| Literature DB >> 31788516 |
Anna Boronat1,2, Julian Mateus1, Natalia Soldevila-Domenech1,2, Mercè Guerra2, Jose Rodríguez-Morató2, Carlota Varon3, Daniel Muñoz4,5, Francina Barbosa6, Juan Carlos Morales7, Andreas Gaedigk8, Klaus Langohr1,9, Maria-Isabel Covas4,10, Clara Pérez-Mañá11,12, Montserrat Fitó4,5, Rachel F Tyndale13, Rafael de la Torre1,2,5.
Abstract
Here we present new and original data on the endogenous conversion of tyrosol (Tyr) into hydroxytyrosol (OHTyr) in humans and its effects on the cardiovascular system. A randomized, crossover, controlled clinical trial was performed with individuals at cardiovascular risk (n = 33). They received white wine (WW) (females 1, males 2 standard drinks/day), WW plus Tyr capsules (WW + Tyr) (25mg Tyr capsule, one per WW drink), and water (control) ad libitum. Intervention periods were of 4 weeks preceded by three-week wash-out periods. We assessed the conversion of Tyr to OHTyr, its interaction with a polygenic activity score (PAS) from CYP2A6 and CYP2D6 genotypes, and the effects on cardiovascular risk markers. For further details and experimental findings please refer to the article "Cardiovascular benefits of tyrosol and its endogenous conversion into hydroxytyrosol in humans. A randomized, controlled trial" [1].Entities:
Keywords: CYP2A6; CYP2D6; Cardiovascular risk; Endogenous conversion; Hydroxytyrosol; Tyrosol
Year: 2019 PMID: 31788516 PMCID: PMC6880089 DOI: 10.1016/j.dib.2019.104787
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Data Brief ISSN: 2352-3409
Fig. 1Schema of the clinical trial. Intervention periods of 4 weeks. WO: wash-out period (3 weeks) without alcohol and following a low-phenolic content diet. WW (white wine): 2 glasses (270 mL, 27 g of alcohol, 2.8 mg of Tyr and 0.4 mg of OHTyr) for men, and 1 glass (135 mL, 13.5 mg, 1.4 mg of Tyr, and 0.2 mg of OHTyr) for women. WW + Tyr (white wine plus tyrosol): 2 glasses of wine: 270 mL, 27 g of alcohol, 2.8 + 50 mg of Tyr (2 capsules), and 0.4 mg of OHTyr for men, and 1 glass:135 mL, 13.5 g of alcohol, 1.4 mg + 25 mg of Tyr (1 capsule), and 0.2 mg of OHTyr for women.
Baseline characteristics of the participants.
| Variable | Values |
|---|---|
| Age, y | 65.3 ± 6.2 |
| Gender, n (%) | |
| Women | 12 (36.4%) |
| Men | 21 (63.6%) |
| BMI, kg/m2 | 32.6 ± 4.2 |
| LDL cholesterol, mg/dL | 118 ± 34.4 |
| HDL cholesterol, mg/dL | 50.2 ± 12.9 |
| Total cholesterol, mg/dL | 192 ± 39.3 |
| Triglycerides, mg/dL | 120 ± 72.2 |
| Cardiovascular Risk factors, n (%) | |
| Current smokers | 6 (18.2%) |
| Family history of premature CHD | 6 (19.4%) |
| Obesity (BMI ≥ 25kg/m2) | 32 (97.0%) |
| Type 2 Diabetes | 13 (39.4%) |
| Hypertension | 28 (84.8%) |
| High LDL cholesterol (>130 mg/dL) | 25 (75.6%) |
| Low HDL cholesterol (<40 mg/dL for men or <50 mg/dL for women) | 8 (24.2%) |
| Medications, n (%) | |
| Alfa blockers | 2 (6.1%) |
| Beta blockers | 6 (18.2%) |
| ACE inhibitors | 14 (42.4%) |
| Angiotensin II receptor antagonists | 11 (33.3%) |
| Diuretics | 13 (39.4%) |
| Statins | 16 (48.5%) |
| Oral hypoglycemic drugs | 12 (36.4%) |
| Acetylsalicylic acid | 10 (30.3%) |
Data presented as mean ± SD or n (%) (n = 33). BMI, body mass index; LDL, low density lipoproteins; HDL, high density lipoproteins; CHD, coronary heart disease.
