La sucralosa promueve la polarización a macrófagos proinflamatorios M1

RESUMEN La sucralosa es un edulcorante no calórico de amplio consumo a nivel mundial, es considerado como un aditivo seguro, debido a que es eliminado en periodos cortos de tiempo. Recientemente se evidenció su bioacumulación en tejido adiposo, donde se encuentran inmersos macrófagos, células del sistema inmune involucradas en el desarrollo de la inflamación sistémica de bajo grado. A la fecha, no se cuenta con suficiente información para demostrar si los edulcorantes potencian los procesos inflamatorios alterando la función de células presentes en tejido y/o contribuyen en el desarrollo de patologías metabólicas. Por lo anterior, en nuestro trabajo se evaluó el efecto de la sucralosa en la viabilidad de los macrófagos diferenciados de la línea celular monocítica THP-1, por azul de tripán y ensayos de MTT, así como su efecto en la polarización M1/M2 por PCR según la expresión de IRF4, IRF5, STAT1, STAT6, perfil de expresión de IL-6, IL-12, TNF-α, TGF-β, IL-10 y SOCS3 por qPCR, y la cuantificación de la quimiocina IP-10 por ELISA. Los resultados indicaron que la sucralosa no tiene efectos citotóxicos, pero disminuye el número de células viables metabólicamente activas determinadas por MTT de manera dependiente de la concentración. La sucralosa incrementa la concentración de la quimiocina IP-10 y la expresión génica del factor de transcripción IRF5 y disminuye la expresión de IRF4 y STAT6, favoreciendo la polarización hacia poblaciones M1. La bioacumulación de sucralosa en tejido adiposo, y su interacción con macrófagos, podría inducir su polarización a M1.

ABSTRACT Sucralose is a non-nutritive sweetener widely consumed worldwide; it is considered a safe additive because it is eliminated quickly. Recently its bioaccumulation in adipose tissue was evidenced, where macrophages, cells of the immune system involved in developing low-grade systemic inflammation, are found. To date, there is a paucity of information regarding whether sweeteners potentiate inflammatory processes by altering the function of cells present in tissue and/or contribute to the development of metabolic pathologies. We evaluate the effect of sucralose on the viability of differentiated macrophages of the monocytic cell line THP-1, by trypan blue and MTT assays, respectively, as well as its effect on M1/ M2 by PCR according to the expression of IRF4, IRF5, STAT1, STAT6, expression profile of IL6, IL-12, TNF-α, TGF-β, IL-10 and SOCS3 by qPCR, and the quantification of the chemokine IP-10 by ELISE. The results indicated that sucralose has no cytotoxic effects but decreases the number of metabolically active viable cells determined by MTT of macrophages in a concentration-dependent manner. Sucralose increased the concentration of the chemokine IP-10 and the gene expression of the transcription factors IRF5 and decreased the expression of IRF4 and STAT 6 gene expression, favoring polarization towards M1 populations. The bioaccumulation of sucralose in adipose tissue, and its interaction with macrophages, could induce its polarization to M1.

Prevalence of Self-Reported Gluten Sensitivity and Adherence to a Gluten-Free Diet in Argentinian Adult Population.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies suggest that the prevalence of wheat/gluten sensitivity and adherence to a gluten-free diet (GFD) are high in Latin population despite a poor diagnosis of celiac disease. However, these prevalence rates still remain unknown in most Latin American countries. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey study was conducted in Santa Fe, Argentina. RESULTS: The estimated self-reported prevalence rates were (95% Confidence Interval [CI]): self-reported gluten sensitivity (SR-GS) 7.61% (6.2-9.2), SR-GS currently following a GFD 1.82% (1.2-2.7), celiac disease 0.58% (0.3-1.2), wheat allergy 0.33% (0.12-0.84), self-reported non-celiac gluten sensitivity (SR-NCGS) 6.28% (5.1-7.8), SR-NCGS currently following a GFD 0.91% (0.5-1.6), and adherence to a GFD 6.37% (5.1-7.9). SR-GS was more common in women (6.0%; p < 0.001) and associated with irritable bowel syndrome (p < 0.001). Among the GFD followers, 71.4% were doing it for reasons other than health-related benefits and 50.6% without medical/dietitian advice. In the non-SR-GS group, the main motivations for following a GFD were weight control and the perception that a GFD is healthier. CONCLUSION: In Argentina, gluten sensitivity is commonly reported and it seems that physicians/gastroenterologists are aware of celiac disease diagnosis. Trustable information about the benefits and potential consequences of following a GFD should be given to the general population.