Dear Editor,
Current treatments for age-related macular degeneration (AMD)―the leading cause of blindness in industrialized countries―are restricted to a single form of the disease and cannot always avoid severe visual loss.1 Among emerging preventive strategies, ω-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs) are enjoying interest as they promote normal retinal structure and function, reduce incidence, and slow progression of AMD, consistently with their abundance in retinal neurons. However, direct assessment of retinal ω-3 PUFAs content in humans is impossible, making the use of a systemic biomarker a mandatory surrogate for tissue composition. Here, we determine which circulating lipids have the highest predictive performance for retinal content in ω-3 PUFAs.
As major components of the human retina, ω-3 PUFAs are essential for retinal physiology. The highest content in ω-3 PUFAs is found in retinal photoreceptors, where they inhibit several cellular and molecular mechanisms involved in AMD pathogenesis and the related visual loss. While more than 20 epidemiological studies have consistently shown a 40%-reduction in risk of AMD in subjects with high dietary intake of ω-3 PUFAs,2 and human donor studies have measured lower ω-3 PUFAs concentration in AMD eyes compared to age-matched controls,3 supplementation trials failed to impact disease progression.4,5 This controversy lies partly in the impossibility of directly assess the retinal ω-3 PUFAs content, making the use of a systemic biomarker a mandatory surrogate for tissue composition.
In the Biomarkers of Lipid Status and Metabolism in Retinal ageing project, we determined which circulating lipids have the highest predictive performance for retinal content in ω-3 PUFAs. In addition to plasma total lipids, we focused our attention on the longer- and medium-term markers of dietary fat, namely red blood cell phospholipids and plasma phosphatidylcholines and cholesteryl esters. By using human donor samples (Table S1) and advanced lipidomics,6 we generated an extremely exhaustive database, corresponding to 304 different lipid species (Tables 1 and S2). Selecting the molecular species relevant for the prediction of retinal ω-3 PUFAs in this high-dimensional, low sample size context is not trivial. This is why we tested several methods combining dimension reduction, variable selection, and prior group structure.7 The model with the lowest error of prediction was obtained using sparse group partial least squares and was characterized by a cross-validated r of 0.62 between observed and predicted values of retinal ω-3 PUFAs content (Figure 1A, see Ajana et al7 for details on statistical methods). It was based on an algorithm combining the levels of seven plasma cholesteryl esters.8 Three of them were characterized by the presence of PUFAs from ω-3 family, the four remaining species consisting in a cholesterol molecule esterified to ω-6 PUFAs (Figure 1B). Interestingly, cholesteryl esters species with ω-3 PUFAs contributed positively to the estimation of retinal ω-3 PUFAs content whereas those with ω-6 PUFAs lowered the prediction index, which is consistent with the well-established competitive metabolism of ω-3 and ω-6 PUFAs. Previous attempts (including ours) on RBC or total plasma lipids have failed in finding strong associations between circulating lipids and absolute levels of retinal ω-3 PUFAs.6,9 Here, we confirm that our predictor is more robust (cross-validated r = 0.62, Figure 1A) than the use of the ω-3 PUFAs content of RBC (r = 0.40) and total plasma (r = 0.14).
