Associations of resting and peak fat oxidation with sex hormone profile and blood glucose control in middle-aged women
Karppinen, Jari E.; Juppi, Hanna-Kaarina; Hintikka, Jukka; Wiklund, Petri; Haapala, Eero A.; Hyvärinen, Matti; Tammelin, Tuija H.; Aukee, Pauliina; Kujala, Urho M.; Laukkanen, Jari; Laakkonen, Eija K. (2022)
Elsevier
2022
Julkaisun pysyvä osoite on
https://urn.fi/URN:NBN:fi-fe2023030329571
https://urn.fi/URN:NBN:fi-fe2023030329571
Tiivistelmä
Background and aims: Menopause may reduce fat oxidation. We investigated whether sex hormone profile explains resting fat oxidation (RFO) or peak fat oxidation (PFO) during incremental cycling in middle-aged women. Secondarily, we studied associations of RFO and PFO with glucose regulation.
Method and results: We measured RFO and PFO of 42 women (age 52–58 years) with indirect calorimetry. Seven participants were pre- or perimenopausal, 26 were postmenopausal, and nine were postmenopausal hormone therapy users. Serum estradiol (E2), follicle-stimulating hormone, progesterone, and testosterone levels were quantified with immunoassays. Insulin sensitivity (Matsuda index) and glucose tolerance (area under the curve) were determined by glucose tolerance testing. Body composition was assessed with dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry; physical activity with self-report and accelerometry; and diet, with food diaries. Menopausal status or sex hormone levels were not associated with the fat oxidation outcomes. RFO determinants were fat mass (β = 0.44, P = 0.006) and preceding energy intake (β = −0.40, P = 0.019). Cardiorespiratory fitness (β = 0.59, P = 0.002), lean mass (β = 0.49, P = 0.002) and physical activity (self-reported β = 0.37, P = 0.020; accelerometer-measured β = 0.35, P = 0.024) explained PFO. RFO and PFO were not related to insulin sensitivity. Higher RFO was associated with poorer glucose tolerance (β = 0.52, P = 0.002).
Conclusion: Among studied middle-aged women, sex hormone profile did not explain RFO or PFO, and higher fat oxidation capacity did not indicate better glucose control.
Method and results: We measured RFO and PFO of 42 women (age 52–58 years) with indirect calorimetry. Seven participants were pre- or perimenopausal, 26 were postmenopausal, and nine were postmenopausal hormone therapy users. Serum estradiol (E2), follicle-stimulating hormone, progesterone, and testosterone levels were quantified with immunoassays. Insulin sensitivity (Matsuda index) and glucose tolerance (area under the curve) were determined by glucose tolerance testing. Body composition was assessed with dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry; physical activity with self-report and accelerometry; and diet, with food diaries. Menopausal status or sex hormone levels were not associated with the fat oxidation outcomes. RFO determinants were fat mass (β = 0.44, P = 0.006) and preceding energy intake (β = −0.40, P = 0.019). Cardiorespiratory fitness (β = 0.59, P = 0.002), lean mass (β = 0.49, P = 0.002) and physical activity (self-reported β = 0.37, P = 0.020; accelerometer-measured β = 0.35, P = 0.024) explained PFO. RFO and PFO were not related to insulin sensitivity. Higher RFO was associated with poorer glucose tolerance (β = 0.52, P = 0.002).
Conclusion: Among studied middle-aged women, sex hormone profile did not explain RFO or PFO, and higher fat oxidation capacity did not indicate better glucose control.