Supplemental Table S2

Supplemental Table 2. Top 10 significantly (p<0.05) enriched Ingenuity Canonical Pathways for the 193 transcripts that were differentially expressed in the HFD:control comparison of liver transcriptomes but not the HFD+DHA:control comparison (total of 24 enriched pathways), and for the 179 transcripts differentially expressed in the HFD+DHA:control comparison of liver transcriptomes, but not the HFD:Control comparison (total of 16 enriched pathways). Transcriptomic analysis was performed on N=4 for each group. Ratio = number of differentially expressed genes/total genes in pathway. Red indicates predicted positive activation of the pathway and upregulation of an individual transcript and blue indicates downregulation.</p

Supplemental Table S5

Supplemental Table 5. Top 10 significantly (p<0.05) enriched Ingenuity Canonical Pathways for the 76 transcripts that were differentially expressed in the HFD:control comparison of skeletal muscle transcriptomes but not the HFD+EPA:control comparison (total of 21 enriched pathways), and for the 216 transcripts differentially expressed in the HFD+EPA:control comparison of skeletal muscle transcriptomes, but not the HFD:Control comparison (total of 116 enriched pathways). Transcriptomic analysis was performed on N=4 for each group. Ratio = number of differentially expressed genes/total genes in pathway. Red indicates predicted positive activation of the pathway and upregulation of an individual transcript and blue indicates downregulation.</p

Supplemental Table S4

Supplemental Table 4. Top 10 significantly (p<0.05) enriched Ingenuity Canonical Pathways for the 152 transcripts that were differentially expressed in the HFD:control comparison of skeletal muscle transcriptomes but not the HFD+DHA:control comparison (total of 59 enriched pathways), and for the 67 transcripts differentially expressed in the HFD+DHA:control comparison of skeletal muscle transcriptomes, but not the HFD:Control comparison (total of 44 enriched pathways). Transcriptomic analysis was performed on N=4 for each group. Ratio = number of differentially expressed genes/total genes in pathway. Red indicates predicted positive activation of the pathway and upregulation of an individual transcript and blue indicates downregulation.</p

Supplemental Table S6

Supplemental Table 6. Top 10 significantly (p-value <0.05) enriched Ingenuity Canonical Pathways in the HFD:HFD+DHA (14 total enriched pathways), the HFD:HFD+EPA (9 enriched pathways), and the HFD+DHA:HFD+EPA (15 enriched pathways) comparisons of liver transcriptomes. Transcriptomic analysis was performed on N=4 for each group. Ratio = number of differentially expressed genes/total genes in pathway. Red indicates predicted positive activation of the pathway and upregulation of an individual transcript in the reference group (listed first) and blue indicates downregulation.</p

Supplemental Table S3

Supplemental Table 3. Top 10 significantly (p<0.05) enriched Ingenuity Canonical Pathways for the 92 transcripts that were differentially expressed in the HFD:control comparison of liver transcriptomes but not the HFD+EPA:control comparison (total of 25 enriched pathways), and for the 264 transcripts differentially expressed in the HFD+EPA:control comparison of liver transcriptomes, but not the HFD:Control comparison (total of 33 enriched pathways). Transcriptomic analysis was performed on N=4 for each group. Ratio = number of differentially expressed genes/total genes in pathway. Red indicates predicted positive activation of the pathway and upregulation of an individual transcript and blue indicates downregulation.</p

Supplemental Table S7

Supplemental Table 7. Top 10 significantly (p-value <0.05) enriched Ingenuity Canonical Pathways in the HFD:HFD+DHA (39 total enriched pathways), the HFD:HFD+EPA (5 total enriched pathways), and the HFD+DHA:HFD+EPA (61 enriched pathways) comparisons of skeletal muscle transcriptomes. Transcriptomic analysis was performed on N=4 for each group. Ratio = number of differentially expressed genes/total genes in pathway. Red indicates predicted positive activation of the pathway and upregulation of an individual transcript and blue indicates downregulation.</p

Supplemental Table S1

Supplemental Table 1. Dietary composition of the purified diets for the control, HFD, HFD+EPA, and HFD+DHA groups

Supplemental File 1: Plasma Metabolites

Comparison of metabolites identified in the plasma of patients with cancer and healthy age-, sex-, and BMI-matched control participants. Fold-change analyses and unpaired t-tests were performed for each identified metabolite to identify differences in the relative abundance of individual metabolites between patients with cancer and control participants. p-values were false discovery rate (FDR)-adjusted to account for multiple comparisons Fold change (FC) analysis is defined as cancer/control, where a negative Log2(FC) indicates lower abundance in patients with cancer

Supplemental Figure 1. Plasma enrichments of stable isotope amino acid tracers

The mean plasma enrichment (MPE) of 13C6 phenylalanine, 13C6 tyrosine, and 15N tyrosine measured by gas chromatography/mass spectrometry (GCMS) in patients with cancer and in healthy age-, sex- and BMI-matched control participants during a primed, continuous infusion of 13C6 phenylalanine and 15N tyrosine.</p

Supplemental Table 1. Estimated food intake based on the VioCare Food Frequency Questionnaire

Estimated food intake for patients with cancer and healthy age-, sex-, and BMI-matched control participants based on the VioCare Food Frequency Questionnaire.</p