INVESTIGADORES
GARRAZA Mariela
congresos y reuniones científicas
Título:
Association between genetic profile assessed from 10 SNPs (single nucleotide polymorphisms) and anthropometric obesity in Argentine schoolchildren Asociacion entre perfil genético evaluado a partir de 10 SNPs (polimorfismos de nucleotido único) y obesid
Autor/es:
ALAMINO TORRES; NAVAZO B; MARRODÁN MD; LOPÉZ EJEDA N; GARRAZA M; GAUNA ME; TORRES MF; CESANI MF
Lugar:
Denver
Reunión:
Congreso; 47th Annual Meeting of the Human Biology Association; 2022
Resumen:
Obesity has a multi-causal origin mainly related to highcalorie diets and sedentary lifestyles. However, genetic composition may condition the predisposition to put on weight, as not all individuals and human groups show the same response to the obesogenic environment. Theaim of this study is to analyse the phenotypic variability of the anthropometric profile and in particular of the diagnostic indicators of obesity in a sample of 283 Argentinean schoolchildren aged 6 to 14 years.Data were collected in 2019 in the city of La Plata, Buenos Aires province. Height, weight, body circunferences and subcutaneous skinfolds were measured, estimating body mass index (BMI), waist-to-height ratio (WtHR), and body fat percentage (%BF). DNA was isolated from saliva and 10 single base polymorphisms (SPNs) in the TMEM18, INSIG2, GNPDA2, CLOCK, FAM120AOS, FAIM2, OLFM4 and FTO genes (rs1558902, rs171817449, rs9939609) were genotyped. The nutritional phenotype-genotype association was analysed for each of the SNPs separately and with the genetic risk score (GR) set at a range between 0 (no risk allele) and 20 points (homozygous risk for all 10 markers). A GR score above the 50th percentile (4.96 ± 2.48) was associated with increased waist circumference, skinfold sum, BMI, %BFG and WtHR. Anthropometric indicatorsshowed higher prevalences according to polygenic risk, with significant differences between Q1 and Q4 for excess weight (29.10% vs 44.30%), high adiposity (17.30% vs 30.10%) and abdominal obesity (41.19% vs 54.90%).