Pharmacokinetics of Supplemental Omega-3 Fatty Acids Esterified in Monoglycerides, Ethyl Esters, or Triglycerides in Adults in a Randomized Crossover Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Omega-3 (n-3) fatty acid (FA) supplements increase blood concentrations of EPA and DHA. Most of the supplements on the market are esterified in triglycerides (TGs) or ethyl esters (EEs), which limits their absorption and may cause gastrointestinal side effects. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to compare the 24-h AUC of the plasma concentrations of EPA, DHA, and EPA+DHA when provided esterified in monoglycerides (MAGs), EEs, or TGs, (primary outcomes) and evaluate their side effects over 24 h (secondary outcome). METHODS: This was a randomized, triple-blind, crossover, controlled clinical trial. Eleven women and 11 men between 18 and 50 y of age ingested, in random order, a single oral dose of ∼1.2 g of EPA and DHA esterified in MAGs, EEs, and TGs with low-fat meals provided during the 24-h follow-up. Eleven blood samples over 24 h were collected from each participant, and the plasma n-3 FAs were quantified. Friedman's paired ANOVA statistical rank test was used for the pharmacokinetic parameters and a chi-square statistical test was used for the side effects. RESULTS: The 24-h AUC of plasma EPA was ∼2 times and ∼1 time higher after the MAG compared with the EE and TG forms of n-3 FAs, respectively (P ≤ 0.0027). Effects of the EE and TG treatments did not differ. The 3 supplements had similar eructation, dysgeusia, abdominal discomfort, nausea, and bloating side effects. CONCLUSIONS: The plasma n-3 FA concentration in adults is greater after acute supplementation with n-3 FAs esterified in MAGs rather than in EEs or TGs, suggesting that with a lower dose of MAG n-3 FAs, the plasma n-3 FA concentrations attained are similar to those after higher doses of n-3 FAs esterified in EEs or TGs. This trial is registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as NCT03897660.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".