| Literature DB >> 35662935 |
Weifeng Zhu1, Ying Zhou1, Rong Tsao2, Huanhuan Dong1, Hua Zhang1.
Abstract
Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is a hepatic manifestation of metabolic syndrome with a global prevalence. Impaired gut barrier function caused by an unhealthy diet plays a key role in disrupting the immune-metabolic homeostasis of the gut-liver axis (GLA), leading to NAFLD. Therefore, dietary interventions have been studied as feasible alternative therapeutic approaches to ameliorate NAFLD. Resistant starches (RSs) are prebiotics that reduce systemic inflammation in patients with metabolic syndrome. The present review aimed to elucidate the mechanisms of the GLA in alleviating NAFLD and provide insights into how dietary RSs counteract diet-induced inflammation in the GLA. Emerging evidence suggests that RS intake alters gut microbiota structure, enhances mucosal immune tolerance, and promotes the production of microbial metabolites such as short-chain fatty acids (SCFAs) and secondary bile acids. These metabolites directly stimulate the growth of intestinal epithelial cells and elicit GPR41/GPR43, FXR, and TGR5 signaling cascades to sustain immune-metabolic homeostasis in the GLA. The literature also revealed the dietary-immune-metabolic interplay by which RSs exert their regulatory effect on the immune-metabolic crosstalk of the GLA and the related molecular basis, suggesting that dietary intervention with RSs may be a promising alternative therapeutic strategy against diet-induced dysfunction of the GLA and, ultimately, the risk of developing NAFLD.Entities:
Keywords: NAFLD; gut metabolites; gut microbiota; gut-liver axis; resistant starch
Year: 2022 PMID: 35662935 PMCID: PMC9159374 DOI: 10.3389/fnut.2022.861854
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Nutr ISSN: 2296-861X
FIGURE 1Mechanism underlying the pathogenesis and physiological alterations of NAFLD. High-caloric diets lead to an imbalanced intestinal flora, which in turn elicits an impaired gut barrier function and increased permeability, followed by bacterial translocation and an increase of harmful metabolites or bacterial products that eventually enter the liver through the portal vein. These factors together promote the development of NAFLD by exacerbating hepatic steatosis, lipogenesis, and inflammatory responses. DAMPs, damage-associated molecular patterns; FFA, free fatty acid; HFD, high-fat diet; TJ, tight junctions; PAMPs, pathogen-associated molecular patterns.
FIGURE 2RSs exert the effects on ameliorating NAFLD via restoring the gut microbiota structure and regulating bacterial metabolites through the link between gut and liver. Intake of RSs contributes to: (1) improving the growth of probiotics (e.g., Lactobacillus and Bifidobacterium); (2) promoting the production of metabolites (e.g., short chain fatty acids and glucagon-like peptide-1); (3) inhibiting harmful metabolites production (e.g., LPS and EnEth); and (4) maintaining the homeostasis of the BAs. This regulates the enterohepatic axis homeostasis by modulating flora metabolite and intestinal hormone productions to inhibit hepatic steatosis, lipogenesis, and inflammatory responses. BAs, bile acids; EnEth, endogenous ethanol; GLP-1, glucagon-like peptide-1; LPS, lipopolysaccharide; RS, resistant starch; SCFAs, short-chain fatty acids.
Effect of RS on NAFLD.
| Model | Dose | Time | NAFLD-related parameters | References | |
| Rice starch-oleic acid complex | Male Sprague-Dawley rats (non-obese) fed HFD | 54.5% in HFD | 8 weeks | TG↓; TC↓; HDL-C↑; SOD↑; GSH-PX↑; MDA↓; AST↓; and ALT↓ | ( |
| Raw potato starch | Duroc × Landrace × Large White growing barrows | 230 (growing) or 280 g/kg (finishing) | 100 days | Fatty acid biosynthesis↓; acid β-oxidation↑; FABP1↑; fatty acid intake ↓; fatty acid synthesis↓; fatty acid oxidation↑; and glycerophospholipid synthesis↑ | ( |
| High amylose maize starch | Male Wistar rats (non-obese) fed a high-fat, high-sucrose diet | 2 g/day | 6 weeks | Blood glucose↓; TC↓; TG↓; HDL-C↑; LDL-C↓; T-AOC↑; T-SOD↑; MDA↓; GSH-PX↑; AST↓; ALT ↓; AKP↓; SREBP-1↓; FAS↓; LXRα↓; and FABP4↓ | ( |
| Purple yam RS | Male golden hamsters fed HFD | 0.5 g/100 g, 1.5 g/100 g | 4 weeks | HDL-C↑; TG↓; TC↓; LDL-C↓; and liver fat accumulation↓ | ( |
| Maize RS | Male Sprague–Dawley rats fed HFD | 1.2 g/day | 6 weeks | Liver weight ↓; TG↓; TC↓; LDL-C↓; PPAR-γ↓; LXR↓; SREBP-c↓; FAS↓; and ACC↓ | ( |
