4.6 Article

Abdominal adipose tissue cytokine gene expression: relationship to obesity and metabolic risk factors

出版社

AMER PHYSIOLOGICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1152/ajpendo.00419.2004

关键词

adipose cytokine; visceral fat; glucose; insulin

资金

  1. NCRR NIH HHS [M01-RR-07122] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NIA NIH HHS [R01-AG/DK-20583, P30-AG-21332] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Adipose tissue is a major source of inflammatory and thrombotic cytokines. This study investigated the relationship of abdominal subcutaneous adipose tissue cytokine gene expression to body composition, fat distribution, and metabolic risk during obesity. We determined body composition, abdominal fat distribution, plasma lipids, and abdominal subcutaneous fat gene expression of leptin, TNF-alpha, IL-6, PAI-1, and adiponectin in 20 obese, middle-aged women (BMI, 32.7 +/- 0.8 kg/m(2); age, 57 +/- 1 yr). A subset of these women without diabetes (n = 15) also underwent an OGTT. In all women, visceral fat volume was negatively related to leptin (r = -0.46, P < 0.05) and tended to be negatively related to adiponectin (r = -0.38, P = 0.09) gene expression. Among the nondiabetic women, fasting insulin (r = 0.69, P < 0.01), 2-h insulin (r = 0.56, P < 0.05), and HOMA index (r = 0.59, P < 0.05) correlated positively with TNF-alpha gene expression; fasting insulin (r = 0.54, P < 0.05) was positively related to, and 2-h insulin (r = 0.49, P = 0.06) tended to be positively related to, IL-6 gene expression; and glucose area (r = -0.56, P < 0.05) was negatively related to, and insulin area (r = -0.49, P = 0.06) tended to be negatively related to, adiponectin gene expression. Also, adiponectin gene expression was significantly lower in women with vs. without the metabolic syndrome (adiponectin-beta-actin ratio, 2.26 +/- 0.46 vs. 3.31 +/- 0.33, P < 0.05). We conclude that abdominal subcutaneous adipose tissue expression of inflammatory cytokines is a potential mechanism linking obesity with its metabolic comorbidities.

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