| Literature DB >> 30691143 |
Jacopo Troisi1,2,3,4, Federica Belmonte5, Antonella Bisogno6, Luca Pierri7, Angelo Colucci8,9, Giovanni Scala10, Pierpaolo Cavallo11, Claudia Mandato12, Antonella Di Nuzzi13, Laura Di Michele14, Anna Pia Delli Bovi15, Salvatore Guercio Nuzio16, Pietro Vajro17,18.
Abstract
Pediatric obesity-related metabolic syndrome (MetS) and nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) are increasingly frequent conditions with a still-elusive diagnosis and low-efficacy treatment and monitoring options. In this study, we investigated the salivary metabolomic signature, which has been uncharacterized to date. In this pilot-nested case-control study over a transversal design, 41 subjects (23 obese patients and 18 normal weight (NW) healthy controls), characterized based on medical history, clinical, anthropometric, and laboratory data, were recruited. Liver involvement, defined according to ultrasonographic liver brightness, allowed for the allocation of the patients into four groups: obese with hepatic steatosis ([St+], n = 15) and without hepatic steatosis ([St⁻], n = 8), and with (n = 10) and without (n = 13) MetS. A partial least squares discriminant analysis (PLS-DA) model was devised to classify the patients' classes based on their salivary metabolomic signature. Pediatric obesity and its related liver disease and metabolic syndrome appear to have distinct salivary metabolomic signatures. The difference is notable in metabolites involved in energy, amino and organic acid metabolism, as well as in intestinal bacteria metabolism, possibly reflecting diet, fatty acid synthase pathways, and the strict interaction between microbiota and intestinal mucins. This information expands the current understanding of NAFLD pathogenesis, potentially translating into better targeted monitoring and/or treatment strategies in the future.Entities:
Keywords: gas-chromatography mass spectrometry; metabolic syndrome; metabolomics; nonalcoholic fatty liver disease; pediatric obesity; saliva
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 30691143 PMCID: PMC6412994 DOI: 10.3390/nu11020274
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nutrients ISSN: 2072-6643 Impact factor: 5.717
Characteristics of the study population.
| Anthropometric and Laboratory Parameters | Controls ( | Obese with Steatosis ( | Obese without Steatosis ( | All Obese ( |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gender (M/F) | 13/5 | 10/5 | 4/4 | 14/9 |
| Age (years) | 10.53 ± 2.57 | 12.48 ± 2.77 * | 12.51 ± 2.79 * | 12.49 ± 2.71 * |
| Weight (kg) | 37.42 ± 11.26 | 79.99 ± 28.76 * | 71.9 ± 17.31 * | 77.18 ± 25.24 * |
| Height (cm) | 140.17 ± 15.17 | 153.41 ± 19.27 * | 157.45 ± 11.97 * | 154.52 ± 16.88 * |
| BMI (kg/cm2) | 18.52 ± 2.92 | 32.80 ± 6.94 * | 28.93 ± 5.58 * | 31.45 ± 6.65 * |
| BMI percentile | 23.75 ± 34.25 | 95.14 ± 0.53 * | 95.67 ± 1.03 * | 95.40 ± 1.05 * |
| Waist circumference (cm) | 61.14 ± 7.11 | 93.27 ± 12.68 * | 86.00 ± 14.53 * | 90.74 ± 13.49 * |
| WC percentile | 65.85 ± 24.58 | 94.98 ± 0.97 * | 94.38 ± 1.77 * | 94.78 ± 1.04 * |
| Cm WC > 95th percentile | 0 | 21.03 ± 10.57 * | 14.00 ± 10.99 * | 18.59 ± 11.01 * |
| WtHR | 0.43 ± 0.03 | 0.61 ± 0.05 * | 0.55 ± 0.08 * | 0.59 ± 0.07 * |
| Neck circumference (cm) | 27.67 ± 2.41 | 36.05 ± 4.33 * | 34.69 ± 4.08 * | 35.58 ± 4.20 * |
| NC percentile | 44.12 ± 33.22 | 95.57 ± 5.35 * | 92.61 ± 3.15 | 94.09 ± 4.26 * |
| Cm NC > 95th percentile | 0 | 3.71 ± 2.77 * | 2.41 ± 2.75 * | 3.26 ± 2.77 * |
| SBP (mmHg) | 95.98 ± 11.95 | 127.47 ± 8.95 * | 125.63 ± 20.23 * | 126.83 ± 13.49 * |
| SBP percentile | 50.00 ± 0 | 86.93 ± 19.36 * | 83.50 ± 20.96 * | 85.74 ± 19.52 * |
| DBP (mmHg) | 55.00 ± 10.77 | 61.53 ± 10.42 * | 60.75 ± 11.70 * | 61.26 ± 10.62 * |
