4.6 Review

Biology of upper-body and lower-body adipose tissue-link to whole-body phenotypes

期刊

NATURE REVIEWS ENDOCRINOLOGY
卷 11, 期 2, 页码 90-100

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/nrendo.2014.185

关键词

-

资金

  1. Wellcome Trust
  2. British Heart Foundation, Heart Research UK
  3. European Union (EU) [LSHG/512, 066, 202, 272]
  4. NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre
  5. British Heart Foundation [PG/12/78/29862] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The distribution of adipose tissue in the body has wide-ranging and reproducible associations with health and disease. Accumulation of adipose tissue in the upper body (abdominal obesity) is associated with the development of cardiovascular disease, insulin resistance, type 2 diabetes mellitus and even all-cause mortality. Conversely, accumulation of fat in the lower body (gluteofemoral obesity) shows opposite associations with cardiovascular disease and type 2 diabetes mellitus when adjusted for overall fat mass. The abdominal depots are characterized by rapid uptake of predominantly diet-derived fat and a high lipid turnover that is easily stimulated by adrenergic receptor activation. The lower-body fat stores have a reduced lipid turnover with a capacity to accommodate fat undergoing redistribution. Lower-body adipose tissue also seems to retain the capacity to recruit additional adipocytes as a result of weight gain and demonstrates fewer signs of inflammatory insult. New data suggest that the profound functional differences between the upperbody and lower-body tissues are controlled by site-specific sets of developmental genes, such as HOXA6, HOXA5, HOXA3, IRX2 and TBX5 in subcutaneous abdominal adipose tissue and HOTAIR, SHOX2 and HOXC11 in gluteofemoral adipose tissue, which are under epigenetic control. This Review discusses the developmental and functional differences between upper-body and lower-body fat depots and provides mechanistic insight into the disease-protective effects of lower-body fat.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据