Repository hosted by TU Delft Library

Background: There has been limited evidence about whether genotype-tailored advice provides extra benefits in reducing obesityrelated traits compared with the benefits of conventional one-size-fitsall advice. Objective: We determined whether the disclosure of information on fat-mass and obesity-associated (FTO) genotype risk had a greater effect on a reduction of obesity-related traits in risk carriers than in nonrisk carriers across different levels of personalized nutrition. Design: A total of 683 participants (women: 51%; age range: 18'73 y) from the Food4Me randomized controlled trial were included in this analysis. Participants were randomly assigned to 4 intervention arms as follows: level 0, control group; level 1, dietary group; level 2, phenotype group; and level 3, genetic group. FTO (single nucleotide polymorphism rs9939609) was genotyped at baseline in all participants, but only subjects who were randomly assigned to level 3 were informed about their genotypes. Level 3 participants were stratified into risk carriers (AA/AT) and nonrisk carriers (TT) of the FTO gene for analyses. Height, weight, and waist circumference (WC) were self-measured and reported at baseline and months 3 and 6. Results: Changes in adiposity markers were greater in participants who were informed that they carried the FTO risk allele (level 3 AT/AA carriers) than in the nonpersonalized group (level 0) but not in the other personalized groups (level 1 and 2). Mean reductions in weight andWC at month 6 were greater for FTO risk carriers than for noncarriers in the level 3 group [-2.28 kg (95% CI: -3.06, -1.48 kg) compared with -1.99 kg (-2.19, -0.19 kg), respectively (P = 0.037); and -4.34 cm(-5.63, -3.08 cm) compared with -1.99 cm (-4.04, -0.05 cm), respectively, (P = 0.048)]. Conclusions: There are greater body weight and WC reductions in risk carriers than in nonrisk carriers of the FTO gene. This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT01530139. © 2017 American Society for Nutrition.

Diet-quality scores (DQS), which are developed across the globe, are used to define adherence to specific eating patterns and have been associated with risk of coronary heart disease and type-II diabetes. We explored the association between five diet-quality scores (Healthy Eating Index, HEI; Alternate Healthy Eating Index, AHEI; MedDietScore, MDS; PREDIMED Mediterranean Diet Score, P-MDS; Dutch Healthy Diet-Index, DHDI) and markers of metabolic health (anthropometry, objective physical activity levels (PAL), and dried blood spot total cholesterol (TC), total carotenoids, and omega-3 index) in the Food4Me cohort, using regression analysis. Dietary intake was assessed using a validated Food Frequency Questionnaire. Participants (n = 1480) were adults recruited from seven European Union (EU) countries. Overall, women had higher HEI and AHEI than men (p < 0.05), and scores varied significantly between countries. For all DQS, higher scores were associated with lower body mass index, lower waist-to-height ratio and waist circumference, and higher total carotenoids and omega-3-index (p trends < 0.05). Higher HEI, AHEI, DHDI, and P-MDS scores were associated with increased daily PAL, moderate and vigorous activity, and reduced sedentary behaviour (p trend < 0.05). We observed no association between DQS and TC. To conclude, higher DQS, which reflect better dietary patterns, were associated with markers of better nutritional status and metabolic health. © 2018 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. Chemicals/CAS: cholesterol, 57-88-5

Mediterranean Diet (MedDiet) adherence has been proven to produce numerous health benefits. In addition, nutrigenetic studies have explained some individual variations in the response to specific dietary patterns. The present research aimed to explore associations and potential interactions between MedDiet adherence and genetic background throughout the Food4Me web-based nutritional intervention. Dietary, anthropometrical and biochemical data from volunteers of the Food4Me study were collected at baseline and after 6 months. Several genetic variants related to metabolic risk features were also analysed. A Genetic Risk Score (GRS) was derived from risk alleles and a Mediterranean Diet Score (MDS), based on validated food intake data, was estimated. At baseline, there were no interactions between GRS and MDS categories for metabolic traits. Linear mixed model repeated measures analyses showed a significantly greater decrease in total cholesterol in participants with a low GRS after a 6-month period, compared to those with a high GRS. Meanwhile, a high baseline MDS was associated with greater decreases in Body Mass Index (BMI), waist circumference and glucose. There also was a significant interaction between GRS and the MedDiet after the follow-up period. Among subjects with a high GRS, those with a high MDS evidenced a highly significant reduction in total carotenoids, while among those with a low GRS, there was no difference associated with MDS levels. These results suggest that a higher MedDiet adherence induces beneficial effects on metabolic outcomes, which can be affected by the genetic background in some specific markers. © 2017 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. Chemicals/CAS: cholesterol, 57-88-5; glucose, 50-99-7, 84778-64-3

