Skip to main content
. 2021 Oct 8;8:734847. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2021.734847

Table 1.

Effect of the therapy on clinical, biochemical, thiobarbituric acid reactive substance, Fibroscan® and controlled attenuation parameter assessment among the three study groups.

Variables (M ± SD) NAFLD wild type control group (n. 30) NAFLD wild type treated group (n. 30) NAFLD mutated treated group (n. 32) p-value of the baseline comparison among the groups
Baseline End of treatment p Baseline End of treatment p Baseline End of treatment p
Age (y) 47.9 ± 14.2 / / 45.2 ± 15 / / 47.1 ± 13 / / Mutated vs. WT treated: >0.999
Mutated vs. WT control: >0.999
WT treated vs. WT control: >0.999
Sex (M/F) 15/15 / / 13/17 / / 18/14 / / 0.597
BMI (kg/m2) 28.1 ± 2.7 28.1 ± 2.7 0.827 29.09 ± 3.1 29.06.8 ± 3.1 0.871 30.5 ± 4.1 31.6 ± 3.6 0.062 Mutated vs. WT treated: >0.999
Mutated vs. WT control: 0.108
WT treated vs. WT control: 0.694
WHtR 0.9 ± 0.13 0.91 ± 0.12 0.112 0.96 ± 0.13 0.95 ± 0.12 0.679 1.08 ± 0.25 1.08 ± 0.26 0.372 Mutated vs. WT treated: 0.488
Mutated vs. WT control: 0.005
WT treated vs. WT control: 0.274
Metavir 1.4 ± 0.56 / / 1.46 ± 0.57 / / 1.46 ± 0.67 / / Mutated vs. WT treated: >0.999
Mutated vs. WT control: >0.999
WT treated vs. WT control: >0.999
NAFLD activity score 5.36 ± 1.21 / / 5.46 ± 1.27 / / 5.93 ± 1.16 / / Mutated vs. WT treated: 0.51
Mutated vs. WT control: 0.2
WT treated vs. WT control: >0.999
CAP (dB/m) 271.9 ± 35.8 272.8 ± 36.8 0.373 271.5 ± 51.4 263.9 ± 43.6 0.251 316.7 ± 35.7 305.4 ± 43.4 0.136 Mutated vs. WT treated: 0.0002
Mutated vs. WT control: 0.0002
WT treated vs. WT control: >0.999
Stiffness (kPa) 4.7 ± 1.5 4.9 ± 1.2 0.117 4.3 ± 0.7 4.4 ± 0.7 0.568 4.8 ± 1.5 4.7 ± 1.7 0.893 Mutated vs. WT treated: 0.711
Mutated vs. WT control: >0.999
WT treated vs. WT control: >0.999
SBP (mmHg) 126 ± 14 126 ± 11 0.664 126 ± 13 127 ± 11 0.436 129 ± 15 130 ± 11 0.299 Mutated vs. WT treated: 0.981
Mutated vs. WT control: >0.999
WT treated vs. WT control: >0.999
DBP (mmHg) 74 ± 7 73 ± 5 0.243 75 ± 8 75 ± 7 0.279 76 ± 9 77 ± 8 0.492 Mutated vs. WT treated: >0.999
Mutated vs. WT control: 0.811
WT treated vs. WT control: >0.999
FPG (mg/dl) 99.7 ± 11.7 101 ± 14 0.503 100.3 ± 24.5 89.7 ± 18.5 0.0009 110.9 ± 24 110.9 ± 26.3 0.721 Mutated vs. WT treated: 0.464
Mutated vs. WT control: 0.455
WT treated vs. WT control: >0.999
Insulinemia (μU/ml) 25 ± 9 25.2 ± 9 0.464 25.7 ± 8.8 19.4 ± 9 0.006 26.4 ± 6.2 25.2 ± 6.8 0.447 Mutated vs. WT treated: >0.999
Mutated vs. WT control: 0.505
WT treated vs. WT control: >0.999
HOMA-IR 6.15 ± 2.38 6.33 ± 2.71 0.545 6.59 ± 3.26 4.51 ± 3.13 0.0001 7.35 ± 2.91 7.16 ± 3.46 0.742 Mutated vs. WT treated: >0.999
Mutated vs. WT control: 0.258
WT treated vs. WT control: >0.94
GGT (IU/L) 52 ± 50 58 ± 61 0.161 59 ± 31 57 ± 30 0.281 63 ± 77 64 ± 68 0.657 Mutated vs. WT treated: >0.999
Mutated vs. WT control: >0.999
WT treated vs. WT control: >0.999
AST (IU/L) 31 ± 13 29 ± 16 0.322 34 ± 20 34 ± 14 0.45 39 ± 34 34 ± 31 0.571 Mutated vs. WT treated: >0.999
Mutated vs. WT control: >0.999
WT treated vs. WT control: >0.999
ALT (IU/L) 54 ± 28 56 ± 37 0.81 57 ± 28 34 ± 14 <0.0001 68 ± 32 68 ± 43 0.674 Mutated vs. WT treated: 0.68
Mutated vs. WT control: 0.232
WT treated vs. WT control: >0.999
CRP (mg/dl) 3.26 ± 2.04 3.46 ± 2.36 0.703 3.72 ± 2.67 2.1 ± 2.37 0.0005 4.38 ± 2.28 4.04 ± 2.51 0.814 Mutated vs. WT treated: 0.144
Mutated vs. WT control: 0.041
WT treated vs. WT control: >0.999
TBARS (nmol/μg) 21.12 ± 23.35 23.81 ± 23.01 0.001 22.75 ± 25.91 10.31 ± 8.83 0.002 24.62 ± 15.15 23.25 ± 18.39 0.462 Mutated vs. WT treated: 0.2
Mutated vs. WT control: 0.1
WT treated vs. WT control: >0.999

BMI, body mass index; WHtR, waist-to-height ratio; CAP, controlled attenuation parameter; SBP, systolic blood pressure; DBP, diastolic blood pressure; FPG, fasting plasma glucose; HOMA-IR, homeostatic model assessment for insulin resistance; GGT, gamma-glutamyl transferase; AST, aspartate aminotransferase; ALT, alanine aminotransferase; CRP, C reactive protein; TBARS, thiobarbituric acid reactivesubstance.

For the comparison of the therapeutic outcome in each group for the continuous variables, Wilcoxon signed ranks test and t-test for dependent groups were performed according to non-normal and normal distribution, respectively. The Kruskal-Wallis test or ANOVA test with post-hoc Bonferroni analysis, in the case of non-normal or normal distribution, respectively, were performed to compare the continuous variables among three groups. X2-test was performed to compare sex distribution among the three study groups. The bold was used to indicate significative p values <0.05.