4.3 Article Proceedings Paper

Nutrigenetics: links between genetic background and response to Mediterranean-type diets

期刊

PUBLIC HEALTH NUTRITION
卷 12, 期 9A, 页码 1601-1606

出版社

CAMBRIDGE UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1017/S1368980009990437

关键词

Gene; Polymorphism; Single nucleotide polymorphism; Intervention study

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective. It has been substantiated that the onset of most major diseases (CVD, diabetes, obesity, cancers, etc.) is modulated by the interaction between genetic traits (Susceptibility) and environmental factors, especially diet. We aim to report more specific observations relating the effects of Mediterranean-type diets on cardiovascular risk factors and the genetic background of subjects. Results and conclusions: in the first part, general concepts about nutrigenetics are briefly presented. Human genome has, overall, only marginally changed since its origin but it is thought that minor changes (polymorphisms) of common genes that Occurred during evolution are now widespread in human Populations, and can alter metabolic pathways and response to diets. In the second part, we report the data obtained during the Medi-RIVAGE intervention Study performed in the South-East of France. Data obtained in 169 Subjects at moderate cardiovascular risk after a 3-month dietary intervention indicate that some of the twenty-three single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNP) Studied exhibit interactions with diets regarding changes of particular parameters after 3-month regimens. Detailed examples are presented, Such as interactions between SNP in genes coding for microsomial transfer protein (MTTP) or intestinal fatty acid binding protein (FABP2) and triglyceride, LDL-cholesterol or Framigham score lowering in responses to Mediterranean-type diets. The data provided add further evidence of the interaction between particular SNP and metabolic responses to diets. Finally, improvement in dietary recommendations by taking into account known genetic variability has been discussed.

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

4.3
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