Fibroblast Growth Factor-21 to Adiponectin Ratio: A Potential Biomarker to Monitor Liver Fat in Children With Obesity
Background: There is a pressing need for effective and non-invasive biomarkers to track intrahepatic triglyceride (IHTG) in children at-risk for non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD), as standard-of-care reference tools, liver biopsy and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), are impractical to monitor the course disease.
Objective: We aimed to examine the association between serum fibroblast growth factor (FGF)-21 to adiponectin ratio (FAR) and IHTG as assessed by MRI in children with obesity.
Methods: Serum FGF21 and adiponectin levels and IHTG were measured at two time points (baseline, 6 months) in obese children enrolled in a clinical weight loss program. The association between percent change in FAR and IHTG at final visit was examined using a multiple linear regression model.
Results: At baseline, FAR was higher in the subjects with NAFLD (n = 23, 35.8 ± 41.9 pg/ng) than without NAFLD (n = 35, 19.8 ± 13.7 pg/ng; p = 0.042). Forty-eight subjects completed both visits and were divided into IHTG loss (≥1% reduction than baseline), no change (within ±1% change), and gain (≥1% increase than baseline) groups. At 6 months, the percent change in FAR was different among the three groups (p = 0.005). Multiple linear regression showed a positive relationship between percent change in FAR and the final liver fat percent in sex and pubertal stage-similar subjects with NAFLD at baseline (slope coefficient 6.18, 95% CI 1.90–10.47, P = 0.007), but not in those without NAFLD.
Conclusions: Higher value in percent increase in FAR is positively associated with higher level of IHTG percent value at 6 months in children with baseline NAFLD. FAR could be a potential biomarker to monitor the changes in IHTG in children with NAFLD.
CITE THIS COLLECTION
REFERENCES
- https://doi.org//10.1097/MPG.0000000000001482
- https://doi.org//10.1002/hep.28431
- https://doi.org//10.4254/wjh.v9.i16.715
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.cgh.2016.08.028
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.cld.2017.08.010
- https://doi.org//10.1111/joim.12719
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.jhep.2014.11.034
- https://doi.org//10.1053/j.gastro.2018.04.014
- https://doi.org//10.1172/jci.insight.127902
- https://doi.org//10.1007/s00330-019-06072-4
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.cmet.2013.04.005
- https://doi.org//10.3945/ajcn.2009.28449B
- https://doi.org//10.1210/en.2006-1168
- https://doi.org//10.14814/phy2.12828