| Maize RS | Female ob/ob mice fed HFD | 10%, 15%, and 20% in HFD | 12 weeks | Liver weight↓; lipid droplet accumulation↓; TBA↓; LPS↓; TG↓; TC↓; AST↓; ALT↓; PPAR↑; and AMPK pathways↑ | ( |
| Microwave–toughening treatment starch | Male C57BL/6J (B6) mice fed HFD | MTT starch in HFD | 5 weeks | Liver index↓; fasting glucose↓; and fat vacuoles↓ | ( |
| Sorghum RS | Female Sprague–Dawley rats given Formestane for 50 mg/kg BW/d, fed with no soy feed or ordinary feed | 0.9 g/kg, 1.8 g/kg, and 2.7 g/kg | 6 weeks | Liver steatosis↓; FXR↓; SREBP-1↓; ACC↓; FAS↓; and SCD1↓; | ( |
| Green banana ( | Male C57BL/6 mice fed HFD | 15% RS in HFD | 14 weeks | Liver steatosis↓; fasting glucose↓; HOMA-IR↓; TG↓; TC↓; p-AMPK/AMPK↑; and HMG CoA-R↓ | ( |
| Buckwheat RS | Male C57BL/6 mice fed HFD | 33.4% RS in HFD | 6 weeks | Liver index ↓; HDL-C↑; TG↓; TC↓; LDL-C↓; IL-6↓; TNF-α↓; LPS↓; SOD↑; T-AOC↑; and MDA↓ | ( |
| Maize RS | Male Wistar rats fed HFD | 41.6% RS in HFD | 9 weeks | TG↓;TC↓;NEFA↓; HOMA-IR; IRS1↓; IRS2↓; and PPARGC1α↑ | ( |
| High amylose starch or Esterified high amylose starch | Male Wistar rats (non-obese) fed a high-fat | 2 g/day | 6 weeks | TC↓; TG↓; HDL-C↑; LDL-C↓; AST↓; ALT↓; MDA↓; GSH-PX↑; T-AOC↑; T-SOD↑; ACC↓; SREBP-1↓; PPAR γ↓; and LXRα↓ | ( |
ACC, acetyl CoA carboxylase; ALT, alanine aminotransferase; AMPK, adenosine 5′-monophosphate (AMP)-activated protein kinase; AST, aspartate aminotransferase; FABP, fatty acid-binding protein; FAS, fatty acid synthase; GSH-Px, glutathione peroxidase; HDL-C, high density lipoprotein cholesterol; HFD, high-fat diet; HMG-CoA, 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A; HOMA-IR, homeostatic model assessment for insulin resistance; IL-6, interleukin-6; ISR, insulin receptor substrate; LDL-C, low density lipoprotein cholesterol; LPS, lipopolysaccharides; LXR, liver X receptors; MDA malondialdehyde; NEFA, non-esterified fatty acid; PPAR, peroxisome proliferators-activated receptors; PPARGC1α, peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor, gamma, coactivator 1 alpha; RS, resistant starch; SCD1, stearoyl-CoA desaturase-1; SOD, superoxide dismutase; SREBP, sterol regulatory element-binding protein; T-AOC, total antioxidant capacity; TBA, total bile acids; TC, total cholesterol; TG, triglyceride; TNF-α, tumor necrosis factor-α; T-SOD, total superoxide dismutase.
The symbol ↑ is upregulated, and the symbol ↓ is downregulated.
Intake of resistant starch (RS)-induced alterations of gut microbiota structure.
| RS type | Model | Bacterial flora changes | References |
| Rice starch-oleic acid complex | HFD-induced male Sprague–Dawley rats (non-obese) | ( | |
| Purple yam RS | HFD-induced male golden hamsters | ( | |
| Maize RS | HFD-induced female ob/ob mice | ( | |
| Buckwheat RS | HFD-induced male C57BL/6 mice | ( |
FIGURE 3Potential mechanisms underlying RSs regulating the GLA immune-metabolic homeostasis toward NAFLD mitigation. The gut bacterial metabolites released after intake of RSs act as crucial molecules that interact with a broad range of sensing receptors along with the GLA. (1). Secondary BAs bind to TGR5/FXR receptors in the intestine, inhibiting the TLR4/NF-κB inflammatory signaling pathway to ameliorate NAFLD. (2). SCFAs binding with GPR41/GPR43 receptors in the intestine and hepatic activates PPAR-γ/AMPK signaling pathway to inhibit acetyl CoA carboxylase. As such, the production of glucose triglyceride and total cholesterol production is inhibited. (3). SCFAs can enhance the release of pro-peptide YY (PYY)/glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) by ligand binding with GPR43, which contributes to regulating appetite to maintain energy homeostasis. (4). SCFAs act as a histone deacetylase inhibitor to strengthen intestinal barrier functions, or elevate angiopoietin-like 4 secretions to reduce lipotoxicity and inflammation by potentially activating PPAR-γ. ACC, acetyl-CoA carboxylase; AMPK, adenosine 5′-monophosphate (AMP)-activated protein kinase; ANGPTL4, recombinant human angiopoietin-like protein 4; BAs, bile acids; CAT, catalase; FBA, N-(1-carbamoyl-2-phenyl-ethyl) butyramide; FXR, farnesoid X receptor; GPCR, G protein-coupled receptors; GLP-1, glucagon-like peptide 1; GPR43, G protein-coupled receptor 43; HDAC, histone deacetylase; NF-κB, nuclear factor kappa-B; PGC1α, peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-γ coactivator-1α; PPAR-γ, peroxisome proliferator activated receptor-γ; SCFAs, short-chain fatty acids; SOD, superoxide dismutase; TC, total cholesterol; TG, triglyceride; TLR4, toll-like receptor 4; PYY, pro-peptide YY.