Ana F Pina, Maria João Meneses, Fabrizia Carli, Rogério T Ribeiro, Luís Gardete-Correia, José M Boavida, João F Raposo, Amalia Gastaldelli, M Paula Macedo
{"title":"Lipidomic profiling unveils sex differences in diabetes risk: Implications for precision medicine.","authors":"Ana F Pina, Maria João Meneses, Fabrizia Carli, Rogério T Ribeiro, Luís Gardete-Correia, José M Boavida, João F Raposo, Amalia Gastaldelli, M Paula Macedo","doi":"10.1111/eci.70137","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims/hypothesis: </strong>Type 2 diabetes is a multifactorial condition whose greatest impact comes from its complications. We hypothesized that distinct insulin-derived mechanisms and lipid profiles discriminate sex differences and can be used to identify subjects at higher risk to develop diabetes-related complications.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The PREVADIAB2 study evaluated metabolic alterations after 5 years in individuals initially free of Type 2 Diabetes (PREVADIAB1). In this analysis, 953 participants were stratified into clusters using hierarchical clustering based on insulinogenic index (IGI), fasting insulin secretion rate, HOMA-IR, and fasting insulin clearance. A subset of participants (n = 488) had their lipidome assessed using LC/MS-QTOF.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Four clusters were identified: Liver Sensitive (LS), Pancreas Glucose Sensitive (PGS), Insulin Deficient (ID), and Insulin Resistant (IR), each with distinct dysglycemia risk. While metabolic features were similar across sexes, the parameter thresholds differed, resulting in sex-specific lipidomic profiles. Women exhibited higher levels of circulating dihydroceramides (5.3 ± 1.9 vs. 4.7 ± 1.8, p < .001), associated with de novo ceramide synthesis, and elevated sphingomyelins (SM), suggesting altered lipid metabolism. Conversely, the ceramide-to-SM ratio was higher in men (1.04 ± .21 vs. .90 ± .18, p < .001). Except for the LS cluster, all other clusters exhibit distinct lipid signatures associated with metabolic dysfunction, further accentuated by specific lipid profile sex differences.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Distinct insulin-related metabolic features and sex identify different phenotypes with distinct lipidome profiles, highlighting the need to place prediabetes in a broader context of metabolism beyond glucose.</p>","PeriodicalId":12013,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Clinical Investigation","volume":" ","pages":"e70137"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Clinical Investigation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/eci.70137","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Aims/hypothesis: Type 2 diabetes is a multifactorial condition whose greatest impact comes from its complications. We hypothesized that distinct insulin-derived mechanisms and lipid profiles discriminate sex differences and can be used to identify subjects at higher risk to develop diabetes-related complications.
Methods: The PREVADIAB2 study evaluated metabolic alterations after 5 years in individuals initially free of Type 2 Diabetes (PREVADIAB1). In this analysis, 953 participants were stratified into clusters using hierarchical clustering based on insulinogenic index (IGI), fasting insulin secretion rate, HOMA-IR, and fasting insulin clearance. A subset of participants (n = 488) had their lipidome assessed using LC/MS-QTOF.
Results: Four clusters were identified: Liver Sensitive (LS), Pancreas Glucose Sensitive (PGS), Insulin Deficient (ID), and Insulin Resistant (IR), each with distinct dysglycemia risk. While metabolic features were similar across sexes, the parameter thresholds differed, resulting in sex-specific lipidomic profiles. Women exhibited higher levels of circulating dihydroceramides (5.3 ± 1.9 vs. 4.7 ± 1.8, p < .001), associated with de novo ceramide synthesis, and elevated sphingomyelins (SM), suggesting altered lipid metabolism. Conversely, the ceramide-to-SM ratio was higher in men (1.04 ± .21 vs. .90 ± .18, p < .001). Except for the LS cluster, all other clusters exhibit distinct lipid signatures associated with metabolic dysfunction, further accentuated by specific lipid profile sex differences.
Conclusions: Distinct insulin-related metabolic features and sex identify different phenotypes with distinct lipidome profiles, highlighting the need to place prediabetes in a broader context of metabolism beyond glucose.
目的/假设:2型糖尿病是一种多因素疾病,其最大的影响来自其并发症。我们假设不同的胰岛素衍生机制和脂质谱区分性别差异,并可用于识别糖尿病相关并发症的高风险受试者。方法:PREVADIAB2研究评估了最初无2型糖尿病(PREVADIAB1)个体5年后的代谢改变。在这项分析中,953名参与者使用基于胰岛素生成指数(IGI)、空腹胰岛素分泌率、HOMA-IR和空腹胰岛素清除率的分层聚类方法进行分组。一部分参与者(n = 488)使用LC/MS-QTOF评估了他们的脂质组。结果:确定了四组:肝敏感(LS)、胰糖敏感(PGS)、胰岛素缺乏(ID)和胰岛素抵抗(IR),每组都有不同的血糖异常风险。虽然代谢特征在两性之间相似,但参数阈值不同,导致性别特异性脂质组学概况。女性表现出更高的循环二氢神经酰胺水平(5.3±1.9 vs. 4.7±1.8,p)。结论:不同的胰岛素相关代谢特征和性别确定了不同的表型和不同的脂质谱,强调了将糖尿病前期置于葡萄糖代谢以外的更广泛背景下的必要性。
期刊介绍:
EJCI considers any original contribution from the most sophisticated basic molecular sciences to applied clinical and translational research and evidence-based medicine across a broad range of subspecialties. The EJCI publishes reports of high-quality research that pertain to the genetic, molecular, cellular, or physiological basis of human biology and disease, as well as research that addresses prevalence, diagnosis, course, treatment, and prevention of disease. We are primarily interested in studies directly pertinent to humans, but submission of robust in vitro and animal work is also encouraged. Interdisciplinary work and research using innovative methods and combinations of laboratory, clinical, and epidemiological methodologies and techniques is of great interest to the journal. Several categories of manuscripts (for detailed description see below) are considered: editorials, original articles (also including randomized clinical trials, systematic reviews and meta-analyses), reviews (narrative reviews), opinion articles (including debates, perspectives and commentaries); and letters to the Editor.