| Literature DB >> 34401690 |
Mads Israelsen1,2,3, Min Kim4, Tommi Suvitaival4, Bjørn Stæhr Madsen1,2, Camilla Dalby Hansen1,2, Nikolaj Torp1,2, Kajetan Trost5, Maja Thiele1,2, Torben Hansen5, Cristina Legido-Quigley4,6, Aleksander Krag1,2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND & AIMS: In experimental models, alcohol induces acute changes in lipid metabolism that cause hepatocyte lipoapoptosis and inflammation. Here we study human hepatic lipid turnover during controlled alcohol intoxication.Entities:
Keywords: ALD, alcohol-related liver disease; ALT, alanine aminotransferase; AST, asparagine aminotransferase; Alcohol; CTL, healthy control; Cer, ceramide; DG, diglyceride; Ethanol; FFA, free fatty acid; Fatty acids; GGT, gamma-glutamyl transferase; HOMA-IR, Homeostatic Model Assessment of Insulin Resistance; Heavy drinking; HexCer, hexosylceramide; LPC, lysophosphatidylcholine; LPE, lysophosphatidylethanolamine; LacCer, lactosylceramides; Lipidomics; Liver disease; Lysophosphatidylcholines; NAFLD, non-alcoholic fatty liver disease; P-glucose, plasma glucose; PC, phosphatidylcholine; PE, phosphatidylethanolamine; PI, phosphatidylinositol; PLA2, phospholipase A2; QC, quality control; SHexCer, sulfatides hexosylceramide; SM, sphingomyelin; TE, transient elastography; TG, triglyceride; Triglycerides
Year: 2021 PMID: 34401690 PMCID: PMC8350545 DOI: 10.1016/j.jhepr.2021.100325
Source DB: PubMed Journal: JHEP Rep ISSN: 2589-5559
Fig. 1Schematic study design and lipidome workflow.
(A) Study design: for the baseline visit, we invited 40 individuals with 3 distinct hepatic phenotypes: 10 healthy controls, 15 with ALD, and 15 with NAFLD. One ALD participant was subsequently excluded owing to protocol violation by consuming alcohol within 48 h before the alcohol intervention. The remaining 39 participants underwent the alcohol intervention: blood was sampled at time 0 min, and alcohol was subsequently instilled over 30 min. Blood was sampled again after 60 and 180 min. ∗Transjugular liver biopsies were collected after 240 min in participants with ALD and NAFLD. (B) Lipidome workflow: lipid levels (n = 252) were measured using ultra-high-performance liquid chromatography coupled with quadrupole time-of-flight mass spectrometery (UHPLC-QTOFMS). First, we explored the average level of 13 distinct lipid classes from hepatic venous blood to identify which lipid class changed in its level over time after alcohol intervention. We used longitudinal mixed effect models to investigate 3 different fixed effects: (1) ‘time’, (2) ‘time∗phenotype’, and (3) ‘time∗blood site’. Fixed effect of ‘time’ allowed us to identify lipid classes that changed in their levels after alcohol intervention. Fixed effect of ‘time∗phenotype’ allowed us to see whether levels of 13 lipid classes were different between the hepatic phenotypes before and after alcohol intervention. Fixed effect of ‘time∗blood site’ allowed us to see whether levels of 13 lipid classes were different between 2 blood vein sites (systemic vs. hepatic) before and after alcohol intervention. Finally, we investigated 252 individual lipid species using the same approach where fixed effects were (1) ‘time’, (2) ‘time∗phenotype’, and (3) ‘time∗blood site’. In all models, random effect was the individual participant. ALD, alcohol-related liver disease; NAFLD, non-alcoholic fatty liver disease.
Participant characteristics.
