A Systematic Review of Proteomics in Obesity: Unpacking the Molecular Puzzle

Relatively higher-quality human studies compared with other topics in this database, e.g. multiple RCTs or systematic reviews. This does not mean it is standard or approved care.

• Level A · Stronger Clinical Evidence
• Level B · Emerging clinical evidence with positive signals
• Level C · Early human research exploring benefits
• Level D · Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studies
• Emerging · Emerging topic under active research

Abstract (original English)

Purpose of review The present study aims to review the existing literature to identify pathophysiological proteins in obesity by conducting a systematic review of proteomics studies. Proteomics may reveal the mechanisms of obesity development and clarify the links between obesity and related diseases, improving our comprehension of obesity and its clinical implications. Recent findings Most of the molecular events implicated in obesity development remain incomplete. Proteomics stands as a powerful tool for elucidating the intricate interactions among proteins in the context of obesity. This methodology has the potential to identify proteins involved in pathological processes and to evaluate changes in protein abundance during obesity development, contributing to the identification of early disease predisposition, monitoring the effectiveness of interventions and improving disease management overall. Despite many non-targeted proteomic studies exploring obesity, a comprehensive and up-to-date systematic review of the molecular events implicated in obesity development is lacking. The lack of such a review presents a significant challenge for researchers trying to interpret the existing literature. This systematic review was conducted following the PRISMA guidelines and included sixteen human proteomic studies, each of which delineated proteins exhibiting significant alterations i

Evidence level

Relatively higher-quality human studies compared with other topics in this database, e.g. multiple RCTs or systematic reviews. This does not mean it is standard or approved care.

Browse all related research

Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.