TABLE 1 Fatty acid composition (%) of blood and eye tissues of human donors
| Retina | Red blood cells | Plasma | ||||||||
| Total | Phosphatidylcholine | Cholesteryl esters | ||||||||
| Median | (IQR) | Median | (IQR) | Median | (IQR) | Median | (IQR) | Median | (IQR) | |
| C14:0 | 0.35 | (0.13–0.46) | 0.68 | (0.32–1.39) | 0.58 | (0.43–0.83) | 0.20 | (0.11–0.25) | 0.36 | (0.16–0.77) |
| C15:0 | 0.10 | (0.07–0.13) | 0.23 | (0.17–0.29) | 0.22 | (0.18–0.27) | 0.23 | (0.15–0.31) | 0.20 | (0015–0.27) |
| C16:0 | 19.65 | (14.76–21.00) | 24.34 | (21.99–26.74) | 23.42 | (22.58–25.91) | 27.15 | (21.83–32.03) | 12.67 | (11.57–14.44) |
| C16:1ω-9 | 0.75 | (0.57–0.87) | 0.30 | (0.23–0.39) | 0.30 | (0.25–0.34) | 0.16 | (0.11–0.24) | 0.33 | (0.24–0.43) |
| C16:1ω-7 | 0.55 | (0.42–0.77) | 2.30 | (1.71–2.76) | 2.72 | (1.87–3.18) | 0.48 | (0.31–0.77) | 3.27 | (2.09–4.34) |
| C17:0 | 0.15 | (0.12–0.18) | 0.36 | (0.32–0.44) | 0.33 | (0.30–0.36) | 0.47 | (0.42–0.57) | 0.13 | (0.11–0.17) |
| C18:0 | 20.52 | (19.40–21.33) | 9.21 | (7.55–10.81) | 6.39 | (5.73–6.94) | 13.33 | (10.92–16.07) | 0.87 | (0.73–1.35) |
| C18:1trans | 0.12 | (0.08–0.17) | 0.44 | (0.35–0.54) | 0.47 | (0.31–0.64) | 0.42 | (0.27–0.57) | 0.58 | (0.20–0.98) |
| C18:1ω-9 | 15.46 | (14.12–16.18) | 29.13 | (24.93–34.84) | 29.00 | (26.52–31.94) | 15.42 | (13.07–17.31) | 25.97 | (24.06–28.62) |
| C18:1ω-7 | 3.13 | (2.88–3.45) | 2.28 | (1.96–2.55) | 2.50 | (2.22–2.83) | 2.37 | (1.99–2.87) | 2.14 | (1.83–2.52) |
| C18:2ω-6 | 1.61 | (1.35–1.95) | 12.29 | (10.30–14.86) | 19.95 | (17.40–21.97) | 16.91 | (14.68–20.62) | 41.84 | (38.03–45.98) |
| C20:0 | 0.53 | (0.47–0.63) | 0.17 | (0.13–0.21) | 0.14 | (0.09–0.15) | 0.17 | (0.09–0.29) | n.d. | – |
| C18:3ω-6 | 0.13 | (0.11–0.16) | n.d. | – | 0.13 | (0.08–0.22) | 0.21 | (0.00–0.26) | 0.37 | (0.24–0.61) |
| C20:1ω-9 | 0.56 | (0.48–0.68) | 0.39 | (0.33–0.49) | 0.27 | (0.21–0.32) | 0.25 | (0.20–0.45) | n.d. | – |
| C18:3ω-3 | 0.15 | (0.13–0.19) | 0.30 | (0.20–0.41) | 0.37 | (0.31–0.54) | 0.18 | (0.14–0.26) | 0.45 | (0.31–0.56) |
| C20:2ω-6 | 0.16 | (0.13–0.20) | 0.22 | (0.18–0.25) | 0.19 | (0.16–0.24) | 0.38 | (0.30–0.52) | n.d. | – |
| C20:3ω-9 | 0.31 | (0.21–0.40) | n.d. | – | 0.14 | (0.11–0.19) | 0.23 | (0.19–0.33) | n.d. | – |
| C22:0 | 0.36 | (0.30–0.49) | 0.23 | (0.16–0.32) | 0.17 | (0.12–0.21) | n.d. | – | n.d. | – |
| C20:3ω-6 | 1.57 | (1.29–2.05) | 0.67 | (0.42–0.93) | 0.78 | (0.59–1.07) | 2.34 | (1.78–2.95) | 0.60 | (0.45–0.67) |
| C22:1ω-9 | 0.10 | (0.07–0.13) | n.d. | – | n.d. | – | n.d. | – | n.d. | – |
| C20:4ω-6 | 10.92 | (10.31–12.15) | 6.18 | (3.24–8.12) | 5.43 | (4.33–6.79) | 9.14 | (6.79–11.44) | 6.30 | (4.99–8.34) |
