Study2015

A red meat-derived glycan promotes inflammation and cancer progression

Samraj AN, Pearce OM, Läubli H, Crittenden AN, Bergfeld AK, Banda K, Gregg CJ, Bingman AE, Secrest P, Diaz SL, Varki NM, Varki A

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 297 citations

How it was studied

Design
Animal study (classified by our AI screen)
Studied in
Animals
Main outcome
Clinical events such as disease or death

Who paid for it

Funding
Independent funding
Government
National Science Foundation
Nonprofit
Ellison Medical Foundation
Nonprofit
Cancer Research Institute
University or hospital
Harvard University
University or hospital
University of Cambridge
Government
Schweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung
Government
National Institutes of Health
Government
National Cancer Institute
Government
National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases
Government
NIH HHS
Government
NIDDK NIH HHS
Government
NCI NIH HHS
Government
HHS | NIH | National Cancer Institute
Grants
National Cancer Institute (R01 CA 38701); National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (T32 DK 069263); National Cancer Institute (R01 CA038701); National Institutes of Health (P51‐OD011132); National Institutes of Health (R01 CA38701)

Based on 13 listed funder(s).

Publication

Published
2014-12-29 · Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A · vol. 112 · issue 2 · pp. 542–547
Publisher
National Academy of Sciences
Cited
408 citations · more than 100% of similar papers · 45.1× the field average
Impact
Top 10% most cited in its field
References
68 works
Access
Free to read
Research areas
Milk Quality and Mastitis in Dairy Cows · melanin and skin pigmentation · Glycosylation and Glycoproteins Research
Keywords
Inflammation, Red meat, Sialic acid, Cancer, Biology, Immunology, Medicine, Internal medicine, Food science, Biochemistry
MeSH
animals, mice, congenic, mice, inbred c57bl, mice, knockout, humans, mice, liver neoplasms, experimental, disease progression, inflammation, neuraminic acids, n-acetylneuraminic acid, mixed function oxygenases, antibodies, blocking, risk factors, food analysis, meat, male

12 authors

From US

  • Annie N. SamrajUniversity of California San Diego
  • Oliver M.T. PearceUniversity of California San Diego
  • Heinz Philipp LaubliUniversity of California San Diego
  • Alyssa N. CrittendenUniversity of California San Diego
  • Anne K. BergfeldUniversity of California San Diego
  • Kalyan BandaUniversity of California San Diego

Abstract

A well known, epidemiologically reproducible risk factor for human carcinomas is the long-term consumption of "red meat" of mammalian origin. Although multiple theories have attempted to explain this human-specific association, none have been conclusively proven. We used an improved method to survey common foods for free and glycosidically bound forms of the nonhuman sialic acid N-glycolylneuraminic acid (Neu5Gc), showing that it is highly and selectively enriched in red meat. The bound form of Neu5Gc is bioavailable, undergoing metabolic incorporation into human tissues, despite being a foreign antigen. Interactions of this antigen with circulating anti-Neu5Gc antibodies could potentially incite inflammation. Indeed, when human-like Neu5Gc-deficient mice were fed bioavailable Neu5Gc and challenged with anti-Neu5Gc antibodies, they developed evidence of systemic inflammation. Such mice are already prone to develop occasional tumors of the liver, an organ that can incorporate dietary Neu5Gc. Neu5Gc-deficient mice immunized against Neu5Gc and fed bioavailable Neu5Gc developed a much higher incidence of hepatocellular carcinomas, with evidence of Neu5Gc accumulation. Taken together, our data provide an unusual mechanistic explanation for the epidemiological association between red meat consumption and carcinoma risk. This mechanism might also contribute to other chronic inflammatory processes epidemiologically associated with red meat consumption.

Abstract via Europe PMC. Copyright remains with the authors or publisher.

Community trust

Loading…

How much do you trust this study's findings?

0 · not at all10 · completely

Comments

Sign in to rate, comment on or flag this study.Sign in

Something wrong here?

Flag this study if its information, labels or funding look wrong. An editor reviews every flag.

Sign in to rate, comment on or flag this study.Sign in

Educational information about published research. Not medical advice, and not a recommendation to start or stop anything.