4.5 Article

Melanocortin-4 receptor polymorphism rs17782313: Association with obesity and eating in the absence of hunger in Chilean children

期刊

NUTRITION
卷 30, 期 2, 页码 145-149

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.nut.2013.05.030

关键词

MCR4; Childhood obesity; Eating behavior

资金

  1. Chilean grants FONDECYT [1061096, 1090388]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: The aim of this study was to assess the association between melanocortin-4 receptor (MC4R) rs17782313 alleles with obesity and eating behavior scores in Chilean children. Methods: A case-control study was conducted with 139 normal-weight and 238 obese children (ages 6-12 y). MC4R rs17782313 genotypes were determined by quantitative-polymerase chain reaction allelic-discrimination assays. Eating behavior scores were evaluated in a subset of participants using the Chilean version of the Child Eating Behavior Questionnaire (CEBQ). Additionally, five normal-weight C-allele carriers of rs17782313 were matched by sex, age, and body mass index (BMI) to five TT homozygous children to carry out the Eating in the Absence of Hunger (EAH) test. Results: The frequency of the C-allele of MC4R rs17782313 was higher in the obese group than in the control group, without achieving statistical significance (odds ratio, 1.4; 95% confidence interval, 0.8-2.4; P = 0.16). CEBQ scores of enjoyment of food were higher (P = 0.04) and satiety responsiveness were lower (P = 0.02) in children with CC genotype than in those with TT genotype matched by sex, age, and BMI. In the EAH test, all five non-obese carriers of the C-allele (three CC and two CF) showed increased sweet snack consumption compared with five matched (by sex-age-BMI) non-carriers after a preload meal, without achieving statistical significance (P = 0.06). Conclusion: MC4R polymorphism rs17782313 may contribute to childhood obesity, affecting enjoyment of food, satiety responsiveness, and possibly eating in the absence of hunger. (C) 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

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

4.5
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