4.7 Article

Fatty Acids Composition of Blood Cell Membranes and Peripheral Inflammation in the PREDIMED Study: A Cross-Sectional Analysis

期刊

NUTRIENTS
卷 11, 期 3, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/nu11030576

关键词

inflammation; fatty acids; cell membranes

资金

  1. Fundacio La Marato de TV3 [201512.30.31.32]
  2. European Union [713679]
  3. Universitat Rovira i Virgili (URV)
  4. Autonomous Government of Catalonia (PERIS 2016-2020 Incorporacio de Cientifics i Tecnolegs) [SLT002/0016/00428]
  5. Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Spain [CP12/03299]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

There is limited evidence from epidemiological studies for the inflammatory or anti-inflammatory properties of fatty acids in blood cell membranes. Therefore, this study examined associations between baseline (n = 282) and 1-year (n = 143) changes in the levels of fatty acids in blood cell membranes with circulating inflammatory markers in older adults at high cardiovascular risk. The data for this cross-sectional analysis was obtained from a case-control study within the PREDIMED study. Linear regression with elastic net penalty was applied to test associations between measured fatty acids and inflammatory markers. Several fatty acids were associated with interferon-gamma (IFN gamma) and interleukins (ILs) IL-6, IL-8, and IL-10 at baseline and additionally also with IL-1b at 1 year. Omega-6 fatty acids were consistently positively associated with pro-inflammatory IL-6 and IL-8 at baseline. Omega-3 fatty acids including C20:5n3 and C18:3n3 were negatively associated with IFN-gamma at 1 year. It is interesting to note that the cis and trans forms of C16:1n7 at 1 year were oppositely associated with the inflammatory markers. C16:1n7trans was negatively associated with IFN-gamma, IL-6, IL-8, IL-10, and IL-1b, whereas C16:1n7cis was positively associated with IL-1b. This study adds to the growing body of evidence suggesting potential differences in inflammatory or anti-inflammatory properties of fatty acids in blood cell membranes.

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

4.7
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