Abstract：
BACKGROUND: Avocado intake improves dietary fat quality, but the subsequent impact on red blood cell (RBC) saturated (SFA), monounsaturated (MUFA), polyunsaturated (PUFA), and trans-fatty acid (TFA) composition and association with cardiometabolic health, has not been elucidated.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the effect of consuming 1 avocado/d relative to habitual diet (HAB) on RBC-FA profiles, and their association with visceral adiposity and cardiometabolic risk factors (CMRFs) in individuals with abdominal obesity.
METHODS: RBC-FA profiling at baseline, 3- and 6 mo was conducted in participants (n = 994) from the Habitual Diet and Avocado Trial (HAT). HAT was a multisite, free-living, parallel-arm intervention study in which participants were randomly assigned to either the avocado-supplemented group (AVO, usual diet with 1 avocado/d) or the HAB group (usual diet with limited avocado intake) for 6 mo. Changes in RBC-FA profiles, a secondary outcome measure, were determined within and between groups using linear regression and mixed effect models, adjusting for age, sex, BMI, clinical site, smoking status, and percentage of energy intake from fat at baseline. The association between changes in RBC-FAs with visceral adiposity measures and CMRFs was assessed after covariate and False Discovery Rate (FDR <0.05) adjustment.
RESULTS: No major differences in RBC-FA profiles were observed between groups, with the exception of MUFA cis-vaccenic [18:1n-7c], which was significantly higher in AVO (β: 0.11 [0.05, 0.17]) compared with the HAB (β: 0.03 [-0.03, 0.08]) participants. In the HAB but not AVO group, increases in MUFA cis (18:1n-7c, oleic [18;1n-9c], erucic [22:1n-9c]) and MUFA trans (palmitelaidic [16:1n-7t], vaccenic [18:1n-7t], elaidic [18:1n-9t], and petroselaidic [18;1n-10-12t), as well as PUFA γ-linolenic [18:3n-6], dihomo-γ-linolenic [20:3n-6], arachidonic [20:4n-6], and α-linolenic [18:3n-3] were associated with unfavorable changes in visceral adiposity measures, lipid profiles, glucose, insulin and high sensitivity C-reactive protein concentrations.
CONCLUSIONS: Daily avocado intake over 6-mo modified RBC-MUFA composition, notably 18:1n-7c, and potentially mitigated some of the unfavorable individual RBC-FA-CMRF associations observed over time in the HAB group. This trial was registered at https://clinicaltrials.gov/study as NCT03528031.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the effect of consuming 1 avocado/d relative to habitual diet (HAB) on RBC-FA profiles, and their association with visceral adiposity and cardiometabolic risk factors (CMRFs) in individuals with abdominal obesity.
METHODS: RBC-FA profiling at baseline, 3- and 6 mo was conducted in participants (n = 994) from the Habitual Diet and Avocado Trial (HAT). HAT was a multisite, free-living, parallel-arm intervention study in which participants were randomly assigned to either the avocado-supplemented group (AVO, usual diet with 1 avocado/d) or the HAB group (usual diet with limited avocado intake) for 6 mo. Changes in RBC-FA profiles, a secondary outcome measure, were determined within and between groups using linear regression and mixed effect models, adjusting for age, sex, BMI, clinical site, smoking status, and percentage of energy intake from fat at baseline. The association between changes in RBC-FAs with visceral adiposity measures and CMRFs was assessed after covariate and False Discovery Rate (FDR <0.05) adjustment.
RESULTS: No major differences in RBC-FA profiles were observed between groups, with the exception of MUFA cis-vaccenic [18:1n-7c], which was significantly higher in AVO (β: 0.11 [0.05, 0.17]) compared with the HAB (β: 0.03 [-0.03, 0.08]) participants. In the HAB but not AVO group, increases in MUFA cis (18:1n-7c, oleic [18;1n-9c], erucic [22:1n-9c]) and MUFA trans (palmitelaidic [16:1n-7t], vaccenic [18:1n-7t], elaidic [18:1n-9t], and petroselaidic [18;1n-10-12t), as well as PUFA γ-linolenic [18:3n-6], dihomo-γ-linolenic [20:3n-6], arachidonic [20:4n-6], and α-linolenic [18:3n-3] were associated with unfavorable changes in visceral adiposity measures, lipid profiles, glucose, insulin and high sensitivity C-reactive protein concentrations.
CONCLUSIONS: Daily avocado intake over 6-mo modified RBC-MUFA composition, notably 18:1n-7c, and potentially mitigated some of the unfavorable individual RBC-FA-CMRF associations observed over time in the HAB group. This trial was registered at https://clinicaltrials.gov/study as NCT03528031.
