Dietary glycemic index and load and the risk of type 2 diabetes: A systematic review and updated meta‐analyses of prospective cohort studies

Geoffrey Livesey; Richard Taylor; Helen F Livesey; Anette E Buyken; David J A Jenkins; Livia S A Augustin; John L Sievenpiper; Alan W Barclay; Simin Liu; Thomas M S Wolever; Walter C Willett; Furio Brighenti; Jordi Salas-Salvadó; Inger Björck; Salwa W Rizkalla; Gabriele Riccardi; Carlo La Vecchia; Antonio Ceriello; Antonia Trichopoulou; Andrea Poli; Arne Astrup; Cyril W C Kendall; Marie-Ann Ha; Sara Baer-Sinnott; Jennie Brand-Miller

doi:10.3390/nu11061280

Dietary glycemic index and load and the risk of type 2 diabetes: A systematic review and updated meta‐analyses of prospective cohort studies

Geoffrey Livesey, Richard Taylor, Helen F Livesey, Anette E Buyken, David J A Jenkins, Livia S A Augustin, John L Sievenpiper, Alan W Barclay, Simin Liu, Thomas M S Wolever, Walter C Willett, Furio Brighenti, Jordi Salas-Salvadó, Inger Björck, Salwa W Rizkalla, Gabriele Riccardi, Carlo La Vecchia, Antonio Ceriello, Antonia Trichopoulou, Andrea PoliArne Astrup, Cyril W C Kendall, Marie-Ann Ha, Sara Baer-Sinnott, Jennie Brand-Miller

Institut for Idræt og Ernæring - Fedmeforskning

50 Citationer (Scopus)

44 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Published meta‐analyses indicate significant but inconsistent incident type‐2 diabetes (T2D)‐dietary glycemic index (GI) and glycemic load (GL) risk ratios or risk relations (RR). It is now over a decade ago that a published meta‐analysis used a predefined standard to identify valid studies. Considering valid studies only, and using random effects dose–response meta‐analysis (DRM) while withdrawing spurious results (p < 0.05), we ascertained whether these relations would support nutrition guidance, specifically for an RR > 1.20 with a lower 95% confidence limit >1.10 across typical intakes (approximately 10th to 90th percentiles of population intakes). The combined T2D–GI RR was 1.27 (1.15–1.40) (p < 0.001, n = 10 studies) per 10 units GI, while that for the T2D–GL RR was 1.26 (1.15–1.37) (p < 0.001, n = 15) per 80 g/d GL in a 2000 kcal (8400 kJ) diet. The corresponding global DRM using restricted cubic splines were 1.87 (1.56–2.25) (p < 0.001, n = 10) and 1.89 (1.66–2.16) (p < 0.001, n = 15) from 47.6 to 76.1 units GI and 73 to 257 g/d GL in a 2000 kcal diet, respectively. In conclusion, among adults initially in good health, diets higher in GI or GL were robustly associated with incident T2D. Together with mechanistic and other data, this supports that consideration should be given to these dietary risk factors in nutrition advice. Concerning the public health relevance at the global level, our evidence indicates that GI and GL are substantial food markers predicting the development of T2D worldwide, for persons of European ancestry and of East Asian ancestry.

Originalsprog	Engelsk
Artikelnummer	1280
Tidsskrift	Nutrients
Vol/bind	11
Udgave nummer	6
Antal sider	54
ISSN	2072-6643
DOI	https://doi.org/10.3390/nu11061280
Status	Udgivet - jun. 2019

Emneord

Det Natur- og Biovidenskabelige Fakultet

FN’s Verdensmål

Dette resultat bidrager til følgende verdensmål

Adgang til dokumentet

10.3390/nu11061280Licens: CC BY

Livesey et al_Nutrients_2019_Vol 11(6)_e1280Forlagets udgivne version, 2,64 MBLicens: CC BY
Livesey et al_Nutrients_2019_Vol 11(6)_e1280_(Supplementary material)Forlagets udgivne version, 559 KBLicens: CC BY

Citationsformater

Livesey, G., Taylor, R., Livesey, H. F., Buyken, A. E., Jenkins, D. J. A., Augustin, L. S. A., Sievenpiper, J. L., Barclay, A. W., Liu, S., Wolever, T. M. S., Willett, W. C., Brighenti, F., Salas-Salvadó, J., Björck, I., Rizkalla, S. W., Riccardi, G., La Vecchia, C., Ceriello, A., Trichopoulou, A., ... Brand-Miller, J. (2019). Dietary glycemic index and load and the risk of type 2 diabetes: A systematic review and updated meta‐analyses of prospective cohort studies. Nutrients, 11(6), [1280]. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu11061280

