TABLE 1.
Effect of Methyl Donor–Enriched Diet on Routine Clinical Parameters
| HFD |
MDHFD |
|||
| Control | Alcohol | Control | Alcohol | |
| Steatosis score | 0 | 2.8 ± 0.3a,d | 0 | 0.9 ± 0.4 |
| Inflammation score | 1.7 ± 0.3 | 1.1 ± 0.1 | 1.5 ± 0.3 | 1.2 ± 0.3 |
| Necrosis score | 0.7 ± 0.4 | 1.7 ± 0.3d | 0 | 0 |
| Total pathology score | 2.3 ± 0.6 | 5.6 ± 0.5a,d | 1.5 ± 0.3 | 2.1 ± 0.4 |
| ALT (U/l) | 16 ± 4 | 76 ± 26 | 14 ± 2 | 28 ± 7 |
| BAC (mg/dl) | 24 ± 5 | 194 ± 61a,c | 30 ± 5 | 239 ± 36a,c |
| LAC (μg EtOH/μg protein) | 11 ± 1 | 22 ± 5a,c | 8 ± 1 | 17 ± 2a,c |
| UAC (mg/dl) | 23 ± 9 | 338 ± 102a,c | 20 ± 8 | 175 ± 44a,c |
| Mean daily UAC (mg/dl) | 23 ± 2 | 225 ± 34a,c,d | 16 ± 1 | 123 ± 17a,c |
| BAE rate (mg/kg/h) | ND | 395 ± 89 | ND | 535 ± 111b |
| Terminal body weight (g) | 28 ± 1 | 26 ± 1 | 25 ± 0a | 23 ± 1a,b |
| Terminal liver weight (g) | 1.9 ± 0.1 | 2.3 ± 0.1 | 1.5 ± 0.1a | 1.4 ± 0.0a,b |
| % Liver:body weight | 6.8 ± 0.5 | 8.6 ± 0.4a,c,d | 6.1 ± 0.1 | 6.0 ± 0.2 |
| Proliferation (% BrdU) | 0.1 ± 0.2 | 10.9 ± 5.4a | 3.6 ± 2.4 | 3.8 ± 0.7 |
Notes. Values given are mean ± SEM (n = 5–7). Statistical significance of means was determined using Mann-Whitney rank sum test for histopathology scores, while one-way ANOVA followed by Tukey’ post hoc test were used for all other measurements. Significance (p < 0.05) is indicated in bold and by an asterisk when compared to (a) HFD control, (b) HFD + alcohol, (c) MDHFD, or (d) MDHFD + alcohol. ALT, alanine aminotransferase; BAC, blood alcohol concentration; LAC, liver alcohol concentration; ND, not determined.