Interaction between BMI and APOE genotype is associated with changes in the plasma long-chain-PUFA response to a fish-oil supplement in healthy participants

BACKGROUND: Carriers of the apolipoprotein E ɛ4 (APOE4) allele are lower responders to a docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) supplement than are noncarriers. This effect could be exacerbated in overweight individuals because DHA metabolism changes according to body mass index (BMI; in kg/m²). OBJECTIVES: We evaluated the plasma fatty acid (FA) response to a DHA-rich supplement in APOE4 carriers and noncarriers consuming a high-saturated fat diet (HSF diet) and, in addition, evaluated whether being overweight changed this response. DESIGN: This study was part of the SATgenɛ trial. Forty-one APOE4 carriers and 41 noncarriers were prospectively recruited and consumed an HSF diet for 8-wk followed by 8 wk of consumption of an HSF diet with the addition of DHA and eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) (HSF + DHA diet; 3.45 g DHA/d and 0.5 g EPA/d). Fasting plasma samples were collected at the end of each intervention diet. Plasma total lipids (TLs) were separated into free FAs, neutral lipids (NLs), and phospholipids by using solid-phase extraction, and FA profiles in each lipid class were quantified by using gas chromatography. RESULTS: Because the plasma FA response to the HSF + DHA diet was correlated with BMI in APOE4 carriers but not in noncarriers, the following 2 groups were formed according to the BMI median: low BMI (<25.5) and high BMI (≥25.5). In response to the HSF + DHA diet, there were significant BMI × genotype interactions for changes in plasma concentrations of arachidonic acid and DHA in phospholipids and TLs and of EPA in NLs and TLs (P ≤ 0.05). APOE4 carriers were lower plasma responders to the DHA supplement than were noncarriers but only in the high-BMI group. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicate that apolipoprotein E genotype and BMI may be important variables that determine the plasma long-chain PUFA response to dietary fat manipulation. APOE4 carriers with BMI ≥25.5 may need higher intakes of DHA for cardiovascular or other health benefits than do noncarriers

Insulin resistance determines a differential response to changes in dietary fat modification on metabolic syndrome risk factors: the LIPGENE study

Background: Previous data support the benefits of reducing dietary saturated fatty acids (SFAs) on insulin resistance (IR) and other metabolic risk factors. However, whether the IR status of those suffering from metabolic syndrome (MetS) affects this response is not established. OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to determine whether the degree of IR influences the effect of substituting high-saturated fatty acid (HSFA) diets by isoenergetic alterations in the quality and quantity of dietary fat on MetS risk factors. DESIGN: In this single-blind, parallel, controlled, dietary intervention study, MetS subjects (n = 472) from 8 European countries classified by different IR levels according to homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance (HOMA-IR) were randomly assigned to 4 diets: an HSFA diet; a high-monounsaturated fatty acid (HMUFA) diet; a low-fat, high-complex carbohydrate (LFHCC) diet supplemented with long-chain n-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids (1.2 g/d); or an LFHCC diet supplemented with placebo for 12 wk (control). Anthropometric, lipid, inflammatory, and IR markers were determined. RESULTS: Insulin-resistant MetS subjects with the highest HOMA-IR improved IR, with reduced insulin and HOMA-IR concentrations after consumption of the HMUFA and LFHCC n-3 diets (P < 0.05). In contrast, subjects with lower HOMA-IR showed reduced body mass index and waist circumference after consumption of the LFHCC control and LFHCC n-3 diets and increased HDL cholesterol concentrations after consumption of the HMUFA and HSFA diets (P < 0.05). MetS subjects with a low to medium HOMA-IR exhibited reduced blood pressure, triglyceride, and LDL cholesterol levels after the LFHCC n-3 diet and increased apolipoprotein A-I concentrations after consumption of the HMUFA and HSFA diets (all P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Insulin-resistant MetS subjects with more metabolic complications responded differently to dietary fat modification, being more susceptible to a health effect from the substitution of SFAs in the HMUFA and LFHCC n-3 diets. Conversely, MetS subjects without IR may be more sensitive to the detrimental effects of HSFA intake. The metabolic phenotype of subjects clearly determines response to the quantity and quality of dietary fat on MetS risk factors, which suggests that targeted and personalized dietary therapies may be of value for its different metabolic features.