Cargando…

Proteomic and Metabolomic Characterization of Metabolically Healthy Obesity: A Descriptive Study from a Swedish Cohort

METHOD: Associations between different biomarkers (proteomics, lipidomics, and metabolomics) coupled to either MHO or metabolically unhealthy obese (MUO) individuals were analyzed through principal component analysis (PCA). Subjects were identified from a subsample of 416 obese individuals, selected...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Korduner, J., Nilsson, P. M., Melander, O., Gerl, M. J., Engström, G., Bachus, E., Magnusson, M., Ottosson, F.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Hindawi 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8514926/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34659828
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2021/6616983
Descripción
Sumario:METHOD: Associations between different biomarkers (proteomics, lipidomics, and metabolomics) coupled to either MHO or metabolically unhealthy obese (MUO) individuals were analyzed through principal component analysis (PCA). Subjects were identified from a subsample of 416 obese individuals, selected from the Malmö Diet and Cancer study—Cardiovascular arm (MDCS-CV, n = 3,443). They were further divided into MHO (n = 143) and MUO (n = 273) defined by a history of hospitalization, or not, at baseline inclusion, and nonobese subjects (NOC, n = 3,027). Two distinctive principle components (PL2, PP5) were discovered with a significant difference and thus further investigated through their main loadings. RESULTS: MHO individuals had a more metabolically favorable lipid and glucose profile than MUO subjects, that is, lower levels of traditional blood glucose and triglycerides, as well as a trend of lower metabolically unfavorable lipid biomarkers. PL2 (lipidomics, p=0.02) showed stronger associations of triacylglycerides with MUO, whereas phospholipids correlated with MHO. PP5 (proteomics, p=0.01) included interleukin-1 receptor antagonist (IL-1ra) and leptin with positive relations to MUO and galanin that correlated positively to MHO. The group differences in metabolite profiles were to a large extent explained by factors included in the metabolic syndrome. CONCLUSION: Compared to MUO individuals, corresponding MHO individuals present with a more favorable lipid metabolic profile, accompanied by a downregulation of potentially harmful proteomic biomarkers. This unique and extensive biomarker profiling presents novel data on potentially differentiating traits between these two obese phenotypes.