Energy, nutrients, and fiber at the beginning and at the end of the clinical trial.
| Variable | Treatment | P* | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control | P | WW | P | WW+TYR | P | ||
| Energy, kcal/day | |||||||
| Baseline | 1695 ± 446 | 1663 ± 421 | 1624 ± 370 | NS | |||
| 12-week | 1643 ± 361 | 0.616 | 1650 ± 354 | 0.868 | 1737 ± 450 | 0.082 | |
| HC, % energy | |||||||
| Baseline | 38.2 ± 8.6 | 40.2 ± 6.4 | 38.8 ± 6.3 | NS | |||
| 12-week | 38.3 ± 7.3 | 0.906 | 37.6 ± 7.7 | 0.095 | 37.8 ± 7.5 | 0.360 | |
| HC, grams | |||||||
| Baseline | 159 ± 48 | 165± 43 | 157 ± 38 | NS | |||
| 12-week | 156 ± 41 | 0.811 | 153 ± 40 | 0.209 | 163 ± 45 | 0.532 | |
| Protein, % energy | |||||||
| Baseline | 20.9 ± 4.0 | 19.2 ± 3.0 | 21.5 ± 4.5 | NS | |||
| 12-week | 21.2 ± 4.1 | 0.578 | 19.5 ± 4.8 | 0.028 | 19.0± 3.9 | 0.142 | |
| Protein, grams | |||||||
| Baseline | 88 ± 25 | 79 ± 19 | 86 ± 24 | NS | |||
| 12-week | 87 ± 25 | 0.939 | 81 ± 30 | 0.651 | 82 ± 23 | 0.184 | |
| Total Fat, % energy | |||||||
| Baseline | 40.7 ± 7.5 | 40.3 ± 6.2 | 39.2 ± 6.6 | NS | |||
| 12-week | 40.2 ± 7.2 | 0.625 | 36.7 ± 9.0 | 0.496 | 38.6 ± 6.3 | 0.230 | |
| Total Fat, grams | |||||||
| Baseline | 78 ± 29 | 76 ± 28 | 72 ± 24 | NS | |||
| 12-week | 74 ± 23 | 0.489 | 68 ± 24 | 0.015 | 76± 28 | 0.809 | |
| SFA, % energy | |||||||
| Baseline | 11.4± 3.8 | 10.1 ± 3.0 | 11.4 ± 4.2 | NS | |||
| 12-week | 10.7 ± 3.7 | 0.526 | 10.1 ± 3.9 | 0.953 | 10.4 ± 3.7 | 0.272 | |
| SFA, grams | |||||||
| Baseline | 22 ± 12 | 19 ± 9 | 21 ± 12 | NS | |||
| 12-week | 20 ± 10 | 0.428 | 19 ± 10 | 0.873 | 21 ± 11 | 0.855 | |
| MUFA,% energy | |||||||
| Baseline | 19.8 ± 5.0 | 19.7 ± 4.2 | 18.6 ± 5.0 | NS | |||
| 12-week | 20.1 ± 4.2 | 0.893 | 18.4 ± 5.1 | 0.177 | 19.6 ± 3.5 | 0.172 | |
| MUFA, grams | |||||||
| Baseline | 53.3 ± 21.0 | 53.8 ± 15.5 | 53.0 ± 16.6 | NS | |||
| 12-week | 51.9 ± 21.2 | 0.475 | 46.5 ± 13.3 | 0.274 | 50.0 ± 14.3 | 0.054 | |
| PUFA, % energy | |||||||
| Baseline | 6.1 ± 2.6 | 6.8 ± 2.5 | 6.0 ± 2.1 | NS | |||
| 12-week | 5.9 ± 2.3 | 0.697 | 5.2 ± 2.1 | 0.222 | 5.4 ± 1.9 | 0.179 | |
| PUFA, grams | |||||||
| Baseline | 12 ± 6 | 13 ± 8 | 11 ± 4 | NS | |||
| 12-week | 11 ± 7 | 0.901 | 10 ± 5 | 0.025 | 11 ± 6 | 0.960 | |
| Fiber, g/day | |||||||
| Baseline | 20 ± 7 | 23 ± 11 | 20 ± 8 | NS | |||
| 12-week | 20 ± 8 | 0.894 | 23 ± 11 | 0.848 | 21 ± 9 | 0.408 | |
Dietary data is expressed as mean ± SD (N = 32). HC, carbohydrates; SFA, saturated fatty acids; MUFA, monounsaturated fatty acids; PUFA, polyunsaturated fatty acids. P Intra-treatment comparisons by Student's t-test. *P value for ANOVA repeated measures adjusted by age and sex.