Livesey, G, Taylor, R, Livesey, HF, Buyken, AE, Jenkins, DJA, Augustin, LSA, Sievenpiper, JL, Barclay, AW, Liu, S, Wolever, TMS, Willett, WC, Brighenti, F, Salas-Salvadó, J, Björck, I, Rizkalla, SW, Riccardi, G, La Vecchia, C, Ceriello, A, Trichopoulou, A, Poli, A, Astrup, A, Kendall, CWC, Ha, M-A, Baer-Sinnott, S & Brand-Miller, J 2019, 'Dietary glycemic index and load and the risk of type 2 diabetes: A systematic review and updated meta‐analyses of prospective cohort studies', Nutrients, bind 11, nr. 6, 1280. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu11061280

@article{0e061134fc554653a5cdf0beb598302c,

title = "Dietary glycemic index and load and the risk of type 2 diabetes: A systematic review and updated meta‐analyses of prospective cohort studies",

abstract = "Published meta‐analyses indicate significant but inconsistent incident type‐2 diabetes (T2D)‐dietary glycemic index (GI) and glycemic load (GL) risk ratios or risk relations (RR). It is now over a decade ago that a published meta‐analysis used a predefined standard to identify valid studies. Considering valid studies only, and using random effects dose–response meta‐analysis (DRM) while withdrawing spurious results (p < 0.05), we ascertained whether these relations would support nutrition guidance, specifically for an RR > 1.20 with a lower 95% confidence limit >1.10 across typical intakes (approximately 10th to 90th percentiles of population intakes). The combined T2D–GI RR was 1.27 (1.15–1.40) (p < 0.001, n = 10 studies) per 10 units GI, while that for the T2D–GL RR was 1.26 (1.15–1.37) (p < 0.001, n = 15) per 80 g/d GL in a 2000 kcal (8400 kJ) diet. The corresponding global DRM using restricted cubic splines were 1.87 (1.56–2.25) (p < 0.001, n = 10) and 1.89 (1.66–2.16) (p < 0.001, n = 15) from 47.6 to 76.1 units GI and 73 to 257 g/d GL in a 2000 kcal diet, respectively. In conclusion, among adults initially in good health, diets higher in GI or GL were robustly associated with incident T2D. Together with mechanistic and other data, this supports that consideration should be given to these dietary risk factors in nutrition advice. Concerning the public health relevance at the global level, our evidence indicates that GI and GL are substantial food markers predicting the development of T2D worldwide, for persons of European ancestry and of East Asian ancestry.",

keywords = "Faculty of Science, Glycemic index, Glycemic load, Fietary fiber, Protein, Alcohol, Type 2 diabetes, Cohort studies, Epidemiology, Meta-analysis",

author = "Geoffrey Livesey and Richard Taylor and Livesey, {Helen F} and Buyken, {Anette E} and Jenkins, {David J A} and Augustin, {Livia S A} and Sievenpiper, {John L} and Barclay, {Alan W} and Simin Liu and Wolever, {Thomas M S} and Willett, {Walter C} and Furio Brighenti and Jordi Salas-Salvad{\'o} and Inger Bj{\"o}rck and Rizkalla, {Salwa W} and Gabriele Riccardi and {La Vecchia}, Carlo and Antonio Ceriello and Antonia Trichopoulou and Andrea Poli and Arne Astrup and Kendall, {Cyril W C} and Marie-Ann Ha and Sara Baer-Sinnott and Jennie Brand-Miller",

note = "CURIS 2019 NEXS 194",

year = "2019",

month = jun,

doi = "10.3390/nu11061280",

language = "English",

volume = "11",

journal = "Nutrients",

issn = "2072-6643",

publisher = "M D P I AG",

number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Dietary glycemic index and load and the risk of type 2 diabetes: A systematic review and updated meta‐analyses of prospective cohort studies

