| Literature DB >> 31218777 |
Dorrain Yanwen Low1, Sophie Lefèvre-Arbogast2, Raúl González-Domínguez3, Mireia Urpi-Sarda3, Pierre Micheau1, Melanie Petera4, Delphine Centeno4, Stephanie Durand4, Estelle Pujos-Guillot4, Aniko Korosi5, Paul J Lucassen5, Ludwig Aigner6, Cécile Proust-Lima2, Boris P Hejblum7, Catherine Helmer2, Cristina Andres-Lacueva3, Sandrine Thuret8, Cécilia Samieri2, Claudine Manach1.
Abstract
SCOPE: Untargeted metabolomics may reveal preventive targets in cognitive aging, including within the food metabolome. METHODS ANDEntities:
Keywords: aging; coffee; cognitive decline; dietary biomarkers; untargeted metabolomics
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31218777 PMCID: PMC6790579 DOI: 10.1002/mnfr.201900177
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Mol Nutr Food Res ISSN: 1613-4125 Impact factor: 5.914
Baseline characteristics of cases of cognitive decline (n = 209) and controls with slower cognitive decline (>median slope, n = 209) in a case‐control study matched for age, gender and education, nested within the 3C Bordeaux cohort
| Cases | Controls |
| |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||
| Age (years) | 75.9 (4.5) | 75.7 (4.2) | – |
| Gender, female | 66.0 | 66.0 | – |
| Education, ≥secondary school | 28.7 | 28.7 | – |
|
| |||
| Number of drugs consumed | 4.9 (2.7) | 4.1 (2.4) | <0.01 |
| BMI (kg m−²) | 26.8 (4.4) | 26.1 (3.6) | 0.12 |
| Plasma total cholesterol (mmol L−1) | 5.8 (0.9) | 5.8 (1.0) | 0.98 |
| Plasma triglycerides (mmol L−1) | 1.4 (0.8) | 1.3 (0.6) | 0.23 |
| Plasma glucose (mmol L−1) | 5.4 (1.6) | 5.1 (1.0) | 0.015 |
| Diabetes | 13.2 | 5.7 | 0.02 |
| ApoE‐ε4 carrier | 26.2 | 12.0 | <0.01 |
|
| |||
| Regular Physical activity | 27.8 | 38.3 | <0.01 |
| Smoking status | 0.75 | ||
| Never | 67.5 | 65.1 | |
| Former | 27.8 | 30.6 | |
| Current | 9.1 | 4.3 | |
|
| |||
| Alcoholic beverages (glasses/week) | 9.4 (10.5) | 10.8 (13.2) | 0.20 |
| Wine (glasses/week) | 8.4 (9.5) | 9.3 (11.5) | 0.35 |
| Regular coffee consumption (daily) | 75.1 | 78.9 | 0.37 |
| Regular tea consumption (daily) | 25.4 | 22.0 | 0.39 |
|
| |||
| Dairy products (daily) | 94.7 | 93.3 | 0.53 |
| Meat (≥4 times/week) | 65.6 | 62.2 | 0.47 |
| Fish (≥2 times/week) | 54.1 | 56.0 | 0.68 |
| Eggs (≥2 times/week) | 40.7 | 43.5 | 0.55 |
| Cereal (daily) | 93.8 | 94.7 | 0.68 |
| Raw fruit (daily) | 82.8 | 83.7 | 0.80 |
| Raw vegetables (daily) | 44.0 | 52.2 | 0.11 |
| Cooked fruit and vegetables (daily) | 72.7 | 77.5 | 0.29 |
| Legumes (≥1 time/week) | 30.1 | 28.7 | 0.75 |
| Chocolate (≥2 times/week) | 38.8 | 52.4 | <0.01 |
Values are mean (SD) or percentages of non‐missing values. ApoE‐ε4, allele ε4 for the apolipoprotein E gene; HDL, high‐density lipoprotein; LDL, low‐density lipoprotein; BMI, body mass index
Estimated using conditional logistic regression.
