Cited by 69Metabolomics and Mass Spectrometry StudiesNutritional Studies and DietPhytochemicals and Antioxidant Activities

Metabolomic profiling of urine: response to a randomised, controlled feeding study of select fruits and vegetables, and application to an observational study

Open access
May, Damon H., Navarro, Sandi L., Ruczinski, Ingo, Hogan, Jason, Ogata, Yuko, Schwarz, Yvonne, Levy, Lisa, Holzman, Ted +2 more·2013·British Journal Of Nutrition

Abstract

Metabolomic profiles were used to characterise the effects of consuming a high-phytochemical diet compared with a diet devoid of fruits and vegetables (F&V) in a randomised trial and cross-sectional study. In the trial, 8 h fasting urine from healthy men (n 5) and women (n 5) was collected after a 2-week randomised, controlled trial of two diet periods: a diet rich in cruciferous vegetables, citrus and soya (F&V), and a fruit- and vegetable-free (basal) diet. Among the ions found to differentiate the diets, 176 were putatively annotated with compound identifications, with forty-six supported by MS/MS fragment evidence. Metabolites more abundant in the F&V diet included markers of the dietary intervention (e.g. crucifers, citrus and soya), fatty acids and niacin metabolites. Ions more abundant in the basal diet included riboflavin, several acylcarnitines and amino acid metabolites. In the cross-sectional study, we compared the participants based on the tertiles of crucifers, citrus and soya from 3 d food records (n 36) and FFQ (n 57); intake was separately divided into the tertiles of total fruit and vegetable intake for FFQ. As a group, ions individually differential between the experimental diets differentiated the observational study participants. However, only four ions were significant individually, differentiating the third v. first tertile of crucifer, citrus and soya intake based on 3 d food records. One of these ions was putatively annotated: proline betaine, a marker of citrus consumption. There were no ions significantly distinguishing tertiles by FFQ. The metabolomic assessment of controlled dietary interventions provides a more accurate and stronger characterisation of the diet than observational data.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s000711451300127x

Cites

27 of 27 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Using food-frequency questionnaires may directly identify biomarkers of habitual dietary exposure, but their lower accuracy and smaller number of documented foods may limit their usefulness for discovery studies.

    “The use of food-frequency questionnaires may directly lead to the identification of biomarkers of habitual dietary exposure, but the lower accuracy and lower number of foods documented may limit their value for such discovery studies (105).”

    From The food metabolome: a window over dietary exposure (2014) · cites this paper as [105]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [26]Rebouche CJ Carnitine. Modern Nutrition in Health and Disease 2006 10th ed. Philadelphia Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
May, D. H., Navarro, S. L., Ruczinski, I., Hogan, J., Ogata, Y., Schwarz, Y., Levy, L., Holzman, T., McIntosh, M. W., & Lampe, J. W.
Affiliations
  • Fred Hutch Cancer Center (US)
  • Johns Hopkins University (US)
Corresponding author
Lampe, Johanna W.
Venue
British Journal Of Nutrition
Published
2013-05-09
Volume
110
Issue
10
Pages
1760-1770
ISSN
  • 0007-1145 (ISSN-L)
  • 1475-2662
OpenAlex
W2131308179
Cited by
69
References
26
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 4
FWCI
4.18
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • British Journal Of Nutrition (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • M.J. Murdock Charitable Trust
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Cancer Institute (R56 CA70913, R01CA142695, R25 CA 94880, R25CA094880, R56CA070913, P30CA015704)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Metabolomics and Mass Spectrometry Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Nutritional Studies and Diet
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Biochemistry › Phytochemicals and Antioxidant Activities
Keywords
urine metabolomics, dietary intervention, fruit and vegetable intake, cruciferous vegetables, citrus, soybean, proline betaine, dietary biomarkers, fatty acids, acylcarnitines, riboflavin, food frequency questionnaire, 3-day food record
MeSH terms
Adult, Carnitine, Citrus, Cross-Sectional Studies, Diet, Fatty Acids, Feeding Behavior, Female, Fruit, Humans, Ions, Male, Niacin, Proline, Surveys and Questionnaires, Riboflavin, Glycine max, Vegetables, Biomarkers, Nutrition Assessment, Diet Records, Brassicaceae, Metabolomics, Metabolome, Young Adult, Phytochemicals

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review