PubMed Health⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 15017352

Nutrigenomics and nutrigenetics.

Jose M Ordovas·Vincent Mooser
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Nutritional genomics has tremendous potential to change the future of dietary guidelines and personal recommendations. Nutritional genomics covers nutrigenomics, which explores the effects of nutrients on the genome, proteome and metabolome, and nutrigenetics, the major goal of which is to elucidate the effect of genetic variation on the interaction between diet and disease. Nutrigenetics has been used for decades in certain rare monogenic diseases such as phenylketonuria, and it has the potential to provide a basis for personalized dietary recommendations based on the individual's genetic makeup in order to prevent common multifactorial disorders decades before their clinical manifestation. RECENT FINDINGS: Preliminary results regarding gene-diet interactions in cardiovascular diseases are for the most part inconclusive because of the limitations of current experimental designs. Success in this area will require the integration of various disciplines, and will require investigators to work on large population studies that are designed to investigate gene-environment interactions. SUMMARY: Based on the current knowledge, we anticipate that in the future we will be able to harness the information contained in our genomes to achieve successful aging using behavioral changes, with nutrition being the cornerstone of this endeavor.

Explore related subjects

Cardiovascular DiseasesDietGenome, HumanGenomicsHumansNutritional Physiological PhenomenaJournal ArticleResearch Support, U.S. Gov't, Non-P.H.S.Research Support, U.S. Gov't, P.H.S.Review

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Jose M Ordovas, Vincent Mooser. 2004. Nutrigenomics and nutrigenetics.. https://doi.org/10.1097/00041433-200404000-00002

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2006

Using pseudo-data to correct for publication bias in meta-analysis.

In many ways, adjustment for publication bias in meta-analysis parallels adjustment for ascertainment bias in genetic studies. We investigate a previously published simulation-based method for dealing with complex ascertainment bias and show that it can be modified for use in meta-analysis when publication bias is suspected. The method involves simulating sets of pseudo-data under the assumed model using guesses for the unknown parameters. The pseudo-data are subjected to the same selection criteria as are believed to have operated on the original data. A conditional likelihood is then used to estimate the adjusted values of the unknown parameters. This method is used to re-analyse a published meta-analysis of the effect of the MTHFR gene on homocysteine levels. Simulation studies show that the pseudo-data method is unbiased; they give an indication of the number of pseudo-data values required and suggest that a two-stage adjustment produces less variable estimates. This method can be thought of as an example of the selection model approach to publication bias correction. As the selection mechanism must be assumed, it is important to investigate the sensitivity of any conclusions to this assumption.

Cardiovascular Diseases↗
PubMed2006

Risks and benefits of omega 3 fats for mortality, cardiovascular disease, and cancer: systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: To review systematically the evidence for an effect of long chain and shorter chain omega 3 fatty acids on total mortality, cardiovascular events, and cancer. DATA SOURCES: Electronic databases searched to February 2002; authors contacted and bibliographies of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) checked to locate studies. REVIEW METHODS: Review of RCTs of omega 3 intake for (3) 6 months in adults (with or without risk factors for cardiovascular disease) with data on a relevant outcome. Cohort studies that estimated omega 3 intake and related this to clinical outcome during at least 6 months were also included. Application of inclusion criteria, data extraction, and quality assessments were performed independently in duplicate. RESULTS: Of 15,159 titles and abstracts assessed, 48 RCTs (36,913 participants) and 41 cohort studies were analysed. The trial results were inconsistent. The pooled estimate showed no strong evidence of reduced risk of total mortality (relative risk 0.87, 95% confidence interval 0.73 to 1.03) or combined cardiovascular events (0.95, 0.82 to 1.12) in participants taking additional omega 3 fats. The few studies at low risk of bias were more consistent, but they showed no effect of omega 3 on total mortality (0.98, 0.70 to 1.36) or cardiovascular events (1.09, 0.87 to 1.37). When data from the subgroup of studies of long chain omega 3 fats were analysed separately, total mortality (0.86, 0.70 to 1.04; 138 events) and cardiovascular events (0.93, 0.79 to 1.11) were not clearly reduced. Neither RCTs nor cohort studies suggested increased risk of cancer with a higher intake of omega 3 (trials: 1.07, 0.88 to 1.30; cohort studies: 1.02, 0.87 to 1.19), but clinically important harm could not be excluded. CONCLUSION: Long chain and shorter chain omega 3 fats do not have a clear effect on total mortality, combined cardiovascular events, or cancer.

Cardiovascular Diseases↗