Title |
Time-Dependent Molecular Responses Differ between Gastric Bypass and Dieting but Are Conserved Across Species
|
---|---|
Published in |
Cell Metabolism (Science Direct), June 2018
|
DOI | 10.1016/j.cmet.2018.06.004 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Danny Ben-Zvi, Luca Meoli, Wasif M. Abidi, Eirini Nestoridi, Courtney Panciotti, Erick Castillo, Palmenia Pizarro, Eleanor Shirley, William F. Gourash, Christopher C. Thompson, Rodrigo Munoz, Clary B. Clish, Ron C. Anafi, Anita P. Courcoulas, Nicholas Stylopoulos |
Abstract |
The effectiveness of Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) against obesity and its comorbidities has generated excitement about developing new, less invasive treatments that use the same molecular mechanisms. Although controversial, RYGB-induced improvement of metabolic function may not depend entirely upon weight loss. To elucidate the differences between RYGB and dieting, we studied several individual organ molecular responses and generated an integrative, interorgan view of organismal physiology. We also compared murine and human molecular signatures. We show that, although dieting and RYGB can bring about the same degree of weight loss, post-RYGB physiology is very different. RYGB induces distinct, organ-specific adaptations in a temporal pattern that is characterized by energetically demanding processes, which may be coordinated by HIF1a activation and the systemic repression of growth hormone receptor signaling. Many of these responses are conserved in rodents and humans and may contribute to the remarkable ability of surgery to induce and sustain metabolic improvement. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United States | 18 | 24% |
Canada | 7 | 9% |
United Kingdom | 6 | 8% |
Spain | 4 | 5% |
Israel | 3 | 4% |
Germany | 2 | 3% |
Mexico | 2 | 3% |
Australia | 1 | 1% |
Sudan | 1 | 1% |
Other | 5 | 7% |
Unknown | 26 | 35% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Scientists | 34 | 45% |
Members of the public | 32 | 43% |
Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 7 | 9% |
Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 3% |
Mendeley readers
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Unknown | 118 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Ph. D. Student | 19 | 16% |
Researcher | 19 | 16% |
Student > Bachelor | 14 | 12% |
Student > Master | 8 | 7% |
Professor > Associate Professor | 6 | 5% |
Other | 17 | 14% |
Unknown | 35 | 30% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Medicine and Dentistry | 27 | 23% |
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 19 | 16% |
Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 7 | 6% |
Neuroscience | 4 | 3% |
Immunology and Microbiology | 3 | 3% |
Other | 15 | 13% |
Unknown | 43 | 36% |