Characteristics of CYP2A6 and CYP2D6 SNPs tested.
| Tested Allelic Variants | Reference Number | Nucleotide Substitution | Amino acid substitution | TaqMan Assay ID |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| rs1801272 | 479T > A | Leu160His | C_27861808_60 | |
| rs28399433 | - 48T > G | Upstream | C_30634332_10 | |
| rs1135840 | 4181G > C | Ser486Thr | C_27102414_10 | |
| rs16947 | 2851C > T | Arg296Cys | C_27102425_10 | |
| rs3892097 | 1847G > A | Intron Variant | C_27102431_DO | |
| rs5030656 | 2616_2618delAAG | Lys281del | C_32407229_60 | |
| rs1065852 | 100C > T | Pro34Ser | C_11484460_40 | |
| rs769258 | 31G > A | Val11Met | C_27102444_80 | |
| rs28371725 | 2989G > A | Intron Variant | C_34816116_20 |
Activity score assigned to each tested variant in the PAS model.
| Tested Allelic | Variants | Functional consequence | Activity score | Defining SNP |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| *2 | No function | 0 | 479T > A | |
| *4 | No expression | 0 | Gene deletion | |
| *9 | Decreased | +0.5 | - 48T > G | |
| *12 | Decreased | +0.5 | Hybrid allele with CYP2A7 | |
| *1xN | Increased | +2 | Multiple copies | |
| *2 | Normal | +1 | 2851C > T | |
| *4 | No function | 0 | 1847 G > A | |
| *5 | No expression | 0 | Gene deletion | |
| *9 | Decreased | +0.5 | 2616 del AGG | |
| *10 | Decreased | +0.5 | 100C > T | |
| *35 | Normal | +1 | 31G > A | |
| *41 | Decreased | +0.5 | 2989 G > A | |
| *1xN | Increased | +2 | Multiple copies | |
| *2xN | ||||
| *35xN |
*4 sub-alleles can commonly present other SNPs such as 100C > T, 4181 G > C and/or 2851C > T.
Changes in lipid and inflammatory biomarkers (mg/dL).
| Interventions | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control | WW | WW + TYR | |||
| vs Control | vs WW | ||||
| Total Cholesterol | 1.8 ± 12.5 | 2.9 ± 21.8 | 7.7 ± 24.4 | 0.665 | 0.753 |
| LDL cholesterol | −1.0 ± 14.1 | 0.1 ± 17.8 | 4.7 ± 22.3 | 0.511 | 0.761 |
| Triglycerides | 14.7 ± 62.0 | 6.0 ± 25.9 | −0.9 ± 25.7 | 0.290 | 0.788 |
| Glucose | 0.9 ± 13.4 | 2.7 ± 10.3 | 2.6 ± 12.0 | 0.849 | 0.999 |
| hsCRP | −0.2 ± 1.3 | 0.02 ± 0.3 | −0.01 ± 0.2 | 0.443 | 0.516 |
Changes expressed as mean ± SD (N = 32). LDL, low density lipoprotein; hsCRP, high sensitivity C reactive protein. ANOVA adjusted by age, sex and smoking habits, LDL cholesterol at the beginning of the clinical trial, and baseline levels.
