4.4 Article

Plasma n-3 fatty acid response to an n-3 fatty acid supplement is modulated by apoE ε4 but not by the common PPAR-α L162V polymorphism in men

期刊

BRITISH JOURNAL OF NUTRITION
卷 102, 期 8, 页码 1121-1124

出版社

CAMBRIDGE UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1017/S000711450938215X

关键词

PPAR-alpha; ApoE4; EPA; DHA

资金

  1. Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) [MOP-200609, 151293]
  2. Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC) [009480]
  3. Canada Foundation for Innovation (CFI) [201796]
  4. Canada Research Chairs Secretariat (CRC) [008033]
  5. Department of Medicine, Universite de Sherbrooke
  6. Fonds de Recherche en Sante du Quebec (FRSQ)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The risk of Alzheimer's disease is increased for carriers of apoE4 (E4) or the PPAR-alpha L162V polymorphism (L162V), but it is decreased in fish and seafood consumers. The link between high fish intake and reduced risk of cognitive decline in the elderly appears not to hold in carriers of E4, possibly because better cognition is linked to EPA + DHA in the blood, but only in non-carriers of E4. As yet, no such studies exist in carriers of L162V. Our objective was to determine whether the plasma fatty acid response to a dietary supplement of EPA + DHA was altered ill carriers of L162V and/or E4. This was an add-on project; in the original study, men were selected based on whether or not they were carriers of L162V (n 14 per group). E4 status was determined afterwards. All subjects received an EPA + DHA supplement for 6 weeks. L162V polymorphism did not interact with the supplement in a way to alter EPA and DHA incorporation into plasma lipids. However, when the groups were separated based on the presence of E4, baseline EPA and DHA in plasma TAG were 67 and 60 % higher, respectively, in E4 carriers. After the supplementation, there were significant gene X diet interactions in which only non-carriers had increased EPA and DHA in plasma NEFA and TAG, respectively.

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

4.4
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