| C24:0 | 0.30 | (0.25–0.41) | 0.39 | (0.27–0.52) | 0.10 | (0.00–0.16) | n.d. | – | n.d. | – |
| C20:5ω-3 | 0.18 | (0.14–0.24) | 0.28 | (0.19–0.40) | 0.43 | (0.22–0.59) | 0.63 | (0.37–0.86) | 0.62 | (0.42–0.83) |
| C24:1ω-9 | 0.11 | (0.08–0.17) | 0.64 | (0.48–0.92) | 0.42 | (0.26–0.57) | n.d. | – | n.d. | – |
| C22:4ω-6 | 1.37 | (1.26–1.62) | 0.83 | (0.48–1.12) | 0.26 | (0.20–0.30) | 0.40 | (0.31–0.45) | n.d. | – |
| C22:5ω-6 | 0.53 | (0.43–0.71) | 0.17 | (0.11–0.27) | 0.15 | (0.12–0.19) | 0.27 | (0.21–0.37) | n.d. | – |
| C22:5ω-3 | 1.04 | (0.86–1.26) | 0.83 | (0.40–1.05) | 0.45 | (0.38–0.49) | 1.02 | (0.70–1.15) | n.d. | – |
| C22:6ω-3 | 15.20 | (13.09–16.87) | 1.84 | (0.70–2.31) | 1.54 | (1.27–1.89) | 2.99 | (2.21–4.20) | 0.53 | (0.41–0.67) |
| total SFAs | 45.34 | (41.90–46.87) | 38.41 | (35.52–40.58) | 32.40 | (31.07–34.21) | 42.63 | (39.17–45.63) | 14.80 | (13.24–17.03) |
| total MUFAs | 21.49 | (19.94–22.81) | 36.48 | (31.50–29.26) | 36.42 | (32.56–39.02) | 19.48 | (17.15–21.38) | 33.14 | (31.10–35.54) |
| total PUFAs | 33.41 | (30.87–36.60) | 25.25 | (16.59–29.26) | 30.70 | (27.04–34.26) | 36.86 | (32.49–40.10) | 51.7 | (47.95–54.87) |
| total ω-6 | 16.42 | (15.55–19.07) | 21.32 | (14.80–24.91) | 27.48 | (24.18–30.89) | 10.75 | (7.82–12.66) | 6.90 | (5.23–8.72) |
| total ω-3 | 16.79 | (14.46–18.43) | 3.41 | (1.72–4.09) | 2.89 | (2.39–3.66) | 4.95 | (3.96–6.08) | 1.63 | (1.40–2.05) |
| ω-6 / ω-3 ratio | 1.04 | (0.91–1.20) | 7.45 | (5.36–9.28) | 9.49 | (7.77–11.33) | 2.12 | (1.63–2.76) | 4.34 | (3.39–5.51) |
Abbreviations: IQR, interquartile range; MUFAs, monounsaturated fatty acids; n.d., not detected; PUFAs, polyunsaturated fatty acids; SFAs, saturated fatty acids.
[IMAGE OMITTED. SEE PDF]
In the second phase, we further explored the associations of AMD with ω-3 PUFAs status. First, in a postmortem case-control study, we confirmed previous data showing a lower ω-3 PUFAs content in retinas affected by AMD when compared to those from healthy donors (Figure 2).3,9 After statistical adjustments (Table S3), the difference between AMD and control retinas was of -2.41% of total fatty acids. Then, using the algorithm based on seven plasma cholesteryl esters developed at phase 1, we compared the predicted retinal ω-3 PUFAs content between 31 subjects affected by advanced AMD and 31 controls (Table 2) and found that it was lower in cases compared to controls. The difference in predicted retinal ω-3 PUFAs content between AMD cases and controls was of −1.39%. These observations are consistent with the pathophysiology of AMD that is characterized by the loss of the ω-3 PUFA-rich photoreceptor cells.
