Direct measurement of de novo lipogenesis has not previously been possible in humans. We measured de novo hepatic lipogenesis in normal men by means of stable isotopes and by combining the acetylated-xenobiotic probe technique with mass isotopomer analysis of secreted very low density lipoprotein-fatty acids (VLDL-FA). Sulfamethoxazole (SMX) was administered with [13C]acetate during an overnight fast followed by refeeding with intravenous glucose (7-10 mg/kg of weight per min), oral Ensure (7-10 mg of carbohydrate/kg of weight per min), or a high-carbohydrate mixed-meal breakfast (3.5 g of carbohydrate/kg of weight). Respiratory quotients remained less than 1.0. High-performance liquid chromatography/mass spectrometry-determined enrichments in SMX-acetate attained stable plateau values, and hepatic acetyl-coenzyme A (CoA) dilution rate did not increase with refeeding (approximately 0.024 mmol/kg per min). The fraction of VLDL-palmitate derived from de novo lipogenesis was only 0.91 +/- 0.27% (fasted) and 1.64-1.97% (fed). For stearate, this was 0.37 +/- 0.08% and 0.47-0.64%. Precursor enrichments predicted from isotopomer ratios were close to measured SMX-acetate enrichments, indicating that SMX-acetate samples the true lipogenic acetyl-CoA pool. Stearate synthesis was less than palmitate and the two did not move in parallel. Estimated total VLDL-FA synthesis is less than 500 mg/day. Thus, de novo hepatic lipogenesis is a quantitatively minor pathway, consistent with gas exchange estimates; fatty acid futile cycling (oxidation/resynthesis) is not thermogenically significant; and synthesis rates of different nonessential fatty acids by human liver are not identical in nonoverfed normal men. The contribution and regulation of de novo lipogenesis in other settings can be studied using this technique.
M K Hellerstein, M Christiansen, S Kaempfer, C Kletke, K Wu, J S Reid, K Mulligan, N S Hellerstein, C H Shackleton
Usage data is cumulative from September 2021 through September 2022.
Usage information is collected from two different sources: this site (JCI) and Pubmed Central (PMC). JCI information (compiled daily) shows human readership based on methods we employ to screen out robotic usage. PMC information (aggregated monthly) is also similarly screened of robotic usage.
Various methods are used to distinguish robotic usage. For example, Google automatically scans articles to add to its search index and identifies itself as robotic; other services might not clearly identify themselves as robotic, or they are new or unknown as robotic. Because this activity can be misinterpreted as human readership, data may be re-processed periodically to reflect an improved understanding of robotic activity. Because of these factors, readers should consider usage information illustrative but subject to change.