Background: The apolipoprotein E (APOE) risk allele (e4) is associated with higher total cholesterol (TC), amplified response to saturated fatty acid (SFA) reduction, and increased cardiovascular disease. Although knowledge of gene risk may enhance dietary change, it is unclear whether e4 carriers would benefit from gene-based personalized nutrition (PN). Objectives: The aims of this study were to 1) investigate interactions between APOE genotype and habitual dietary fat intake and modulations of fat intake on metabolic outcomes; 2) determine whether gene-based PN results in greater dietary change than do standard dietary advice (level 0) and nongene-based PN (levels 1-2); and 3) assess the impact of knowledge of APOE risk (risk: E4+, nonrisk: E42) on dietary change after gene-based PN (level 3). Design: Individuals (n = 1466) recruited into the Food4Me pan- European PN dietary intervention study were randomly assigned to 4 treatment arms and genotyped for APOE (rs429358 and rs7412). Diet and dried blood spot TC and v-3 (n-3) index were determined at baseline and after a 6-mo intervention. Data were analyzed with the use of adjusted general linear models. Results: Significantly higher TC concentrations were observed in E4+ participants than in E42 (P , 0.05). Although there were no significant differences in APOE response to gene-based PN (E4+ compared with E42), both groups had a greater reduction in SFA (percentage of total energy) intake than at level 0 (mean 6 SD: E4+, 20.72% 6 0.35% compared with 21.95% 6 0.45%, P = 0.035; E42, 20.31% 6 0.20% compared with 21.68% 6 0.35%, P = 0.029). Gene-based PN was associated with a smaller reduction in SFA intake than in nongene-based PN (level 2) for E42 participants (21.68% 6 0.35% compared with 22.56% 6 0.27%, P = 0.025). Conclusions: The APOE e4 allele was associated with higher TC. Although gene-based PN targeted to APOE was more effective in reducing SFA intake than standard dietary advice, there was no difference between APOE "risk" and "nonrisk" groups. Furthermore, disclosure of APOE nonrisk may have weakened dietary response to PN. This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT01530139. Am J Clin Nutr 2016;104:827-36. © 2016 American Society for Nutrition.

In e-health intervention studies, there are concerns about the reliability of internet-based, self-reported (SR) data and about the potential for identity fraud. This study introduced and tested a novel procedure for assessing the validity of internet-based, SR identity and validated anthropometric and demographic data via measurements performed face-to-face in a validation study (VS). Participants (n = 140) from seven European countries, participating in the Food4Me intervention study which aimed to test the efficacy of personalised nutrition approaches delivered via the internet, were invited to take part in the VS. Participants visited a research centre in each country within 2 weeks of providing SR data via the internet. Participants received detailed instructions on how to perform each measurement. Individual’s identity was checked visually and by repeated collection and analysis of buccal cell DNA for 33 genetic variants. Validation of identity using genomic information showed perfect concordance between SR and VS. Similar results were found for demographic data (age and sex verification). We observed strong intra-class correlation coefficients between SR and VS for anthropometric data (height 0.990, weight 0.994 and BMI 0.983). However, internet-based SR weight was under-reported (Δ −0.70 kg [−3.6 to 2.1], p < 0.0001) and, therefore, BMI was lower for SR data (Δ −0.29 kg m−2 [−1.5 to 1.0], p < 0.0001). BMI classification was correct in 93 % of cases. We demonstrate the utility of genotype information for detection of possible identity fraud in e-health studies and confirm the reliability of internet-based, SR anthropometric and demographic data collected in the Food4Me study. Trial registration: NCT01530139 (http://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT01530139© 2015, European Union.

Nutrigenetic research examines the effects of inter-individual differences in genotype on responses to nutrients and other food components, in the context of health and of nutrient requirements. A practical application of nutrigenetics is the use of personal genetic information to guide recommendations for dietary choices that are more efficacious at the individual or genetic subgroup level relative to generic dietary advice. Nutrigenetics is unregulated, with no defined standards, beyond some commercially adopted codes of practice. Only a few official nutrition-related professional bodies have embraced the subject, and, consequently, there is a lack of educational resources or guidance for implementation of the outcomes of nutrigenetic research. To avoid misuse and to protect the public, personalised nutrigenetic advice and information should be based on clear evidence of validity grounded in a careful and defensible interpretation of outcomes from nutrigenetic research studies. Evidence requirements are clearly stated and assessed within the context of state-of-the-art 'evidence-based nutrition'. We have developed and present here a draft framework that can be used to assess the strength of the evidence for scientific validity of nutrigenetic knowledge and whether 'actionable'. In addition, we propose that this framework be used as the basis for developing transparent and scientifically sound advice to the public based on nutrigenetic tests. We feel that although this area is still in its infancy, minimal guidelines are required. Though these guidelines are based on semi-quantitative data, they should stimulate debate on their utility. This framework will be revised biennially, as knowledge on the subject increases. © 2017 The Author(s).