[IMAGE OMITTED. SEE PDF]
TABLE 2 Characteristics of the participants to the case-control and LIMPIA studies
| Case-control study | cases (n = 31) | controls (n = 31) | p value |
| Age, mean (SD) (range), y | 84.5 (4.2) (76.7–92.5) | 84.2 (4.3) (76.8–90.7) | 0.4 |
| Female, no (%) | 22 (71.0) | 22 (71.0) | – |
| BMI, mean (SD), kg/m² | 24.8 (3.0) (18.9–31.6) | 24.8 (3.6) (18.1–34.7) | 0.98 |
| Plasma total cholesterol, mean (SD) (range), mmol/L | 5.89 (0.98) (3.32–8.62) | 5.59 (1.00) (3.00–7.56) | 0.24 |
| Plasma HDL cholesterol, mean (SD) (range), mmol/L | 1.62 (0.34) (1.01–2.18) | 1.45 (0.38) (0.82–2.22) | 0.05 |
| Plasma LDL cholesterol, mean (SD) (range), mmol/L | 3.73 (0.84) (1.67–6.01) | 3.57 (0.94) (1.14–5.55) | |
| Plasma triglycerides, mean (SD) (range), mmol/L | 1.19 (0.53) (0.69–3.22) | 1.26 (0.56) (0.40–2.37) | 0.49 |
| ω-3 Supplement use, yes (%) | 6 (19.4) | 1 (3.2) | 0.10 |
| Smoking, no (%) | 0.55 | ||
| Never smoker | 19 (61.3) | 21 (67.7) | |
| <20 pack-year | 5 (16.1) | 6 (19.3) | |
| ≥20pack-year | 7 (22.6) | 4 (13.0) | |
| LIMPIA study | Supplemented (n = 29) | Placebo (n = 26) | p value |
| Age, mean (SD) (range), y | 57.7 (6.3) (44.6–70.2) | 55.6 (6.9) (44.3–66.1) | 0.22 |
| Female, no (%) | 22 (75.9) | 20 (76.9) | 0.93 |
| BMI, mean (SD), kg/m² | 24.2 (3.5) (19.2–31.3) | 23.8 (3.8) (18.1–32.8) | 0.74 |
| Plasma total cholesterol, mean (SD) (range), mmol/L | 5.85 (0.81) (4.32–7.62) | 5.84 (0.72) (4.28–7.53) | 0.95 |
| Plasma HDL cholesterol, mean (SD) (range), mmol/L | 1.73 (0.37) (1.14–2.54) | 1.74 (0.56) (0.98–3.44) | 0.94 |
| Plasma LDL cholesterol, mean (SD) (range), mmol/L | 3.58 (0.77) (1.74–4.98) | 3.58 (0.73) (1.37–4.82) | 0.99 |
| Plasma triglycerides, mean (SD) (range), mmol/L | 1.19 (0.44) (0.61–2.16) | 1.14 (0.42) (0.50–1.98) | 0.68 |
| Smoking, no (%) | 0.85 | ||
| Never smoker | 16 (61.5) | 16 (55.2) | |
| <20 pack-year | 6 (23.1) | 7 (24.1) | |
| ≥20pack-year | 4 (15.4) | 6 (20.7) |
Abbreviations: BMI, body mass index; HDL, high density lipoprotein; LDL, low density lipoprotein; SD, standard deviation.
Considering the crucial functions played by ω-3 PUFAs in retinal structure and function and its depletion in AMD eyes, the idea that maintaining high retinal levels of ω-3 PUFAs would protect against the development and/or the progression of the disease makes sense. This hypothesis is consolidated by a large number of studies showing a significantly reduced risk for developing AMD in subjects with high dietary consumption of ω-3 PUFAs.2 However, in the two randomized trials AREDS2 and NAT2,4,5 ω-3 PUFAs supplementation did not modify disease progression. One possible explanation to these contradictory results lies on subjects’ sensitivity to nutritional supplementation. Indeed, whereas ω-3 PUFAs supplementation had no effect on AMD progression when considering total population, we have shown in NAT2 study that subjects who maintained steadily high blood levels of ω-3 PUFAs had a significantly lower risk for developing advanced AMD.10 This finding confirms the need of monitoring the metabolic status of subjects participating in nutritional interventions. This is why we evaluated the sensitivity of the predicted retinal ω-3 PUFAs content to a dietary supplementation with ω-3 PUFAs. We analyzed blood samples collected within the LIMPIA randomized clinical trial in which participants received ω-3 PUFAs for 6 months (Table 2). Whereas the median values of predicted retinal ω-3 PUFAs content at baseline were similar in both groups, they were significantly increased in supplemented subjects at 3 months, this difference being maintained after 6 months of supplementation (Figure 3).
