4.6 Article

Metabolomic Signature of Early Vascular Aging (EVA) in Hypertension

期刊

出版社

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fmolb.2020.00012

关键词

early vascular aging; metabolomics; arterial stiffness; pulse wave velocity; phospholipid metabolism

资金

  1. Polish-Norwegian Research Fund [EOG/2007/019]
  2. National Science Centre [DEC-2012/07/E/NZ7/04411]
  3. Ministry of Science and Higher Education in Poland [0042/IP1/2016/74, 01-0222/08/529]
  4. European Union through the European Social Fund under the Operational Programme Knowledge Education Development 2014-2020
  5. [POWR.03.02.00-00-I026/17-00]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Arterial stiffening is a hallmark of early vascular aging (EVA) syndrome and an independent predictor of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. In this case-control study we sought to identify plasma metabolites associated with EVA syndrome in the setting of hypertension. An untargeted metabolomic approach was used to identify plasma metabolites in an age-, BMI-, and sex-matched groups of EVA (n = 79) and non-EVA (n = 73) individuals with hypertension. After raw data processing and filtration, 497 putative compounds were characterized, out of which 4 were identified as lysophosphaditylcholines (LPCs) [LPC (18:2), LPC (16:0), LPC (18:0), and LPC (18:1)]. A main finding of this study shows that identified LPCs were independently associated with EVA status. Although LPCs have been shown previously to be positively associated with inflammation and atherosclerosis, we observed that hypertensive individuals characterized by 4 down-regulated LPCs had 3.8 times higher risk of EVA compared to those with higher LPC levels (OR = 3.8, 95% CI 1.7-8.5, P < 0.001). Our results provide new insights into a metabolomic phenotype of vascular aging and warrants further investigation of negative association of LPCs with EVA status. This study suggests that LPCs are potential candidates to be considered for further evaluation and validation as predictors of EVA in patients with hypertension.

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