Fig. 2Changes in HDL cholesterol (HDL-c) after interventions. Change in HDL-c compared to the baseline of the intervention expressed as mean and SD in all participants (A), only men (B) and only normal activity metabolizers (C). ANOVA adjusted by age, sex and smoking habits, LDL cholesterol at the beginning of the clinical trial, and baseline levels * P < 0,05; **P < 0,01.
Endothelin concentrations (ng/dL) after interventions.
| Interventions | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control | WW | WW + TYR | P value for WW + Tyr | ||
| vs Control | vs WW | ||||
| All participants | 2.15 ± 0.90 | 2.33 ± 1.07 | 2.03 ± 0.82 | 0.572 | |
| Women | 2.38 ± 1.07 | 2.57 ± 1.11 | 2.12 ± 0.81 | 0.479 | 0.108 |
| Men | 2.01 ± 0.80 | 2.16 ± 1.08 | 1.99 ± 0.87 | 0.990 | 0.463 |
| LA | 1.93 ± 0.69 | 2.25 ± 0.96 | 1.89 ± 0.72 | 0.981 | 0.203 |
| NA | 2.24 ± 0.95 | 2.48 ± 1.32 | 2.13 ± 1.07 | 0.747 | 0.068 |
Endothelin-1 concentrations are expressed as mean ± SD (N = 32). WW, white wine; WW + Tyr, white wine plus tyrosol (Tyr) capsules; LA, low activity group metabolizers; NA, normal activity group metabolizers. ANOVA adjusted by age, sex, smoking, acetylsalicylic acid consumption, and baseline levels. *P < 0.05 versus its baseline; P value, significance for inter-intervention comparisons.
Transcriptomic changes (% change versus baseline) after interventions.
| Intervention | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control | WW | WW + Tyr | |||
| vs Control | vs WW | ||||
| All participants | 8.9 ± 60.6 | 21.7 ± 62.3 | −26.8 ± 34.2† | ||
| Women | −10.7 ± 75.4 | 28.8 ± 59.5 | −29.9 ± 33.7* | 0.743 | 0.063 |
| Men | 24.6 ± 47.2 | 20.4 ± 66.2 | −25.5 ± 35.8* | ||
| LA | −4.8 ± 66.7 | 11.1 ± 59.8 | −17.1 ± 35.6 | 0.874 | 0.514 |
| NA | 20.1 ± 60.0 | 16.7. ± 56.5 | −28.2 ± 33.9† | 0.011 | 0.020 |
| All participants | 1.1 ± 0.5 | 1.18 ± 0.5 | 0.9 ± 0.30 | 0.229 | |
| Women | −7.6 ± 54.0 | 26.9 ± 63.3 | −16.9 ± 29.8 | 0.896 | 0.089 |
| Men | 22.9 ± 41.9 | 13.4 ± 48.2 | −2.2 ± 28.6 | 0.157 | 0.484 |
| LA | 16.7 ± 63.5 | 6.3 ± 45.3 | −3.0 ± 43.4 | 0.584 | 0.886 |
| NA | 6.7 ± 41.1 | 22.5 ± 58.3 | -.12,5 ± 20.9 | 0.414 | 0.054 |
| All participants | 19.8 ± 57.6 | 28.8 ± 56.5* | −9.1 ± 51.5 | 0.115 | |
| Women | 9.2 ± 57.5 | 48.4 ± 51.9* | 11.9 ± 63.2 | 0.994 | 0.334 |
| Men | 27.9 ± 59.5 | 16.6 ± 58.9 | −18.1 ± 40.9* | ||
| LA | 21.4 ± 77.7 | 35.2 ± 74.8 | −16.7 ± 29.5 | 0.359 | 0.150 |
| NA | 22.4 ± 46.9 | 22.6 ± 45.1 | 0.0 ± 62.8 | 0.438 | 0.433 |
| All participants | −5.0 ± 38.3 | 36.7 ± 82.6* | −19.7 ± 62.4 | 0.734 | |
| Women | −16.9 ± 28.8 | 56.1 ± 109.4 | 2.3 ± 24.1 | 0.897 | 0.303 |