[IMAGE OMITTED. SEE PDF]
In summary, we identified a blood biomarker of retinal ω-3 PUFAs status, which is inversely related to the risk for advanced AMD and increased with supplementation in ω-3 PUFAs. If confirmed in larger studies, it may serve as a practical tool for scientists to set-up and conduct clinical trials, but also to help doctors to diagnose the condition earlier and single out individuals who are more likely to benefit from nutritional treatment. Finally, an independent model validation dataset and samples from intermediate-AMD subjects would also strengthen our findings.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
The authors declare no conflict of interest related to this study.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
This work was supported by grants from Agence Nationale de la Recherche (ANR-14-CE12-0020-01 BLISAR; ANR-11-LABX-0021-01), the Conseil Régional Bourgogne, Franche-Comté (PARI grant), the FEDER (European Funding for Regional Economical Development), and the Fondation de France/Fondation de l'oeil.
AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS
Designed the studies: Niyazi Acar, Benjamin Buaud, Lionel Bretillon, and Cécile Delcourt. Conducted experiments: Zhiguo He, Stéphane Grégoire, Lucy Martine, and Benjamin Buaud. Acquired data: Stéphane Grégoire, Lucy Martine, Benjamin Buaud, Olivier Berdeaux, Jean-François Korobelnik, Catherine P. Creuzot-Garcher, and Alain M. Bron. Analyzed data: Niyazi Acar, Bénédicte M. J. Merle, Soufiane Ajana, Boris P. Hejblum, Benjamin Buaud, Olivier Berdeaux, Hélène Jacqmin-Gadda, Lionel Bretillon, and Cécile Delcourt. Wrote manuscript: Niyazi Acar, Bénédicte M. J. Merle, Soufiane Ajana, Zhiguo He, Stéphane Grégoire, Boris P. Hejblum, Lucy Martine, Benjamin Buaud, Alain M. Bron, Catherine P. Creuzot-Garcher, Jean-François Korobelnik, Olivier Berdeaux, Hélène Jacqmin-Gadda, Lionel Bretillon, and Cécile Delcourt.
AVAILABILITY OF DATA AND MATERIALS
The datasets generated and analyzed during the current study are neither publicly available due to personal information involved nor from the corresponding author due to a pending patent.
Mitchell P, Liew G, Gopinath B, Wong TY. Age-related macular degeneration. Lancet. 2018; 392 (10153): 1147–1159.
van Leeuwen EM, Emri E, Merle BMJ, et al. A new perspective on lipid research in age-related macular degeneration. Prog Retin Eye Res. 2018; 67 : 56–86.
Liu A, Chang J, Lin Y, et al. Long-chain and very long-chain polyunsaturated fatty acids in ocular aging and age-related macular degeneration. J Lipid Res. 2010; 51 (11): 3217–3229.
Age-Related Eye Disease Study 2 Research Group. Lutein + zeaxanthin and omega-3 fatty acids for age-related macular degeneration: the Age-Related Eye Disease Study 2 (AREDS2) randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2013; 309 (19): 2005–2015.
Souied EH, Delcourt C, Querques G, et al. Oral docosahexaenoic acid in the prevention of exudative age-related macular degeneration: the nutritional AMD treatment 2 study. Ophthalmology. 2013; 120 (8): 1619–1631.
Acar N, Berdeaux O, Gregoire S, et al. Lipid composition of the human eye: are red blood cells a good mirror of retinal and optic nerve fatty acids?. PLoS One. 2012; 7 (4): [eLocator: e35102].
Ajana S, Acar N, Bretillon L, et al. Benefits of dimension reduction in penalized regression methods for high dimensional grouped data: a case study in low sample size. Bioinformatics. 2019; 35 (19): 3628–3634.
Delcourt C, Acar N, Bretillon L, et al.
Gorusupudi A, Liu A, Hageman GS, Bernstein PS. Associations of human retinal very long-chain polyunsaturated fatty acids with dietary lipid biomarkers. J Lipid Res. 2016; 57 (3): 499–508.
Merle BM, Benlian P, Puche N, et al. Circulating omega-3 fatty acids and neovascular age-related macular degeneration. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2014; 55 (3): 2010–2019.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
© 2021. This work is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.