摘要：
背景：鳄梨摄入量可改善膳食脂肪质量，但随后对红细胞（RBC）饱和（SFA）的影响，单不饱和（MUFA），多不饱和（PUFA）和反式脂肪酸（TFA）组成和与心脏代谢健康的关联，尚未阐明。
目的：为了比较每天食用一个鳄梨相对于习惯性饮食对RBC-FA谱的影响，以及它们与腹型肥胖患者内脏肥胖和心脏代谢危险因素(CMRFs)的关系。
方法：基线时的RBC-FA分析，在习惯性饮食和鳄梨试验（HAT）的参与者（n=994）中进行了3个月和6个月。帽子是一个多地点的，自由生活,平行臂干预研究，其中参与者被随机分配到鳄梨补充组(AVO，通常的饮食与一个鳄梨/天），或习惯性饮食组(HAB，通常的饮食，鳄梨摄入量有限）6个月。RBC-FA谱的变化，次要结果测量，使用线性回归和混合效应模型在组内和组间确定，调整年龄，性别,BMI,临床部位,基线时吸烟状况和脂肪能量摄入百分比。在协变量和FDR(<0.05)调整后评估RBC-FAs变化与内脏肥胖和CMRFs之间的关联。
结果：两组间RBC-FA谱无明显差异，除了MUFA顺式疫苗[18：1n-7c]，与HAB（β=0.03[-0.03，0.08]）参与者相比，AVO（β=0.11[0.05，0.17]）明显更高。在HAB而不是AVO组中,MUFA顺式增加(18：1n-7c，油酸[18；1n-9c]，芥酸[22：1n-9c]）和MUFA反式（棕榈酸[16：1n-7t]，疫苗[18：1n-7t]，elaidic[18：1n-9t]和岩石学[18;1n-10-12t），以及PUFAγ-亚麻酸[18：3n-6]，二高-γ-亚麻酸[20：3n-6]，花生四烯酸[20:4n-6]和α-亚麻酸[18:3n-3]与内脏肥胖指标的不利变化有关，脂质分布，葡萄糖，胰岛素和hsCRP浓度。
结论：每日鳄梨摄入量超过6个月的改良RBC-MUFA组成，特别是18:1n-7c，并可能减轻HAB组中随时间观察到的一些不利的个体RBCFA-CMRF关联。
背景：https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT03528031。
目的：为了比较每天食用一个鳄梨相对于习惯性饮食对RBC-FA谱的影响，以及它们与腹型肥胖患者内脏肥胖和心脏代谢危险因素(CMRFs)的关系。
方法：基线时的RBC-FA分析，在习惯性饮食和鳄梨试验（HAT）的参与者（n=994）中进行了3个月和6个月。帽子是一个多地点的，自由生活,平行臂干预研究，其中参与者被随机分配到鳄梨补充组(AVO，通常的饮食与一个鳄梨/天），或习惯性饮食组(HAB，通常的饮食，鳄梨摄入量有限）6个月。RBC-FA谱的变化，次要结果测量，使用线性回归和混合效应模型在组内和组间确定，调整年龄，性别,BMI,临床部位,基线时吸烟状况和脂肪能量摄入百分比。在协变量和FDR(<0.05)调整后评估RBC-FAs变化与内脏肥胖和CMRFs之间的关联。
结果：两组间RBC-FA谱无明显差异，除了MUFA顺式疫苗[18：1n-7c]，与HAB（β=0.03[-0.03，0.08]）参与者相比，AVO（β=0.11[0.05，0.17]）明显更高。在HAB而不是AVO组中,MUFA顺式增加(18：1n-7c，油酸[18；1n-9c]，芥酸[22：1n-9c]）和MUFA反式（棕榈酸[16：1n-7t]，疫苗[18：1n-7t]，elaidic[18：1n-9t]和岩石学[18;1n-10-12t），以及PUFAγ-亚麻酸[18：3n-6]，二高-γ-亚麻酸[20：3n-6]，花生四烯酸[20:4n-6]和α-亚麻酸[18:3n-3]与内脏肥胖指标的不利变化有关，脂质分布，葡萄糖，胰岛素和hsCRP浓度。
结论：每日鳄梨摄入量超过6个月的改良RBC-MUFA组成，特别是18:1n-7c，并可能减轻HAB组中随时间观察到的一些不利的个体RBCFA-CMRF关联。
背景：https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT03528031。
