| Literature DB >> 33841891 |
Jaideep Behari1,2,3, Lisa Graham1, Renwei Wang3, Claudiu Schirda4, Amir A Borhani4, Barbara A Methé5,6, Kelvin Li5, Alison Morris5,6, Hung N Luu3,7, Sabrina Palmieri1, Jian-Min Yuan3,7.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Weight loss is recommended as the primary treatment for nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). However, the magnitude and velocity of hepatic steatosis resolution with weight loss is unclear, making it difficult to counsel patients seeking weight loss for treatment of NAFLD. The aim of this study was to determine the rate of hepatic steatosis improvement and stool microbiome changes associated with rapid diet-induced weight loss in NAFLD.Entities:
Keywords: liver disease; microbiome; obesity; weight loss
Year: 2021 PMID: 33841891 PMCID: PMC8019274 DOI: 10.1002/osp4.476
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Obes Sci Pract ISSN: 2055-2238
Baseline clinical characteristics and changes at 12 weeks after weight loss intervention initiation (n = 14)
| Baseline mean (SD) | Week 12 mean (SD) | % Change from baseline to week 12 (95% CI) |
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Weight (kg) | 103.87 (18.05) | 90.26 (18.09) | −13.4 (−15.2, −11.5) | <0.001 |
| BMI (kg/m2) | 36.4 (4.0) | 31.6 (4.0) | −13.5 (−15.2, −11.7) | <0.001 |
| Waist circumference (cm) | 117.8 (11.9) | 103.6 (8.1) | −10.6 (−12.3−9.0) | <0.001 |
| MAP (mmHg) | 101.4 (7.6) | 96.2 (7.7) | −4.5 (−10.7, 1.6) | 0.136 |
| ALT (U/L) | 41.1 (19.4) | 23.4 (11.2) | −35.6 (−52.8, −18.5) | 0.001 |
| AST (U/L) | 26.7 (11.5) | 20.6 (5.7) | −14.1 (−32.5, 4.3) | 0.123 |
| ALP (U/L) | 73.4 (20.4) | 68.6 (18.8) | −5.6 (−13.3, 2.1) | 0.142 |
| Tbili (mg/dL) | 0.56 (0.23) | 0.64 (0.25) | 21.9 (1.7, 42.2) | 0.036 |
| Albumin (g/dL) | 4.41 (0.19) | 4.43 (0.15) | 0.5 (−2.5, 3.5) | 0.735 |
| Glucose (mg/dL) | 108.6 (30.1) | 94.7 (12.8) | −9.8 (−19.0, −0.6) | 0.039 |
| TC (mg/dL) | 186.6 (50.2) | 157.1 (46.7) | −15.2 (−23.2, −7.3) | 0.001 |
| TG (mg/dL) | 178.0 (81.2) | 113.5 (50.1) | −26.4 (−46.0, −6.8) | 0.012 |
| LDL‐C (mg/dL) | 110.6 (44.2) | 93.6 (40.9) | −13.2 (−25.3, −1.1) | 0.035 |
| HDL‐C (mg/dL) | 42.8 (8.2) | 40.4 (7.3) | −3.7 (−15.4, 8.0) | 0.502 |
| HgbA1c (%) | 6.1 (0.9) | 5.5 (0.4) | −7.2 (−13.1, −1.3) | 0.022 |
| TSH (mIU/L) | 2.6 (1.5) | 2.3 (1.5) | −16.1 (−41.8, 9.5) | 0.188 |
| CAP (dB/m) | 341.0 (33.0) | 251 (64) | −26.6 (−35.6, −17.6) | <0.001 |
| LSM (kPa) | 6.5 (3.7) | 5.3 (2.2) | −7.8 (−26.0, 10.5) | 0.375 |
Abbreviations: ALP, alkaline phosphatase; ALT, aspartate aminotransferase; AST, alanine aminotransferase; BMI, body mass index; CAP, controlled attenuation parameter; HDL, high density lipoprotein cholesterol; HgbA1c, glycosylated hemoglobin; LDL, low density lipoprotein cholesterol; LSM, liver stiffness measurement; MAP, mean arterial pressure; Tbili, total bilirubin; TC, total cholesterol; TG, triglyceride; TSH, thyroid stimulating hormone.