Abstract
Dear Editor, Current treatments for age-related macular degeneration (AMD)―the leading cause of blindness in industrialized countries―are restricted to a single form of the disease and cannot always avoid severe visual loss.1 Among emerging preventive strategies, ω-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs) are enjoying interest as they promote normal retinal structure and function, reduce incidence, and slow progression of AMD, consistently with their abundance in retinal neurons. While more than 20 epidemiological studies have consistently shown a 40%-reduction in risk of AMD in subjects with high dietary intake of ω-3 PUFAs,2 and human donor studies have measured lower ω-3 PUFAs concentration in AMD eyes compared to age-matched controls,3 supplementation trials failed to impact disease progression.4,5 This controversy lies partly in the impossibility of directly assess the retinal ω-3 PUFAs content, making the use of a systemic biomarker a mandatory surrogate for tissue composition. TABLE 1 Fatty acid composition (%) of blood and eye tissues of human donors Retina Red blood cells Plasma Total Phosphatidylcholine Cholesteryl esters Median (IQR) Median (IQR) Median (IQR) Median (IQR) Median (IQR) C14:0 0.35 (0.13–0.46) 0.68 (0.32–1.39) 0.58 (0.43–0.83) 0.20 (0.11–0.25) 0.36 (0.16–0.77) C15:0 0.10 (0.07–0.13) 0.23 (0.17–0.29) 0.22 (0.18–0.27) 0.23 (0.15–0.31) 0.20 (0015–0.27) C16:0 19.65 (14.76–21.00) 24.34 (21.99–26.74) 23.42 (22.58–25.91) 27.15 (21.83–32.03) 12.67 (11.57–14.44) C16:1ω-9 0.75 (0.57–0.87) 0.30 (0.23–0.39) 0.30 (0.25–0.34) 0.16 (0.11–0.24) 0.33 (0.24–0.43) C16:1ω-7 0.55 (0.42–0.77) 2.30 (1.71–2.76) 2.72 (1.87–3.18) 0.48 (0.31–0.77) 3.27 (2.09–4.34) C17:0 0.15 (0.12–0.18) 0.36 (0.32–0.44) 0.33 (0.30–0.36) 0.47 (0.42–0.57) 0.13 (0.11–0.17) C18:0 20.52 (19.40–21.33) 9.21 (7.55–10.81) 6.39 (5.73–6.94) 13.33 (10.92–16.07) 0.87 (0.73–1.35) C18:1trans 0.12 (0.08–0.17) 0.44 (0.35–0.54) 0.47 (0.31–0.64) 0.42 (0.27–0.57) 0.58 (0.20–0.98) C18:1ω-9 15.46 (14.12–16.18) 29.13 (24.93–34.84) 29.00 (26.52–31.94) 15.42 (13.07–17.31) 25.97 (24.06–28.62) C18:1ω-7 3.13 (2.88–3.45) 2.28 (1.96–2.55) 2.50 (2.22–2.83) 2.37 (1.99–2.87) 2.14 (1.83–2.52) C18:2ω-6 1.61 (1.35–1.95) 12.29 (10.30–14.86) 19.95 (17.40–21.97) 16.91 (14.68–20.62) 41.84 (38.03–45.98) C20:0 0.53 (0.47–0.63) 0.17 (0.13–0.21) 0.14 (0.09–0.15) 0.17 (0.09–0.29) n.d. – C18:3ω-6 0.13 (0.11–0.16) n.d. – 0.13 (0.08–0.22) 0.21 (0.00–0.26) 0.37 (0.24–0.61) C20:1ω-9 0.56 (0.48–0.68) 0.39 (0.33–0.49) 0.27 (0.21–0.32) 0.25 (0.20–0.45) n.d. – C18:3ω-3 0.15 (0.13–0.19) 0.30 (0.20–0.41) 0.37 (0.31–0.54) 0.18 (0.14–0.26) 0.45 (0.31–0.56) C20:2ω-6 0.16 (0.13–0.20) 0.22 (0.18–0.25) 0.19 (0.16–0.24) 0.38 (0.30–0.52) n.d. – C20:3ω-9 0.31 (0.21–0.40) n.d. – 0.14 (0.11–0.19) 0.23 (0.19–0.33) n.d. – C22:0 0.36 (0.30–0.49) 0.23 (0.16–0.32) 0.17 (0.12–0.21) n.d. – n.d. – C20:3ω-6 1.57 (1.29–2.05) 0.67 (0.42–0.93) 0.78 (0.59–1.07) 2.34 (1.78–2.95) 0.60 (0.45–0.67) C22:1ω-9 0.10 (0.07–0.13) n.d. – n.d. – n.d. – n.d. – C20:4ω-6 10.92 (10.31–12.15) 6.18 (3.24–8.12) 5.43 (4.33–6.79) 9.14 (6.79–11.44) 6.30 (4.99–8.34) C24:0 0.30 (0.25–0.41) 0.39 (0.27–0.52) 0.10 (0.00–0.16) n.d. – n.d. – C20:5ω-3 0.18 (0.14–0.24) 0.28 (0.19–0.40) 0.43 (0.22–0.59) 0.63 (0.37–0.86) 0.62 (0.42–0.83) C24:1ω-9 0.11 (0.08–0.17) 0.64 (0.48–0.92) 0.42 (0.26–0.57) n.d. – n.d. – C22:4ω-6 1.37 (1.26–1.62) 0.83 (0.48–1.12) 0.26 (0.20–0.30) 0.40 (0.31–0.45) n.d. – C22:5ω-6 0.53 (0.43–0.71) 0.17 (0.11–0.27) 0.15 (0.12–0.19) 0.27 (0.21–0.37) n.d. – C22:5ω-3 1.04 (0.86–1.26) 0.83 (0.40–1.05) 0.45 (0.38–0.49) 1.02 (0.70–1.15) n.d. – C22:6ω-3 15.20 (13.09–16.87) 1.84 (0.70–2.31) 1.54 (1.27–1.89) 2.99 (2.21–4.20) 0.53 (0.41–0.67) total SFAs 45.34 (41.90–46.87) 38.41 (35.52–40.58) 32.40 (31.07–34.21) 42.63 (39.17–45.63) 14.80 (13.24–17.03) total MUFAs 21.49 (19.94–22.81) 36.48 (31.50–29.26) 36.42 (32.56–39.02) 19.48 (17.15–21.38) 33.14 (31.10–35.54) total PUFAs 33.41 (30.87–36.60) 25.25 (16.59–29.26) 30.70 (27.04–34.26) 36.86 (32.49–40.10) 51.7 (47.95–54.87) total ω-6 16.42 (15.55–19.07) 21.32 (14.80–24.91) 27.48 (24.18–30.89) 10.75 (7.82–12.66) 6.90 (5.23–8.72) total ω-3 16.79 (14.46–18.43) 3.41 (1.72–4.09) 2.89 (2.39–3.66) 4.95 (3.96–6.08) 1.63 (1.40–2.05) ω-6 / ω-3 ratio 1.04 (0.91–1.20) 7.45 (5.36–9.28) 9.49 (7.77–11.33) 2.12 (1.63–2.76) 4.34 (3.39–5.51) Abbreviations: IQR, interquartile range; MUFAs, monounsaturated fatty acids; n.d., not detected; PUFAs, polyunsaturated fatty acids; SFAs, saturated fatty acids. SEE PDF] TABLE 2 Characteristics of the participants to the case-control and LIMPIA studies Case-control study cases (n = 31) controls (n = 31) p value Age, mean (SD) (range), y 84.5 (4.2) (76.7–92.5) 84.2 (4.3) (76.8–90.7) 0.4 Female, no (%) 22 (71.0) 22 (71.0) – BMI, mean (SD), kg/m² 24.8 (3.0) (18.9–31.6) 24.8 (3.6) (18.1–34.7) 0.98 Plasma total cholesterol, mean (SD) (range), mmol/L 5.89 (0.98) (3.32–8.62) 5.59 (1.00) (3.00–7.56) 0.24 Plasma HDL cholesterol, mean (SD) (range), mmol/L 1.62 (0.34) (1.01–2.18) 1.45 (0.38) (0.82–2.22) 0.05 Plasma LDL cholesterol, mean (SD) (range), mmol/L 3.73 (0.84) (1.67–6.01) 3.57 (0.94) (1.14–5.55) Plasma triglycerides, mean (SD) (range), mmol/L 1.19 (0.53) (0.69–3.22) 1.26 (0.56) (0.40–2.37) 