4.5 Article

Circulating FGF19 and FGF21 surge in early infancy from infra- to supra-adult concentrations

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF OBESITY
卷 39, 期 5, 页码 742-746

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/ijo.2015.2

关键词

-

资金

  1. Clinical Research Council of the University Hospital Leuven
  2. Carlos III National Institute of Health, Spain
  3. Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovacion [SAF 2011-23636]
  4. Recercaixa
  5. Instituto de Salud Carlos III
  6. Fondo Europeo de Desarrollo Regional (FEDER), Madrid, Spain [PI11/0443]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: Fibroblast growth factor 19 (FGF19) and 21 (FGF21) have been linked to obesity and type 2 diabetes in adults. We assessed the circulating concentrations of these factors in human neonates and infants, and their association with the endocrine-metabolic changes associated to prenatal growth restraint. SUBJECTS/METHODS: Circulating FGF19 and FGF21, selected hormones (insulin, insulin-like growth factor I and high- molecular-weight (HMW) adiponectin) and body composition (absorptiometry) were assessed longitudinally in 44 infants born appropriate( AGA) or small-for-gestational-age (SGA). Measurements were performed at 0, 4 and 12 months in AGA infants; at 0 and 4 months in SGA infants; and cross-sectionally in 11 first-week AGA newborns. RESULTS: Circulating FGF19 and FGF21 surged >10-fold in early infancy from infra- to supra-adult concentrations, the FGF19 surge appearing slower and more pronounced than the FGF21 surge. Whereas the FGF21 surge was of similar magnitude in AGA and SGA infants, FGF19 induction was significantly reduced in SGA infants. In AGA and SGA infants, cord-blood FGF21 and serum FGF19 at 4 months showed a positive correlation with HMW adiponectin (r = 0.49, P = 0.013; r = 0.43, P = 0.019, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that these early FGF19 and FGF21 surges are of a physiological relevance that warrants further delineation and that may extend beyond infancy.

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

4.5
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