Franny Jongbloed

150 CHAPTER 6 age, CMV-seropositivity and gender revealed that CMV-seropositivity was an independent factor for the enhanced CD4 + T-cell differentiation status. For the CD8 + T-cell markers, independent factors were age, CMV-seropositivity as well as gender (Table S1). Table 2. P- values of the different T-cell differentiation markers of the different patient cohorts prior to bariatric surgery Parameter Obesity MetS Age MetS x Age CMV Gender CD4 T-cells 0.73 0.37 0.97 0.25 0.54 0.38 CD4 naive T-cells 0.58 0.76 0.67 0.17 0.15 0.17 CD4 CD31 naive T-cells 0.82 0.84 0.32 0.97 0.19 0.02 ( ↑ ) CD4 memory T-cells 0.26 0.26 0.69 0.65 0.70 0.92 CD4 central-memory T-cells 0.003 ( ↑ ) 0.23 0.98 0.74 0.39 0.34 CD4 effector-memory T-cells 0.20 0.99 0.42 0.84 0.02 ( ↑ ) 0.07 CD4 EMRA T-cells 0.11 0.19 0.24 0.22 0.02 ( ↑ ) 0.008 ( ↑ ) CD4 CD28null memory T-cells 0.16 0.01( ↑ ) 0.64 0.03( ↑ ) <0.001 ( ↑ ) 0.35 CD8 T-cells 0.86 0.11 0.60 0.009( ↓ ) 0.006 ( ↓ ) 0.15 CD8 naive T-cells 0.75 0.85 0.008 ( ↓ ) 0.46 0.34 0.46 CD8 CD31 naive T-cells 0.41 0.92 <0.0001 ( ↓ ) 0.002( ↓ ) 0.82 0.36 CD8 memory T-cells 0.01( ↑ ) 0.004( ↑ ) 0.35 0.02( ↑ ) 0.002( ↑ ) 0.07 CD8 central-memory T-cells 0.39 0.004( ↑ ) 0.93 0.002( ↑ ) 0.15 0.03( ↑ ) CD8 effector-memory T-cells 0.14 0.47 0.50 0.38 0.11 0.80 CD8 EMRA T-cells 0.002( ↑ ) 0.005( ↑ ) 0.27 0.03( ↑ ) 0.001( ↑ ) 0.12 CD8 CD28null memory T-cells 0.57 0.01( ↑ ) 0.15 0.01( ↑ ) <0.001( ↑ ) 0.17 Explanation of group comparisons: Obesity = total obesity group vs. healthy controls; MetS = MetS vs. no MetS; Age = total group >50 years vs. ≤50 years. MetS x Age =MetS group >50 years vs. ≤50 years; CMV = total group CMV vs. no CMV; Gender = total group female vs. male patients. MetS = metabolic syndrome. CMV = cytomegalovirus. Significant comparisons are depicted in bold. Arrows indicate direction of significance. Metabolic syndrome and age affect relative telomere length of T-cells prior to bariatric surgery One-way analysis of variance showed a significant decline in the RTL of CD4 + T-cells in the MetS group ( P= 0.046) (Figure 1A). Individual comparisons revealed that this difference was based on the significant decline in RTL in the MetS group compared to the no MetS group ( P= 0.03). Age did not influence RTL (Figure 1B). In patients ≤50 years, MetS significantly shortened RTL in CD4 + T-cells ( P= 0.04) (Figure 1C). No significance was seen in the group