| Characteristics | All | Controls | ALD | NAFLD | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Participants, n | 39 | 10 | 14 | 15 | – |
| Male sex, n | 24 (62%) | 5 (50%) | 12 (86%) | 7 (47%) | 0.066 |
| Age, yr | 54 ± 11 | 53 ± 10 | 57 ± 11 | 53 ± 12 | 0.930 |
| Weight, kg | 87 (74–104) | 75 (67–84) | 85 (74–104) | 99 (86–108)† | 0.006 |
| BMI, kg/m2 | 29 (25–32) | 25 (23–27) | 28 (23–32) | 32 (30–41)∗† | <0.001 |
| Type 2 diabetes, n | 14 (36%) | 0 (0%) | 4 (29%) | 10 (67%)† | 0.002 |
| Metabolic syndrome, n | 18 (46%) | 0 (0%) | 6 (43%)† | 12 (80%)† | <0.001 |
| Daily alcohol consumption, g | 6 (0–48) | 12 (0–12) | 60 (24–120)† | 0 (0–0)∗ | <0.001 |
| Platelet count, 109/L | 221 (190–270) | 210 (169–228) | 216 (105–244) | 252 (196–303) | 0.256 |
| INR | 1 (0.9–1.1) | 1.1 (1–1.1) | 1 (0.9–1.1) | 1 (0.9–1) | 0.192 |
| Albumin, g/L | 45 (42–47) | 46.5 (40–48) | 43 (41–46) | 45 (43–48) | 0.141 |
| ALT, U/L | 36 (23–58) | 26 (17–35) | 44 (27–71) | 44 (26–65) | 0.085 |
| AST, U/L | 29 (25–58) | 23 (22–28) | 49 (29–79)† | 29 (24–61) | 0.007 |
| GGT, U/L | 62 (23–138) | 22 (15–26) | 197 (89–635)† | 65 (45–90)∗† | <0.001 |
| Bilirubin, μmol/L | 10 (7–13) | 10 (9–13) | 13 (7–19) | 10 (6–13)† | 0.490 |
| Fasting P-glucose, mmol/L | 6.2 (5.5–7.0) | 5.7 (5.5–6.1) | 6.5 (5.6–7) | 6.7 (6.2–7)† | 0.014 |
| HbA1c, mmol/mol | 38 (34–45) | 35 (31–37) | 37 (31–40) | 46 (40–55)∗† | <0.001 |
| Insulin, pmol/L | 93 (44–183) | 43 (31–47) | 78 (46–217) | 171 (116–188)† | 0.001 |
| HOMA-IR | 5.3 (1.7–8.7) | 1.6 (1.2–1.8) | 3.2 (1.7–10.3) | 7.0 (5.2–8.8)† | <0.001 |
| HDL cholesterol, mmol/L | 1.2 (1.1–1.6) | 1.5 (1.1–2) | 1.5 (1.2–1.6) | 1.1 (0.9–1.3)∗† | 0.005 |
| LDL cholesterol, mmol/L | 2.6 (2.2–3.6) | 3.1 (2.5–4.3) | 2.4 (2.2–3.1) | 2.6 (1.3–3.6) | 0.234 |
| Total cholesterol, mmol/L | 4.8 (4.2–6.0) | 5.3 (4.5–6) | 4.9 (4.4–6.2) | 4.4 (3.8–5.6) | 0.236 |
| Triglycerides, mmol/L | 1.36 (0.78–2.21) | 0.80 (0.72–1.12) | 1.55 (0.85–2.50)† | 1.45 (0.82–3.38)† | 0.033 |
| – | |||||
| Fibrosis stage (0/1/2/3/4), n | – | – | 2/5/5/1/1 | 1/5/7/1/1 | – |
| Steatosis grade (0/1/2/3), n | – | – | 0/5/2/4 | 0/7/5/3 | – |
| NAFLD activity score | – | – | 3 (1–4) | 3 (2–4) | – |
| Liver stiffness by TE, kPa | 8.9 (4.9–11.0) | 4.6 (3.9–5.0) | 9.0 (5.9–11.0)† | 10.4 (9.5–11.4)† | <0.001 |
Data are presented as means (SD), medians (IQR), or counts (frequencies). Values of p are obtained from comparisons between the 3 groups using Kruskal-Wallis and Chi-square tests. Comparisons between 2 groups are obtained using rank sum and Fisher’s exact test with significance level <0.05 and marked as follows: ∗significant difference between ALD and NAFLD; †significant difference between controls and ALD/NAFLD. Classification of metabolic syndrome was performed according to the International Diabetes Federation criteria.
ALD, alcohol-related liver disease; ALT, alanine aminotransferase; AST, asparagine aminotransferase; GGT, gamma-glutamyl transferase; HOMA-IR, Homeostatic Model Assessment of Insulin Resistance; NAFLD, non-alcoholic fatty liver disease; P-glucose; plasma glucose; TE, transient elastography.
Fig. 2Lipid profile of 3 hepatic phenotypes.
(A) Boxplots showing FFA, LPC, and TG levels from hepatic vein for the 3 hepatic phenotypes. These 3 lipid classes were selected here because their levels changed after alcohol intervention in at least 1 phenotype (Table 2). FFA showed significant changes over time in Control, ALD, and NAFLD phenotypes, while LPC showed significant changes over time in the Control phenotype. TG showed significant changes over time in ALD and NAFLD phenotypes. Significances were based on p <0.0039. (B) Forrest plot showing magnitude of change after alcohol intervention (estimate coefficients derived from mixed models) for all 13 lipid classes from hepatic vein in each hepatic phenotype. (C) Boxplots comparing FFA, LPC, and TG levels in hepatic and systemic veins. The lines connect the means of boxes. ALD, alcohol-related liver disease; CTL, healthy control; FFA, free fatty acid; LPC, lysophosphatidylcholine; NAFLD, non-alcoholic fatty liver disease; TG, triglyceride.