| DBP percentile | 50.00 ± 0 | 56.00 ± 15.83 * | 55.00 ± 14.14 * | 55.65 ± 14.95 * |
| ALT (U/L) | 17.33 ± 4.31 | 50.17 ± 28.75 * | 34.50 ± 37.74 * | 44.72 ± 32.21 * |
| AST (U/L) | 24.72 ± 4.87 | 46.19 ± 28.58 * | 19.75 ± 5.85 | 37.00 ± 26.39 * |
| Total cholesterol (mg/dL) | 148.78 ± 16.38 | 158.17 ± 21.91 * | 162.00 ± 24.20 * | 159.50 ± 22.26 * |
| HDL (mg/dL) | 56.94 ± 14.45 | 45.07 ± 10.21 * | 48.00 ± 5.50 * | 46.09 ± 8.83 * |
| Triglyceride (mg/dL) | Not available | 90.59 ± 26.97 | 138.63 ± 91.90 | 107.30 ± 60.80 |
| Blood glucose (mg/dL) | 83.17 ± 6.61 | 88.59 ± 10.36 * | 90.00 ± 10.34 * | 89.08 ± 10.14 * |
| Salivary glucose (µM) | 3338.36 ± 1274.73 | 3167.86 ± 1192.75 | 2647.09 ± 1227.77 | 2986.70 ± 1203.86 |
| Blood insulin (U/L) | 10.27 ± 5.22 | 24.24 ± 10.95 * | 19.60 ± 6.63 * | 22.62 ± 9.77 * |
| Salivary insulin (nM) | 5.79 ± 2.85 | 20.89 ± 8.69 * | 17.26 ± 6.37 * | 19.60 ± 8.00 * |
| Blood HOMA-IR | 2.01 ± 1.16 | 5.34 ± 2.60 * | 4.11 ± 2.16 * | 4.91 ± 2.48 * |
| Salivary HOMA-IR | 119.7 ± 73.99 | 401.81 ± 231.17 * | 278.79 ± 162.48 * | 358.20 ± 215.35 * |
| Blood uric acid (mg/dL) | 4.04 ± 0.76 | 5.06 ± 1.23 * | 4.42 ± 0.92 * | 4.84 ± 1.15 * |
| Salivary uric acid (µM) | 143.46 ± 4.53 | 157.29 ± 13.04 * | 156.45 ± 15.31 * | 157.00 ± 13.53 * |
Abbreviations = ALT: alanine transaminase; AST: aspartate transaminase; BMI: Body Mass Index; DBP: diastolic blood pressure; HDL: high density lipoproteins; HOMA-IR: Homeostasis Assessment Model—Insulin Resistance WC: waist circumference; NC: neck circumference; SBP: systolic blood pressure; WtHR: Waist to Height Ratio; * p value < 0.05 compared to controls.
Metabolic Syndrome components in obese patients with and without hepatic steatosis.
| Number (%) of Obese Patients with Hepatic Steatosis | Number (%) of Obese Patients without Hepatic Steatosis | Total (%) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sample size | 15(65%) | 8(35%) | 23(100%) |
| Waist circumference >90th percentile | 15(65%) | 7(30%) | 22(95%) |
| Glucose blood levels >100 mg/dL | 4(17%) | 2(9%) | 6(26%) |
| Blood pressure >95th percentile | 10(43%) | 4(17%) | 14(60%) |
| HDL <40 mg/dL | 3(13%) | 0(0%) | 3(13%) |
| TG >150 mg/dL | 2(9%) | 3(13%) | 5(22%) |
| HOMA-IR > 3 | 13(57%) | 5(22%) | 18(79%) |
| Numbers of patients fulfilling MetS Criteria: (WC > 90th percentile and more than two out of four other criteria) | 7(30%) | 3(13%) | 10(43%) |
Abbreviations = HDL: high density lipoproteins; HOMA-IR: Homeostasis Assessment Model – Insulin Resistance; MetS: Metabolic Syndrome; TG: Triglycerides; WC: waist circumference
Figure 1Partial least square discriminant analysis (PLS-DA) models to discriminate children according to Body Mass Index (BMI) (A1) and Non Alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease (NAFLD) (B1), as unique parameters investigated. The explained variance of each component is shown in parenthesis on the corresponding axis. In panel A1, the green ellipse contains normal weight children, while the red one contains the obese children. In panel B1, the purple circles represent the obese children with NAFLD (OB[St+]), the pink circles represent obese children without NAFLD (OB[St−]), while green circles represent the normal weight controls (NW). In panel C1, the blue circles represent the children with a diagnosis of metabolic syndrome (MetS), while the yellow ones represent the children without MetS diagnosis. The first 12, 13 and 5 variables important in projection (VIP) identified by the corresponding PLS-DA are shown in Panels A2, B2 and C2 respectively. The number of VIPs was established by setting the VIP-score ≥ 2 as a cut off value. In all cases, the colored boxes on the right indicate the relative amount of the corresponding metabolite in each group under study.
