A greater glycemic load reduction was associated with a lower diabetes risk in pre-diabetic patients who consume a high glycemic load diet

Dietary pattern scores in relation to pre-diabetes regression to normal glycemia or progression to type 2 diabetes: a 9-year follow-up

BACKGROUND

We aimed to assess potential associations of habitual dietary pattern scores in relation to the risk of pre-diabetes (Pre-DM) progression to type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) or the chance of returning to normal glycemia.

METHODS

This cohort study included 334 Pre-DM individuals (mean age of 49.4 years, and 51.5% men) who participated in the third phase of the Tehran Lipid and Glucose Study (2006-2008) and followed up for a median of 9 years. A validated food frequency questionnaire at baseline assessed usual intakes of the participants. Major dietary patterns were identified using principal component analysis. The DASH score and Mediterranean diet score (MDS) were also calculated. Multinomial logistic regression analysis was used to estimate the odds ratios (95% confidence intervals (CIs)) of developing T2DM and returning to normal glycemia in relation to dietary pattern scores.

RESULTS

During the study follow-up, 39.8% progressed to T2DM, and 39.8% returned to normal glycemia. Three following major dietary patterns, including Western-style (with a higher load of red meats, hydrogenated fats, sodium, and total fat intakes), healthy pattern (with a higher load of whole grains, vegetables, and dairy products), and processed-foods pattern (with a higher load of processed-meats, fast-foods, salty snakes, and sweets and candies) were identified. The Western-style dietary pattern increased the risk of progressing to T2DM by 38% (OR = 1.38; 95% CI = 1.00 to 1.89, P = 0.050). Other dietary pattern scores were not related to regression or progression from Pre-DM.

CONCLUSION

The Western-style dietary pattern (characterized by higher load of red meats, hydrogenated fats, sodium intake, and high-GI foods) may accelerate the progression of Pre-DM to T2DM.

An optimal glycemic load range is better for reducing obesity and diabetes risk among middle-aged and elderly adults

Background

Due to the lack of evidence, advice pertaining to glycemic load (GL) can be misleading. Does the excessive restriction of GL, mostly through an extreme reduction in carbohydrate intake, result in a relatively high intake of fat and protein and result in overweight and obesity? This study was performed to initially explore the optimal GL range.

Methods

A cross-sectional study involving 2029 participants aged 40 years or older in Guangzhou, China was conducted. Participants were divided into four groups according to cluster analysis. Dietary data were assessed using a previously validated 3-day food record.

Results

Instead of participants with the highest [cluster 1, median (interquartile ranges) GL was 112(107–119)/1000 kcal] and the lowest GL intake [cluster 4, 90(82–96)/1000 kcal], those with moderate GL intakes [clusters 2 and 3, 93(85–102) and 93(85–99)/1000 kcal, respectively] had a lower prevalence of overweight, obesity and diabetes. In addition, clusters 2 and 3 were more consistent with the macronutrient intake reference with adequate micronutrient intake. Therefore, the optimal GL range was determined to be (85–100)/1000 kcal, rather than “lower is better”.

Conclusions

Reducing the GL intake to prevent diabetes deserves more attention in the context of a balanced diet. An appropriate GL may be better than excessive restriction.

The association between glycemic index, glycemic load, and metabolic syndrome: a systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis of observational studies

PURPOSE

The association of glycemic index (GI) and glycemic load (GL) with metabolic syndrome (MetS) is controversial. Therefore, we conducted this first systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis of observational studies to quantify these associations.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library for relevant studies up to 1 April 2019. Summary odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated by a random-effects model. This study was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42019131788).

RESULTS

We included eight high-quality (n = 5) or medium-quality (n = 3) cross-sectional studies in the final meta-analysis, comprising 6058 MetS events and 28,998 participants. The summary ORs of MetS for the highest versus lowest categories were 1.23 (95% CI 1.10-1.38, I² = 0, tau² = 0, n = 5) for dietary GI, 1.06 (95% CI 0.89-1.25, I² = 36.2%, tau² = 0.0151, n = 6) for dietary GL. The summary OR was 1.12 (95% CI 1.00-1.26, I² = 0, tau² = 0, n = 3) per 5 GI units, 0.96 (95% CI 0.83-1.10, I² = 33.4%, tau² = 0.0059, n = 2) per 20 GL units.

CONCLUSIONS

Dietary GI was positively associated with the prevalence of MetS. However, no significant association was found between dietary GL and the prevalence of MetS. Further studies with prospective design are needed to establish potential causal relationship between dietary GI and the MetS.