Comparison of FFA, LPC, and TG at baseline between hepatic and systemic venous blood.
| Lipid class | Average lipid levels in hepatic vein (SD), ×102 | Average lipid levels in systemic vein (SD), ×102 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| All | Controls | ALD | NAFLD | All | Controls | ALD | NAFLD | |
| FFA | 12.92 (45.06) | 5.64 (48.46) | 21.41 (28.90) | 9.85 (55.72) | 80.21 (59.73) | 104.92 (61.19) | 62.15 (48.17) | 80.60 (66.04) |
| LPC | 5.13 (84.72) | 46.14 (28.05) | 18.49 (79.81) | -34.68 (99.92) | 22.85 (75.97) | 46.26 (34.65) | 36.46 (80.27) | -5.46 (86.45) |
| TG | -13.44 (76.09) | -67.27 (43.10) | -20.68 (47.79) | 29.21 (91.27) | -16.89 (73.27) | -43.01 (63.62) | -30.73 (62.40) | 13.44 (81.79) |
Different to healthy controls at Bonferroni procedure p <0.0039 level according to mixed model.
Difference between hepatic and systemic values at Bonferroni procedure p <0.0039 level according to mixed model. FFA, free fatty acid; LPC, lysophosphatidylcholine; TG, triglyceride.
Summary of mixed models showing relative changes in FFA, LPC, and TG levels from baseline to 180 min after start of alcohol intake.
| Lipid class | Hepatic vein: estimate coefficients (95% CI) | Systemic vein: estimate coefficients (95% CI) | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| All | Controls | ALD | NAFLD | All | Controls | ALD | NAFLD | |
| FFA | -39.42 | -31.02 | -44.36 | -40.41 | -37.91 | -45.97 | -30.67 | -39.29 |
| LPC | -14.08 | -23.96 | -20.97 | -1.05 | -14.84 | -15.50(-30.02~-0.98) | -20.52 | -9.09 |
| TG | 12.00 | 25.20 | 17.52 | -1.95 | 16.53 | 12.88 | 19.49 | 16.20 |
The table shows estimate coefficients (change in relative levels of lipid every minute after alcohol intervention) and their p values are shown.
ALD, alcohol-related liver disease; FFA, free fatty acid; LPC, lysophosphatidylcholine; NAFLD, non-alcoholic steatohepatitis; TG, triglyceride.
Passed Bonferroni procedure p <0.0039.
Fig. 3Changes in lipid levels after alcohol intervention.
(A) Volcano plot showing changes in levels (mixed model estimate coefficients) for 252 lipids from hepatic vein after alcohol intervention. Statistical significance (y-axis) is plotted against the magnitude of change in the lipid levels after alcohol intervention (x-axis) to identify the most dynamic lipids that were also statistically significant. Different colours represent different lipid species, and larger dots represent the 24 lipids passing Bonferroni threshold (p <1.98×10-04). (B) Forrest plot showing magnitude of change after alcohol intervention (mixed model estimate coefficients) for the 24 lipids from hepatic vein selected from Fig. 3A. Cer, ceramide; DG, diglyceride; FFA, free fatty acid; HexCer, hexosylceramide; LacCer, lactosylceramides; LPC, lysophosphatidylcholine; LPE, lysophosphatidylethanolamine; NAFLD, non-alcoholic fatty liver disease; PC, phosphatidylcholine; PE, phosphatidylethanolamine; PI, phosphatidylinositol; SHexCer, sulfatides hexosylceramide; SM, sphingomyelin; TG, triglyceride.
Fig. 4Volcano plot showing changes in levels (mixed model estimate coefficients) for 252 lipids from hepatic vein after alcohol intervention.
(A) Healthy controls, (B) participants with ALD and (C) participants with NAFLD. ALD, alcohol-related liver disease; Cer, ceramide; DG, diglyceride; FFA, free fatty acid; HexCer, hexosylceramide; LacCer, lactosylceramides; LPC, lysophosphatidylcholine; LPE, lysophosphatidylethanolamine; NAFLD, non-alcoholic fatty liver disease; PC, phosphatidylcholine; PE, phosphatidylethanolamine; PI, phosphatidylinositol; SHexCer, sulfatides hexosylceramide; SM, sphingomyelin; TG, triglyceride.
Fig. 5A model of hepatic lipid metabolism after alcohol intake.
(1) Alcohol increases hepatic FFA uptake. (2) FFAs can be hydroxylated by CYP2E1 or can be esterified to TGs and either be (3) stored in the hepatocyte leading to steatosis or (4) packaged in VLDL and (5) secreted to the circulation. (6) LPCs can be actively taken up by the liver. Together LPCs and FFAs are the end products of PLA2 metabolism. (7) Increased levels of intracellular LPCs may lead to FFAs via lysophospholipase D (LysoPLD) catalysis or to endoplasmic stress and caspase activation that (8) induce lipoapoptosis. Alcohol intoxication does not lead to increased levels of circulating TGs in NAFLD, which might indicate that at least 1 of the dashed arrows is suppressed. This may explain the increased TG storage and alcohol susceptibility reported in individuals with metabolic syndrome. ER, endoplasmic reticulum; FFA, free fatty acid; LPC, lysophosphatidylcholine; PLA2, phospholipase A2; TG, triglycerides.