Variables important in projection (VIP) metabolites fold changes in patients versus controls’ saliva.
| VIP | NW | OB[St−] | OB[St+] | MetS− | MetS+ | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hydroxy butyric acid | 0.00697 | −0.14 | −0.62 * | NS | 0.00622 | −1.02 | NS |
| Palmitic acid d | 0.00088 | 4.46 *** | 8.06 ** | NS | 0.00398 | −0.74 | NS |
| Myristic acid | 0.00092 | 3.71 ** | 7.58 * | NS | 0.00375 | −0.66 | NS |
| Lauric acid | 0.00061 | −7.21 ** | −3.35 | NS | 0.00267 | 0.73 | NS |
| Urea | 0.00093 | 4.15 ** | 7.65 ** | NS | 0.00404 | −0.71 | NS |
| 0.00088 | 3.72 ** | 7.60 * | NS | 0.00375 | −0.66 | NS | |
| Malic acid | 0.17825 | −0.98 | −0.98 | NS | 0.09066 | 0.96 | NS |
| Methyl maleic acid | 0.01375 | −0.72 | −0.24 | NS | 0.01164 | 0.81 | NS |
| Maltose | 0.07047 | −0.54 | −0.25 | NS | 0.05846 | 0.24 | NS |
| Xylose | 0.00864 | −0.62 | −0.34 | NS | 0.00681 | 0.27 | NS |
| Butanediol | 0.00070 | −6.16 ** | −2.79 | NS | 0.00272 | 0.34 | NS |
| Proline | 0.00999 | −0.56 | −0.25 | NS | 0.00752 | −1.02 | NS |
| Tartaric acid | 0.06401 | 0.52 | 0.40 | NS | 0.04729 | −0.40 | NS |
* indicates a p-value < 0.05 compared to NW, ** indicates a p-value < 0.01 compared to NW, *** indicates a p-value < 0.001 compared to NW, NS indicates a p-value > 0.05. Normalized chromatographic peak area; p-values of OB[St+]/OB[St−] comparison; p-values of MetS−/MetS+ comparison; Metabolite selected by both PLS-DA models. Abbreviations: MetS−: No metabolic syndrome diagnosis; MetS+: Diagnosis of metabolic syndrome; NW: Normal Weight; OB[St+]: Obese without steatosis; OB[St+]: Obese with Steatosis; PLS-DA: Partial Least Squares Discriminant Analysis; VIP: Variable Important in Projections
Figure 2Partial least squares discriminant analysis (PLS-DA) model to discriminate obese children according to the number of Metabolic Syndrome (MetS) components. The explained variance of each component is shown on the corresponding axis. In panels A and B, the color darkness progression denotes the MetS components increase. The seven metabolites with a variable important in projection score (VIP-score) higher than 2 are shown in Panel C.
Figure 3Partial least squares discriminant analysis (PLS-DA) model to discriminate children according to the presence/absence of hypertransaminasemia. Panel A: Serum Alanine transaminase (ALT) > 40 U/L was considered as hypertransaminasemia for both boys and girls. The explained variance of each component is shown on the corresponding axis. Panel B. Serum ALT > 25.8 U/L for boys and 22.1 U/L for girls was considered as hypertransaminasemia. In panels A and B, the cyan ellipse contains children with ALT > cut off values, while gray circles represent the children with serum ALT lower than cut off values. The nine metabolites with a VIP-score higher than 2 are shown in Panel C. PLS-DA shown in Panels D/E cumulates information on the status of both hepatic steatosis and transaminases values with respective variable important in projection scores (VIP-scores) shown in Panel F.
Figure 4UpSet representation of the metabolites selected in the different classification models. H-ALT: Hypertransaminasemia; MetS: Metabolic Syndrome; NW: normal weight, OB: obese, [St]: hepatic steatosis.
Figure 5Metabolic systems map summarizing the shortest route that may explain the interactions among the metabolites with a variable important in projection scores higher than 2. There is a clear interplay of several pathways involving: de novo fatty acid biosynthesis; saturated fatty acid beta-oxidation; butanoate metabolism; glycolysis and gluconeogenesis; tricarboxylic acid cycle (TCA); urea cycle and metabolism of proline, glutamate, aspartate and asparagine; valine, and isoleucine (branched chain amino acids) degradation; aminosugars metabolism; purine metabolism; glycerophospholipid metabolism.