AU - Livesey, Geoffrey

AU - Taylor, Richard

AU - Livesey, Helen F

AU - Buyken, Anette E

AU - Jenkins, David J A

AU - Augustin, Livia S A

AU - Sievenpiper, John L

AU - Barclay, Alan W

AU - Liu, Simin

AU - Wolever, Thomas M S

AU - Willett, Walter C

AU - Brighenti, Furio

AU - Salas-Salvadó, Jordi

AU - Björck, Inger

AU - Rizkalla, Salwa W

AU - Riccardi, Gabriele

AU - La Vecchia, Carlo

AU - Ceriello, Antonio

AU - Trichopoulou, Antonia

AU - Poli, Andrea

AU - Astrup, Arne

AU - Kendall, Cyril W C

AU - Ha, Marie-Ann

AU - Baer-Sinnott, Sara

AU - Brand-Miller, Jennie

N1 - CURIS 2019 NEXS 194

PY - 2019/6

Y1 - 2019/6

N2 - Published meta‐analyses indicate significant but inconsistent incident type‐2 diabetes (T2D)‐dietary glycemic index (GI) and glycemic load (GL) risk ratios or risk relations (RR). It is now over a decade ago that a published meta‐analysis used a predefined standard to identify valid studies. Considering valid studies only, and using random effects dose–response meta‐analysis (DRM) while withdrawing spurious results (p < 0.05), we ascertained whether these relations would support nutrition guidance, specifically for an RR > 1.20 with a lower 95% confidence limit >1.10 across typical intakes (approximately 10th to 90th percentiles of population intakes). The combined T2D–GI RR was 1.27 (1.15–1.40) (p < 0.001, n = 10 studies) per 10 units GI, while that for the T2D–GL RR was 1.26 (1.15–1.37) (p < 0.001, n = 15) per 80 g/d GL in a 2000 kcal (8400 kJ) diet. The corresponding global DRM using restricted cubic splines were 1.87 (1.56–2.25) (p < 0.001, n = 10) and 1.89 (1.66–2.16) (p < 0.001, n = 15) from 47.6 to 76.1 units GI and 73 to 257 g/d GL in a 2000 kcal diet, respectively. In conclusion, among adults initially in good health, diets higher in GI or GL were robustly associated with incident T2D. Together with mechanistic and other data, this supports that consideration should be given to these dietary risk factors in nutrition advice. Concerning the public health relevance at the global level, our evidence indicates that GI and GL are substantial food markers predicting the development of T2D worldwide, for persons of European ancestry and of East Asian ancestry.

AB - Published meta‐analyses indicate significant but inconsistent incident type‐2 diabetes (T2D)‐dietary glycemic index (GI) and glycemic load (GL) risk ratios or risk relations (RR). It is now over a decade ago that a published meta‐analysis used a predefined standard to identify valid studies. Considering valid studies only, and using random effects dose–response meta‐analysis (DRM) while withdrawing spurious results (p < 0.05), we ascertained whether these relations would support nutrition guidance, specifically for an RR > 1.20 with a lower 95% confidence limit >1.10 across typical intakes (approximately 10th to 90th percentiles of population intakes). The combined T2D–GI RR was 1.27 (1.15–1.40) (p < 0.001, n = 10 studies) per 10 units GI, while that for the T2D–GL RR was 1.26 (1.15–1.37) (p < 0.001, n = 15) per 80 g/d GL in a 2000 kcal (8400 kJ) diet. The corresponding global DRM using restricted cubic splines were 1.87 (1.56–2.25) (p < 0.001, n = 10) and 1.89 (1.66–2.16) (p < 0.001, n = 15) from 47.6 to 76.1 units GI and 73 to 257 g/d GL in a 2000 kcal diet, respectively. In conclusion, among adults initially in good health, diets higher in GI or GL were robustly associated with incident T2D. Together with mechanistic and other data, this supports that consideration should be given to these dietary risk factors in nutrition advice. Concerning the public health relevance at the global level, our evidence indicates that GI and GL are substantial food markers predicting the development of T2D worldwide, for persons of European ancestry and of East Asian ancestry.

KW - Faculty of Science

KW - Glycemic index

KW - Glycemic load

KW - Fietary fiber

KW - Protein

KW - Alcohol

KW - Type 2 diabetes

KW - Cohort studies

KW - Epidemiology

KW - Meta-analysis

U2 - 10.3390/nu11061280

DO - 10.3390/nu11061280

M3 - Review

C2 - 31195724

SN - 2072-6643

VL - 11

JO - Nutrients

JF - Nutrients

IS - 6

M1 - 1280

ER -

Dietary glycemic index and load and the risk of type 2 diabetes: A systematic review and updated meta‐analyses of prospective cohort studies

Abstract

Emneord

FN’s Verdensmål

Adgang til dokumentet

Fingeraftryk

Citationsformater