Figure 1Identification of a metabolomics signature of cognitive decline in the 3C Bordeaux cohort (n = 418). We applied LASSO‐penalized conditional logistic regression on 1000 bootstrap samples to identify the ions/metabolites robustly associated with the odds of cognitive decline in the case‐control study. Ions/metabolites are ranked by decreasing frequency of selection across bootstraps. Dark grey bars indicate metabolites selected on the initial sample, and light grey bars those selected on bootstrapped samples only. We retained the 22 ions/metabolites selected in >40% of bootstraps (with names highlighted in bold font). For each bootstrapped model, the optimal penalization was chosen by leave‐pair‐out cross‐validation. Models were conditioned on the matching variables (age, gender, and level of education) and adjusted for body mass index and the number of medications regularly consumed. Ion/metabolites are defined with their mass‐to‐charge ratio (M) and retention time (T).
Multivariate associations between the 22 serum ions/metabolites selected in the metabolomics signature and the odds of subsequent cognitive decline, in the 3C Bordeaux cohort (n = 418)
| Selection rank | Ion | Metabolite name | Identification level | OR |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | M497.2383_T10.11 | Atractyligenin glucuronide | 2 | 0.72 |
| 2 | M144.1018_T0.96 | Proline betaine | 1 | 1.56 |
| 3 | M195.0876_T8.09 | Caffeine | 1 | 1.75 |
| 4 | M251.1278_T13.25 | CMPFP | 2 | 0.74 |
| 5 | M129.0658_T0.90 | – | 4 | 1.49 |
| 6 | M160.1331_T0.97 | – | 4 | 1.83 |
| 7 | M271.2056_T12.99 | – | 4 | 0.69 |
| 8 | M197.1284_T7.95 | Cyclo(prolyl‐valyl) | 1 | 0.90 |
| 9 | M372.3108_T13.12 | Myristoylcarnitine | 1 | 1.01 |
| 10 | M626.3536_T11.69 | GDCA | 1 | 1.12 |
| 11 | M383.1161_T0.87 | Glucose | 1 | 1.24 |
| 12 | M114.0660_T0.88 | Creatinine | 1 | 1.41 |
| 13 | M189.1597_T0.79 | N‐trimethyl‐Lysine | 1 | 1.09 |
| 14 | M159.0276_T1.15 | – | 4 | 1.40 |
| 15 | M211.1441_T8.78 | Cyclo(leucyl‐prolyl) | 1 | 0.68 |
| 16 | M287.6256_T14.09 | LysoPC(18:3) | 2 | 0.76 |
| 17 | M363.2166_T10.80 | Cortisol | 1 | 0.74 |
| 18 | M330.2639_T11.58 | Undecanoylcarnitine/4,8 dimethylnonanoylcarnitine | 3 | 0.83 |
| 19 | M245.0768_T1.15 | – | 4 | 1.29 |
| 20 | M256.6796_T14.27 | – | 4 | 0.85 |
| 21 | M175.1189_T0.81 | L‐Arginine | 1 | 1.29 |
| 22 | M344.2795_T12.23 | Lauroylcarnitine | 1 | 1.32 |
Ions/metabolites are ordered by decreasing frequency of selection across bootstraps and referred to by mass‐to‐charge‐ratio (M) and retention time (T). Odds Ratios (ORs) for cognitive decline were estimated using a conditional logistic regression conditioned on matching variables (age, gender and educational level) and adjusted for BMI and number of medications regularly consumed. ORs are for 1SD‐increment of metabolite intensity. Confidence intervals are not valid in post‐selection inference and hence were not estimated. Level of identification is assigned as: 1, identification validated with standards; 2, putative identification by comparison with databases or literature; 3, putative identification of a chemical class; 4, unknown. CMPFP, 3‐carboxy‐4‐methyl‐5‐pentyl‐2‐furanpropionic acid; GDCA, glycodeoxycholic acid‐3‐glucuronide; LysoPC(18:3), 1‐linolenoyl‐sn‐glycero‐3‐phosphocholine.
Figure 2Cross‐validated ROC curves for a reference predictive model for cognitive decline (light grey curve) and a model additionally including the 22 metabolite‐signature (dark grey curve), the 3C Bordeaux cohort (n = 418). Areas Under the Curve (AUC) were estimated using conditional logistic regressions conditioned on age at baseline, gender and level of education and adjusted for body mass index, number of medications, ApoE‐ε4 genotype and diabetes. ROC curves and AUCs were estimated by leave‐pair‐out cross‐validation; confidence intervals for AUC were computed from 1000 bootstraps.