4.6 Article

Serum Fatty Acids Are Correlated with Inflammatory Cytokines in Ulcerative Colitis

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 11, 期 5, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0156387

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [R01AT004821, 3R01AT004821-02S1, 5T32DK007673, P30DK058404, UL1TR000445, DK20593]
  2. Department of Veterans Affairs [1IK2BX002126-01]
  3. Vanderbilt Physician Scientist Development Award
  4. Thomas F. Frist Sr. Endowment
  5. VA [1IK2BX002126-01, 550307] Funding Source: Federal RePORTER

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background and Aims Ulcerative colitis (UC) is associated with increased dietary intake of fat and n-6 polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFA). Modification of fat metabolism may alter inflammation and disease severity. Our aim was to assess differences in dietary and serum fatty acid levels between control and UC subjects and associations with disease activity and inflammatory cytokines. Methods Dietary histories, serum, and colonic tissue samples were prospectively collected from 137 UC subjects and 38 controls. Both histologic injury and the Mayo Disease Activity Index were assessed. Serum and tissue cytokines were measured by Luminex assay. Serum fatty acids were obtained by gas chromatography. Results UC subjects had increased total fat and oleic acid (OA) intake, but decreased arachidonic acid (AA) intake vs controls. In serum, there was less percent saturated fatty acid (SFA) and AA, with higher monounsaturated fatty acids (MUFA), linoleic acid, OA, eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA), and docosapentaenoic acid (DPA) in UC. Tissue cytokine levels were directly correlated with SFA and inversely correlated with PUFA, EPA, and DPA in UC subjects, but not controls. 5-aminosalicylic acid therapy blunted these associations. Conclusions In summary, we found differences in serum fatty acids in UC subjects that correlated with pro-inflammatory tissue cytokines. We propose that fatty acids may affect cytokine production and thus be immunomodulatory in UC.

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