FIGURE 1Changes in weight and controlled attenuation parameter measurements from baseline over the course of the weight loss intervention. Graph shows mean (standard deviation) percentage change measured biweekly over the course of the study
Changes in body fat and muscle measurements by magnetic resonance imaging from baseline to Week 12 after the initiation of weight loss intervention
| Baseline mean (SD) | Week 12 mean (SD) | % Change (95% CI) |
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hepatic fat, % | 18.8 (7.5) | 4.4 (3.6) | −74.1 (−86.2, −62.1) | <0.001 |
| VAT (cm2) | 230.2 (82.8) | 173.1 (58.6) | −23.5 (−32.7, −14.3) | <0.001 |
| SAT (cm2) | 343.2 (50.0) | 289.9 (79.7) | −20.7 (−27.8, −13.5) | <0.001 |
| Muscle (cm2) | 126.0 (18.3) | 119.4 (14.9) | −4.4 (−9.9, 1.0) | 0.102 |
| VAT/SAT ratio | 0.71 (0.35) | 0.64 (0.30) | −2.95 (−13.85, 7.94) | 0.559 |
| VAT/muscle ratio | 1.82 (0.63) | 1.44 (0.44) | −19.48 (−29.90, −9.06) | 0.002 |
Abbreviations: SD, standard deviation; SAT, subcutaneous adipose tissue; VAT, visceral adipose tissue; 95% CI, 95% confidence intervals.
FIGURE 2Individual differences in BMI, hepatic fat fraction, controlled attenuation parameter, and liver stiffness measurement with weight loss. (A), Example of MRI‐Dixon method determined hepatic steatosis resolution with weight loss. The subject was a 51‐year‐old while male with a baseline BMI of 32 kg/m2. Hepatic fat fraction decreased from 22.1% (Grade 3 steatosis; left panel) at Week 0 to 3.1% (normal liver fat fraction; right panel) at Week 12. (B), Individual BMI trajectories from 0–12 (meal replacement phase) and 12–24 weeks (transition phase). (C), MRI‐Dixon method determined hepatic fat fraction at Weeks 0 and 12. The horizontal line at 6% represents the pre‐specified criterion for complete steatosis resolution. (D), Hepatic steatosis via CAP measurement at Week 0, 12 and 24. The horizontal lines represent thresholds for hepatic steatosis (S0 vs. S1–3) as per the equipment manufacturer (248 dB/m) or as reported by Eddowes et al. (304 dB/m) E. Liver stiffness measurement at Week 0, 12 and 24 weeks. The horizontal line represents the threshold for normal liver stiffness or absence of liver fibrosis. Abbreviations: BMI, body mass index; F/W + F, MRI‐Dixon method determined hepatic fat fraction (fat/water + fat); CAP, controlled attenuation parameter; MRI, magnetic resonance imaging
Spearman correlation coefficients between magnetic resonance imaging‐determined hepatic fat and visceral and subcutaneous fat and muscle
| FWF | VAT | SAT | Muscle | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FWF | 1.00 | 0.288* | 0.661**** | 0.394** |
| VAT | 1.00 | −0.207* | 0.415*** | |
| SAT | 1.00 | 0.248* |
Abbreviations: FWF, fat:fat + water; VAT, visceral adipose tissue (cm2); SAT, subcutaneous adipose tissue (cm2).
* p > 0.10; ** p < 0.10; *** p < 0.05; **** p < 0.01.
FIGURE 3Differences in taxonomic abundance between initial and Week 12 samples. (A), These histograms represent the difference between the ALR transformed abundances of the taxon of interest between W0 and W12 samples from the same subject. The blue vertical dashed line indicates the 0 reference (no difference). A positive difference indicates an increase of taxonomic abundance over time from W0. The indicated p‐values were calculated with the Wilcoxon signed‐rank test, and are neither adjusted for multiple testing nor controlled for the clinical variables. (B), Stacked Bar Plots comparing initial and Week 12 taxonomic abundances. These stacked bar plots illustrate the most abundant genera as a comparison between the samples from W0 and W12. The most abundant taxa are found at the bottom of each bar. The “Remaining” contain the least abundant taxa. The three ticks on the left of the legend and bar plots correspond to the same color/taxa. additive log‐ratio, (ALR)