Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-2xdlg Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-23T23:15:08.600Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Uptake of exogenous and endogenous eicosapentaenoic acid by cultured human mononuclear cells

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2007

M. J. Gibney  and
Aedeen Connolly
M. J. Gibney
Affiliation:
Division of Nutritional Sciences, Department of Clinical Medicine, Trinity College Medical School, St. James's Hospital, Dublin 8, Irish Republic
Aedeen Connolly
Affiliation:
Division of Nutritional Sciences, Department of Clinical Medicine, Trinity College Medical School, St. James's Hospital, Dublin 8, Irish Republic
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

1. Peripheral blood mononuclear cells from eight healthy volunteers were cultured, with or without concanavalin A (Con A), in a medium containing (ml/1) 100 normal autologous serum, 100 experimental autologous serum or 100 heterologous (fetal calf) serum.

2. The control and experimental autologous sera were obtained from the volunteers, before and after 15 d supplementation with 15 g fish oil (MaxEPA)/d to provide 1.5 g eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA; 20:5n-3)/d. The sera were frozen at -20°. The level of EPA increased from trace quantities in the control autologous serum to 14.3% w/w free fatty acids and between 6.9 and 8.1% w/w lipoprotein phospholipids in the experimental autologous serum. The heterologous fetal calf serum was enriched with EPA, complexed with bovine serum albumin, to provide a final concentration of 15μg/ml. All culture medium contained 10 ml fresh autologous serum/l and cells were obtained from the volunteers for the culture studies about 60 d after the end of EPA supplementation.

3. Portions of cells were removed from culture at 36, 48 and 72 h for phospholipid fatty acid analysis.

4. The level of EPA in phospholipids of cells cultured with exogenous EPA in fetal calf serum was increased significantly (P < 0.05) at all sampling times, both with and without Con A. By 48 h the levels had peaked at 15.8 (se 2.7) and 18.4 (se 4.5) % w/w respectively.

5. Resting cells, i.e. with no Con A present, failed to accumulate EPA when cultured in the experimental autologous serum containing 8.6% w/w total lipids as endogenous EPA. When cells were stimulated to divide by the mitogen Con A, there was a gradual increase in phospholipid EPA levels of mononuclear cells cultured with experimental autologous serum containing endogenous EPA. The maximum level obtained was at 72 h (7.2 (se 2.7)).

6. In a separate experiment, the effect of Con A at increasing doses (0, 1,5, 10 and 20 μg, final concentration) on lymphocyte blastogenesis was determined by estimating the incorporation of 3[H]thymidine. No significant effects due to serum in the culture medium were observed.

Type
Clinical and Human Nutrition Papers: Studies in Man
Information
British Journal of Nutrition , Volume 60 , Issue 1 , July 1988 , pp. 13 - 20
Copyright
Copyright © The Nutrition Society 1988

References

Abumrad, N. A., Park, J. H. & Park, C. R. (1984) Journal of Biological Chemistry 259, 8945–8953.Google Scholar
Buttke, T. M. & Cuchens, M. A. (1984) Immunology 53, 507–511.Google Scholar
Chambaz, J., Guillouzo, A., Cardot, P., Pepin, D. & Bereziat, G. (1986) Biochimica et Biophysica Acta 878, 310–319.Google Scholar
Cunnane, S. C., Keeling, P. W. N., Thompson, R. P. H. & Crawford, M. A. (1984) British Journal of Nutrition 51, 209–217.Google Scholar
Cuthbert, J. A., East, C. A., Bilheimer, D. W. & Lipsky, P. E. (1986) New England Journal of Medicine 314, 879–883.Google Scholar
Demacker, P. N., Van Sommeren-Fondag, D. F., Statenhoif, A. F., Stuyt, P. M. & Van't Laor, A. (1983) Clinical Chemistry 29, 563–565.Google Scholar
Goldstein, J. L., Helegeson, J. A. S. & Brown, M. S. (1978) Journal of Biological Chemistry 254, 3403–3409.Google Scholar
Gurr, M. I. (1983) Progress in Lipid Research 22, 257–287.Google Scholar
Herold, P. S. & Kinsella, J. E. (1986) American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 43, 566–598.Google Scholar
Hornstra, G. (1985) Proceedings of the Nutrition Society 44, 371–378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lagarde, M., Drouot, B., Guichardant, M. & Dechavanne, M. (1985) Biochimica et Biophysica Acta 833, 52–58.Google Scholar
Loomis, R. J., Marshall, L. A. & Johnston, P. V. (1983) American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 113, 1292–1298.Google Scholar
Magrum, L. J. & Johnston, P. V. (1985) Biochimica et Biophysica Acta 836, 354–360.Google Scholar
Marshall, L. A. & Johnston, P. V. (1982) Lipids 17, 905–913.Google Scholar
Marshall, L. A. & Johnston, P. V. (1983) Lipids 18, 737–742.Google Scholar
Morisaki, N., Kanzaki, T., Fujiyama, Y., Osawa, I., Shirai, K., Matsouka, N., SaitoY., Y., & Yoshida, S. (1985) Journal of Lipid Research 26, 930–939.Google Scholar
Morita, I., Saito, Y., Chang, W. C. & Murota, S. (1983) Lipids 18, 42–49.Google Scholar
Mulder, E. & Van Deenen, L. L. M. (1965) Biochimica et Biophysica Acta 106, 106–114.Google Scholar
Reed, C. F., Murphy, M. & Roberts, G. (1968) Journal of Clinical Investigation 14, 749–760.Google Scholar
Sakagrami, T., Minari, O. & Orii, T. (1965) Biochimica et Biophysica Acta 98, 111–118.Google Scholar
Salmon, J. A. & Terano, T. (1985) Proceedings of the Nutrition Society 44, 385–389.Google Scholar
Sanders, T. A. B. (1985) Proceedings of the Nutrition Society 44, 391–397.Google Scholar
Scow, R. D. & Blanchette-Mackie, E. J. (1985) Progress in Lipid Research 24, 197–241.Google Scholar
Spector, A. A., Kadyce, T. L., Figard, P. H., Norton, K. C., Hoak, J. D. & Czervionke, R. L. (1983) Journal of Lipid Research 24, 1595–1604.Google Scholar
Spector, A. A., Mathur, S. N., Kaduce, T. L. & Hyman, B. T. (1981) Progress in Lipid Research 19, 155–186.Google Scholar
von Schacky, C., Fisher, S. & Weber, P. C. (1985) Journal of Clinical Investigation 76, 1626–1631.Google Scholar
von Schacky, C. & Weber, P. C. (1985) Journal of Clinical Investigation 76, 2446–2450.Google Scholar