0.49 ω-3 Supplement use, yes (%) 6 (19.4) 1 (3.2) 0.10 Smoking, no (%) 0.55 Never smoker 19 (61.3) 21 (67.7) <20 pack-year 5 (16.1) 6 (19.3) ≥20pack-year 7 (22.6) 4 (13.0) LIMPIA study Supplemented (n = 29) Placebo (n = 26) p value Age, mean (SD) (range), y 57.7 (6.3) (44.6–70.2) 55.6 (6.9) (44.3–66.1) 0.22 Female, no (%) 22 (75.9) 20 (76.9) 0.93 BMI, mean (SD), kg/m² 24.2 (3.5) (19.2–31.3) 23.8 (3.8) (18.1–32.8) 0.74 Plasma total cholesterol, mean (SD) (range), mmol/L 5.85 (0.81) (4.32–7.62) 5.84 (0.72) (4.28–7.53) 0.95 Plasma HDL cholesterol, mean (SD) (range), mmol/L 1.73 (0.37) (1.14–2.54) 1.74 (0.56) (0.98–3.44) 0.94 Plasma LDL cholesterol, mean (SD) (range), mmol/L 3.58 (0.77) (1.74–4.98) 3.58 (0.73) (1.37–4.82) 0.99 Plasma triglycerides, mean (SD) (range), mmol/L 1.19 (0.44) (0.61–2.16) 1.14 (0.42) (0.50–1.98) 0.68 Smoking, no (%) 0.85 Never smoker 16 (61.5) 16 (55.2) <20 pack-year 6 (23.1) 7 (24.1) ≥20pack-year 4 (15.4) 6 (20.7) Abbreviations: BMI, body mass index; HDL, high density lipoprotein; LDL, low density lipoprotein; SD, standard deviation.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details
; Merle, Bénédicte M J 2 ; Ajana, Soufiane 2 ; He, Zhiguo 3 ; Grégoire, Stéphane 1 ; Hejblum, Boris P 4 ; Lucy, Martine 1 ; Buaud, Benjamin 5 ; Bron, Alain M 6 ; Creuzot-Garcher, Catherine P 6 ; Jean-François Korobelnik 7 ; Berdeaux, Olivier 8 ; Jacqmin-Gadda, Hélène 2 ; Bretillon, Lionel 1 ; Delcourt, Cécile 2 1 Eye and Nutrition Research Group, AgroSup Dijon, CNRS, INRAE, Centre des Sciences du Goût et de l'Alimentation, Université Bourgogne Franche-Comté, Dijon, France
2 Team LEHA, UMR 1219 Bordeaux Population Health Research Center, Univ. Bordeaux, INSERM, F-33000 Bordeaux, France
3 Biology, Imaging, and Engineering of Corneal Graft, Faculty of Medicine, Jean Monnet University, Saint, France
4 Team SISTM, UMR 1219 Bordeaux Population Health Research Center, Univ. Bordeaux, INSERM, INRIA BSO, F-33000 Bordeaux, France
5 ITERG - Equipe Nutrition – Santé and Biochimie des Lipides, France
6 Eye and Nutrition Research Group, AgroSup Dijon, CNRS, INRAE, Centre des Sciences du Goût et de l'Alimentation, Université Bourgogne Franche-Comté, Dijon, France; Department of Ophthalmology, University Hospital, Dijon, France
7 ChemoSens Platform, Centre des Sciences du Goût et de l'Alimentation, AgroSup Dijon, CNRS, INRAE, Université Bourgogne Franche-Comté, Dijon, France; CHU Bordeaux, Service d'ophtalmologie, Bordeaux, France
8 ChemoSens Platform, Centre des Sciences du Goût et de l'Alimentation, AgroSup Dijon, CNRS, INRAE, Université Bourgogne Franche-Comté, Dijon, France