4.6 Article

Plasma Amino Acids in NAFLD Patients with Obesity Are Associated with Steatosis and Fibrosis: Results from the MAST4HEALTH Study

期刊

METABOLITES
卷 13, 期 8, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/metabo13080959

关键词

non-alcoholic fatty liver disease; magnetic resonance imaging; amino acids; metabolomics; inflammation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study aimed to investigate the relationship between MRI parameters reflecting inflammation and fibrosis and plasma amino acid (AA) concentrations in NAFLD patients. The study found that subjects with higher MRI-proton density fat fraction (MRI-PDFF) had higher plasma AA levels compared to those with lower PDFF. Significant associations were also observed between AAs and MRI-PDFF and MRI-cT1, suggesting the potential utility of circulating AAs as diagnostic markers for NAFLD.
Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) and non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) have been linked to changes in amino acid (AA) levels. The objective of the current study was to examine the relationship between MRI parameters that reflect inflammation and fibrosis and plasma AA concentrations in NAFLD patients. Plasma AA levels of 97 NAFLD patients from the MAST4HEALTH study were quantified with liquid chromatography. Medical, anthropometric and lifestyle characteristics were collected and biochemical parameters, as well as inflammatory and oxidative stress biomarkers, were measured. In total, subjects with a higher MRI-proton density fat fraction (MRI-PDFF) exhibited higher plasma AA levels compared to subjects with lower PDFF. The concentrations of BCAAs (p-Value: 0.03), AAAs (p-Value: 0.039), L-valine (p-Value: 0.029), L-tyrosine (p-Value: 0.039) and L-isoleucine (p-Value: 0.032) were found to be significantly higher in the higher PDFF group compared to lower group. Plasma AA levels varied according to MRI-PDFF. Significant associations were also demonstrated between AAs and MRI-PDFF and MRI-cT1, showing the potential utility of circulating AAs as diagnostic markers of NAFLD.

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