; Lori A Bateman; Dana Thompson; Michael J Muehlbauer; James R Bain; Robert D Stevens; Brett R Wenner; Virginia Byers Kraus; Christopher B Newgard; William E Kraus Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2010-10-04 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Kayvan Khoramipour; Øyvind Sandbakk; Ammar Hassanzadeh Keshteli; Abbas Ali Gaeini; David S Wishart; Karim Chamari Journal: Sports Med Date: 2021-10-30 Impact factor: 11.136
Authors: Yen How Tan; Jun Pei Lim; Wee Shiong Lim; Fei Gao; Louis L Y Teo; See Hooi Ewe; Bryan M H Keng; Ru San Tan; Woon-Puay Koh; Angela S Koh Journal: Obes Facts Date: 2022-03-04 Impact factor: 4.807