3.9 Article

Gene-Gene Interplay and Gene-Diet Interactions Involving the MTNR1B rs10830963 Variant with Body Weight Loss

期刊

JOURNAL OF NUTRIGENETICS AND NUTRIGENOMICS
卷 7, 期 4-6, 页码 232-242

出版社

KARGER
DOI: 10.1159/000380951

关键词

MTNR1B; FTO; MC4R; Obesity; Body weight loss; Gene-gene interplay; Gene-diet interaction

资金

  1. Linea Especial (University of Navarra) [LE/97]
  2. Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness [AGL2013-45554-R]
  3. Asociacion de Amigos Universidad de Navarra

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background/Aims: Investigation of the genetic makeup may facilitate the implementation of more personalized nutritional interventions. The aims were to examine whether the rs10830963 MTNR1B polymorphism affects weight loss in response to a hypocaloric diet and to find potential gene-gene interplays and gene-diet interactions. Methods: 167 subjects enrolled in a personalized nutritional intervention for weight loss (3-6 weeks) were examined for anthropometric measurements, dietary habits and physical activity at baseline and at the first follow-up visit. Three polymorphisms, which have previously been associated with body weight regulation, rs10830963 (MTNR1B), rs9939609 (FTO) and rs17782313 (MC4R), were analyzed using the Luminex (R) 100/200 (TM) System. Results: After adjusting for covariates, females with the rs10830963 CG/GG genotype showed lower weight loss than those with the CC genotype. In the total population, carriers of variant alleles of both FTO and MC4R showed a significant association with MTNR1B and weight loss outcome. Moreover, among women, higher total protein and animal protein intakes were associated with a lower weight loss in G allele carriers of the MTNR1B variant. Conclusions: Our data evidenced that rs10830963 MTNR1B polymorphism could be associated with individual differences in weight loss induced by a hypocaloric diet. This association was influenced by FTO and MC4R loci and modified by baseline protein intake. (C) 2015 S. Karger AG, Basel

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

3.9
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