| Literature DB >> 32699106 |
Catherine E Cioffi1, K M Venkat Narayan2, Ken Liu3, Karan Uppal3, Dean P Jones3, ViLinh Tran3, Tianwei Yu4, Jessica A Alvarez3, Moriah P Bellissimo5, Kristal M Maner-Smith6, Bridget Pierpoint7, Sonia Caprio7, Nicola Santoro7,8, Miriam B Vos9.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Body fat distribution is strongly associated with cardiometabolic disease (CMD), but the relative importance of hepatic fat as an underlying driver remains unclear. Here, we applied a systems biology approach to compare the clinical and molecular subnetworks that correlate with hepatic fat, visceral fat, and abdominal subcutaneous fat distribution. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This was a cross-sectional sub-study of 283 children/adolescents (7-19 years) from the Yale Pediatric NAFLD Cohort. Untargeted, high-resolution metabolomics (HRM) was performed on plasma and combined with existing clinical variables including hepatic and abdominal fat measured by MRI. Integrative network analysis was coupled with pathway enrichment analysis and multivariable linear regression (MLR) to examine which metabolites and clinical variables associated with each fat depot.Entities:
Keywords: NAFLD; dyslipidemia; insulin resistance; visceral fat
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32699106 PMCID: PMC7380953 DOI: 10.1136/bmjdrc-2019-001126
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMJ Open Diabetes Res Care ISSN: 2052-4897
Figure 1Summary of the data analysis workflow. (1) High-resolution metabolomics was performed on stored plasma EDTA samples; (2) an integrative network analysis of the body fat deposition, clinical biomarkers, and plasma metabolomics data sets was performed in xMWAS; (3) the m/z features in each community detected in the integrative network analysis were entered into untargeted pathway analysis using Mummichog; (4) associations selected in the integrative network analysis between the clinical and metabolomics variables and the body fat variables were further examined using multiple linear regression adjusted for potential confounders. BMI, body mass index; EDTA, ethylene diaminete traacetic acid; m/z, mass to charge ratio; PLS, partial least squares.
Demographic and health characteristics of the subsample of 283 children and adolescents (7–19 years) from the Yale Pediatric NAFLD Cohort
| Variable | Mean or count | Variable | Mean or count |
| Age (years) | 13.3 (3.02) | Fasting glucose (mg/dL) | 90.3 (8.28) |
| Sex, male | 129 (45.6%) | Fasting insulin (µU/mL) | 32.8 (23.4) |
| Race/ethnicity | HOMA-IR | 7.43 (5.55) | |
| Non-Hispanic white | 68 (24.0%) | Whole body insulin sensitivity index | 1.98 (1.32) |
| African–American | 104 (36.7%) | Insulinogenic index | 4.98 (4.61) |
| Hispanic | 98 (34.6%) | Disposition index | 7.75 (6.37) |
| Asian/Other | 13 (4.6%) | Triglycerides (mg/dL) | 104 (62.7) |
| BMI z-score | 2.01 (0.726) | HDL cholesterol (mg/dL) | 43.7 (10.6) |
| Hepatic fat fraction (%) | 7.14 (9.80) | LDL cholesterol (mg/dL) | 91.4 (31.5) |
| VAT ratio | 0.111 (0.044) | Total cholesterol (mg/dL) | 155 (37.2) |
| Deep SAT ratio | 0.283 (0.069) | NAFLD | 100 (35.3%) |
| Superficial SAT ratio | 0.273 (0.066) | Type 2 diabetes mellitus | 7 (2.5%) |
| ALT (U/L) | 25.5 (20.9) | IGT | 44 (15.5%) |
| Systolic BP (mm Hg) | 117 (10.4) | IFG | 18 (6.4%) |
| Diastolic BP (mm Hg) | 66.8 (7.54) | Both IGT and IFG | 6 (2%) |
ALT, alanine aminotransferase; BMI, body mass index; BP, blood pressure; HDL, high-density lipoprotein; HOMA-IR, homeostatic model assessment of insulin resistance; IFG, impaired fasting glucose; IGT, impaired glucose tolerance; LDL, low-density lipoprotein; NAFLD, non-alcoholic fatty liver disease; SAT, subcutaneous adipose tissue; VAT, visceral adipose tissue.
Figure 2Results from the integrative network analysis of hepatic fat and abdominal fat deposition, clinical biomarkers, and plasma metabolomics data in 283 children and adolescents in the Yale Pediatric NAFLD Cohort. Communities detected by the multilevel community detection algorithm are indicated by different colors. Associations were selected by partial least squares regression based on thresholds of r|>0.15 and p<0.05. ALT, alanine aminotransferase; BP, blood pressure; ESI, electrospray ionization; HDL, high-density lipoprotein; HILIC, hydrophilic liquid interaction chromatography; HOMA-IR, homeostatic model assessment of insulin resistance; m/z, mass to charge ratio; NAFLD, non-alcoholic fatty liver disease; SAT, subcutaneous adipose tissue; WBISI, whole body insulin sensitivity index.
Results from multiple linear regression of clinical biomarkers in the hepatic fat community with hepatic fat fraction
| Variable | Model 1 | Model 2 | ||
| β (SE) | P value* | β (SE) | P value* | |
| Systolic BP | 0.83 (0.35) | 0.0186 | 0.84 (0.35) | 0.0184 |
| Log-fasting insulin | ||||
| Log-HOMA-IR | ||||
| Log-WBISI | − | − | ||
| Log-DI | −0.06 (0.03) | 0.0206 | −0.06 (0.03) | 0.0219 |
| Log-ALT | ||||
| Log-triglycerides | ||||
| HDL | −0.41 (0.37) | 0.2705 | −0.42 (0.37) | 0.2617 |
P values meeting this threshold are indicated in bold.
*Model 1 was adjusted for age (years), sex, race/ethnicity, and BMI z-score. Model 2 was also adjusted for log-VAT ratio, log-deep SAT ratio, and log-superficial SAT ratio. Hepatic fat was square root-transformed prior to analysis. Significance was set at Bonferroni-corrected p<0.00625 (0.05/8 tests).
ALT, alanine aminotransferase; BMI, body mass index; BP, blood pressure; DI, disposition index; HDL, high-density lipoprotein; HOMA-IR, homeostatic model assessment of insulin resistance; SAT, subcutaneous adipose tissue; VAT, visceral adipose tissue; WBISI, whole body insulin sensitivity index.
Figure 3Results from pathway analysis in Mummichog of the m/z features in the hepatic fat community. Dotted vertical lines indicate p<0.05. All pathways shown in the figure were significantly enriched based on p<0.05 based on permutation testing and consisted of at least five overlapping features. There were no significantly enriched pathways meeting these predetermined thresholds for the other abdominal fat communities. ESI, electrospray ionization; HILIC, hydrophilic liquid interaction chromatography; m/z, mass to charge ratio; TCA, tricarboxylic acid.
Figure 4Scatterplots with regression lines for selected m/z features associated with hepatic fat fraction in integrative network analysis and multiple linear regression. The x-axis is square root-transformed hepatic fat fraction, and the y-axis is log-transformed ion abundance of each m/z feature. All m/z features shown were annotated or identified at level 2 or level 1, respectively, based on the Metabolomics Standards Initiative criteria, to the adduct listed in parentheses. Reported β-coefficients and their p values were calculated using multivariable linear regression of hepatic fat fraction with each m/z feature adjusted for age, sex, race/ethnicity, body mass index z-score, and abdominal fats. m/z, mass to charge ratio.