| Men | −2.7 ± 41.2 | 29.9 ± 71.3 | −27.5 ± 70.4 | 0.470 | |
| LA | 6.3 ± 36.2 | 17.0 ± 66.9 | −33.0 ± 52.4 | 0.299 | 0.091 |
| NA | −4.7 ± 38.1 | 46.2 ± 26.7 | −10.4 ± 69.6 | 0.996 | 0.080 |
| All participants | 11.7 ± 65.6 | 34.9 ± 72.2* | −8.2 ± 50.2 | 0.509 | 0.035 |
| Women | 13.2 ± 71.7 | 42.2 ± 42.1* | 14.7 ± 48.8 | 0.997 | 0.565 |
| Men | 12.9 ± 65.5 | 26.4 ± 83.7 | −20.5 ± 49.4 | 0.351 | 0.115 |
| LA | −4.8 ± 54.9 | 28.9 ± 77.8 | −16.2 ± 62.6 | 0.910 | 0.344 |
| NA | 28.3 ± 72.9 | 34.8 ± 74.6 | −0.2 ± 44.8 | 0.536 | 0.334 |
| All participants | 14.3 ± 58.1 | 32.2 ± 69.7* | −6.2 ± 45.2 | 0.398 | |
| Women | 12.6 ± 59.0 | 30.4 ± 68.9 | −3.0 ± 61.6 | 0.533 | 0.112 |
| Men | 9.4 ± 55.4 | 26.2 ± 67.9 | −10.0 ± 36.3* | 0.870 | 0.500 |
| LA | 26.3 ± 65.9 | 19.4 ± 75.6 | −3.0 ± 40.6 | 0.497 | 0.665 |
| NA | 7,7 ± 57.6 | 27.7 ± 60.1 | −1.1 ± 46.5 | 0.896 | 0.256 |
Changes are expressed as mean ± SD (N = 32). WW, white wine; WW + Tyr, white wine plus tyrosol (Tyr) capsules; LA, low activity group metabolizers; NA, normal activity group metabolizers. CD40L, CD40 ligand; CFH, complement factor H; eNOS, endothelial nitric oxide synthase 3; iNOS, inducible nitric oxide synthase; p65/RELA, transcription factor p65 (RELA); VEGFA, vascular endothelial growth factor. ANOVA adjusted by age and sex. *P < 0.05, †P < 0.001 versus its baseline; P value, significance for inter-intervention comparisons.
Fig. 3Comparison of the effects of white wine (WW) (blue) versus those of white wine plus tyrosol (WW + Tyr) (Green), CD40L, CD40 ligand; NF-KB, nuclear factor kappa B; CFH, complement factor H; iNOS, inducible nitric oxide synthase; eNOS, endothelial nitric oxide synthase.
Specifications Table
| Subject | |
| Specific subject area | |
| Type of data | |
| How data were acquired | |
| Data format | |
| Parameters for data collection | |
| Description of data collection | |
| Data source location | |
| Data accessibility | |
| Related research article |
The presented data provide further details on how the polygenic activity score to evaluate the efficiency of Tyr to OHTyr conversion was generated. This report describes the effects on cardiovascular biomarkers of an intervention with white wine and white wine enriched with Tyr. They are useful to predict the effects of nutritional interventions rich in Tyr (olive oil, wine, beer …) considering the interaction with individual's genetic background. The present data are of interest for the effects of Tyr alone and in the future within Tyr rich foods These data can be used for the design of new nutraceutical based on Tyr ingestion in humans |