Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-18T17:53:07.834Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

SATgenε dietary strategy to investigate the impact of the apo E genotype on LDL-cholesterol response to dietary fat manipulation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 October 2011

S. Lockyer ,
A. L. Carvalho-Wells ,
A. M. Minihane ,
K. G. Jackson  and
J. A. Lovegrove
S. Lockyer
Affiliation:
Department of Food and Nutritional Sciences, University of Reading, Reading, RG6 6A, UK
A. L. Carvalho-Wells
Affiliation:
Department of Food and Nutritional Sciences, University of Reading, Reading, RG6 6A, UK
A. M. Minihane
Affiliation:
Department of Nutrition, Norwich Medical School, University of East Anglia, Norwich, NR4 7TJ, UK
K. G. Jackson
Affiliation:
Department of Food and Nutritional Sciences, University of Reading, Reading, RG6 6A, UK
J. A. Lovegrove
Affiliation:
Department of Food and Nutritional Sciences, University of Reading, Reading, RG6 6A, UK
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content. As you have access to this content, full HTML content is provided on this page. A PDF of this content is also available in through the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Type
Abstract
Information
Proceedings of the Nutrition Society , Volume 70 , Issue OCE4: Summer Meeting, 4–6 July 2011, 70th Anniversary: From plough through practice to policy , 2011 , E209
Copyright
Copyright © The Authors 2011

There is emerging evidence that polymorphisms in the gene encoding for apoE impact on the LDL-cholesterol (LDL-C) response to dietary fat intake. It has been reported that carriers of the apoE4 allele have higher plasma LDL-C concentrations after ingestion of saturated fat (SFA)(Reference Sarkkinen, Korhonen and Erkkilä1) and docosahexanaeoic acid (DHA) (>2g/d)(Reference Caslake, Miles and Kofler2) compared with the apoE3 wild-type. The aim of the SATgen study was to investigate the impact of a combination of SFA and DHA intake on plasma lipids according to apoE genotype.

Eighty-eight subjects were prospectively recruited according to apoE genotype (n 44 E3/E3 and n 44 E3/E4) who were matched for age, gender and BMI. A flexible dietary exchange strategy, based on models previously developed by our group(Reference Shaw, Tierney and McCarthy3, Reference Moore, Gitau and Goff4) was employed to implement three iso-caloric diets with different fatty acid profiles sequentially: Participants consumed a low fat (LF) diet (28%E fat, 8%E SFA, 55%E carbohydrate (CHO)); High SFA (HSF) diet (38%E fat, 18%E SFA, 45%E CHO) and HSF-DHA diet (HSF diet+3g/d DHA) each for an 8-week period. Commercially available spreads (LF spread (LF), butter (HSF)), oils and snacks (cereal bars, pretzels and rice cakes (LF) and chocolate bars, crisps and cakes (HSF)) were supplied to subjects to be consumed in exchange for habitual foods in order to replace the exchangeable fat in their diet. Subjects were also advised to adjust the quantity of carbohydrate and dairy products accordingly. Four 3-d weighed diet diaries were completed by the subjects (one at baseline and one during each of the dietary periods) and analysed using Dietplan 6.60 (Forestfield Software, UK).

SATgen dietary compositional targets were broadly met (see table). Total dietary fat (42.8%E and 41.0%E respectively v. 25.1%E) and SFA (19.3%E and 18.6%E, respectively v. 8.3%E) intakes were higher during the HSF compared with the LF diet (P=0.000). In addition, the DHA intake was significantly higher in the HSA-DHA diet group (P=0.000) relative to the two earlier dietary periods. Therefore the SATgen food exchange model was effective at implementation of the three experimental diets, which were well tolerated by the subjects.

The SATgen study was funded by Wellcome Trust Fund (WT085045MA).

References

1.Sarkkinen, E, Korhonen, M, Erkkilä, A et al. (1998) Am J Clin Nutr 68, 1215–1222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2.Caslake, MJ, Miles, EA, Kofler, BM et al. (2007) Am J Clin Nutr 88, 618–629.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3.Shaw, D, Tierney, AC, McCarthy, S et al. (2008) Br J Nutr 101, 750–759.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4.Moore, C, Gitau, R, Goff, L et al. (2009) J Nutr 139, 1534–1540.CrossRefGoogle Scholar