| Literature DB >> 28534830 |
Angela J Reeves1, Mark A McEvoy2, Lesley K MacDonald-Wicks3, Daniel Barker4, John Attia5, Allison M Hodge6, Amanda J Patterson7.
Abstract
Total iron intake is not strongly associated with iron stores, but haem iron intake may be more predictive. Haem iron is not available in most nutrient databases, so experimentally determined haem contents were applied to an Australian Food Frequency Questionnaire (FFQ) to estimate haem iron intake in a representative sample of young women (25-30 years). The association between dietary haem iron intakes and incident self-reported diagnosed iron deficiency over six years of follow-up was examined. Haem iron contents for Australian red meats, fish, and poultry were applied to haem-containing foods in the Dietary Questionnaire for Epidemiological Studies V2 (DQESv2) FFQ. Haem iron intakes were calculated for 9076 women from the Australian Longitudinal Study on Women's Health (ALSWH) using the DQESv2 dietary data from 2003. Logistic regression was used to examine the association between haem iron intake (2003) and the incidence of iron deficiency in 2006 and 2009. Multiple logistic regression showed baseline haem iron intake was a statistically significant predictor of iron deficiency in 2006 (Odds Ratio (OR): 0.91; 95% Confidence Interval (CI): 0.84-0.99; p-value: 0.020) and 2009 (OR: 0.89; 95% CI: 0.82-0.99; p-value: 0.007). Using the energy-adjusted haem intake made little difference to the associations. Higher haem iron intake is associated with reduced odds of iron deficiency developing in young adult Australian women.Entities:
Keywords: haem iron; iron deficiency; longitudinal analysis; women’s health
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28534830 PMCID: PMC5452245 DOI: 10.3390/nu9050515
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nutrients ISSN: 2072-6643 Impact factor: 5.717
Iron present in the Dietary Questionnaire for Epidemiological Studies V2 (DQESv2) Food Frequency Questionnaire (FFQ) flesh foods and mixed foods and the intakes of these food items by Australian Longitudinal Study of Women’s Health (ALSWH) young cohort women in the study sample at survey three (baseline).
| Flesh Food or Mixed Food (FFQ) | Total Iron (mg/100 g) | Haem Iron (mg/100 g) | Median Food Item Intake at Survey Three (g/Day) | Median Haem Iron Intake at Survey Three (mg/Day) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beef | 2.8 | 1.7 | 28 | 0.48 |
| Lamb | 2.4 | 1.4 | 9 | 0.13 |
| Veal | 2.1 | 1.3 | 0 | 0 |
| Pork | 1.4 | 0.9 | 2 | 0.02 |
| Ham | 1.4 | 0.9 | 3 | 0.03 |
| Sausages/Frankfurters | 2.5 | 0.9 | 3 | 0.03 |
| Bacon | 1.1 | 0.7 | 3 | 0.02 |
| Salami | 2.0 | 0.7 | 1 | 0.01 |
| Chicken | 1.2 | 0.7 | 26 | 0.18 |
| Fish; fried | 0.7 | 0.4 | 3 | 0.01 |
| Fish; steamed, grilled, or baked | 0.4 | 0.3 | 9 | 0.03 |
| Fish; canned | 1.4 | 0.3 | 5 | 0.02 |
| Hamburger * | 2.5 | 0.9 | 4 | 0.04 |
| Pizza † | 1.3 | 0.3 | 16 | 0.05 |
| Pies ‡ | 1.2 | 0.2 | 12 | 0.02 |
Total Iron values from the DQESv2 database. Haem iron values generated from Rangan et al.’s experimentally determined haem contents for Australian meat and fish [17]. Food types from Rangan et al. that were used or averaged to determine haem contents (%) of DQESv2 flesh food items were: mince, rump steak, skirt steak, and rib roast for Beef and Veal (62%); chicken breast and thigh for Chicken (62%); lamb chop and lamb leg for Lamb (60.5%); pork chop for Pork (66%); ham for Ham (61%); bacon for Bacon (67%): beef sausage for Sausages or Frankfurters and Salami (36%); Snapper for fried, steamed/grilled/baked Fish (63%); Tuna for Canned fish (18%). For mixed food items, the assumptions and calculations follow: * Hamburger calculations: DQESv2 weight is 190 g, assume 105 g meat patty from the average of burger company websites (iron content from NUTTAB 3.99 mg), 60 g white roll (iron content 0.78 mg), thus iron for the total burger is 4.8 mg (2.5 mg/100 g) and iron from the meat patty is 3.99/4.8 = 83%. Rangan et al. [17] stated that the average of beef mince and sausage equals 42% haem, so the haem iron content of hamburger is (2.5 mg/100 g) × 0.83 × 0.42 = 0.86 mg haem iron/100 g. † Pizza calculations: DQESv2 weight is 278.8 g and total iron is 1.32 mg/100 g. Iron content Pizza base from NUTTAB is 1.3 mg/100 g. Assume the meat on pizza is 1.6 mg/100 g iron (average salami is 2.0 mg/100 g and ham is 1.4 mg/100 g) and assume the crust is 47% of the weight of the pizza (based on carbohydrate content of DQESv2 Pizza and NUTTAB pizza base 25/52.6); thus 1.3 × 0.47 = 0.61 mg iron from crust and 1.3 − 0.61 = 0.69 mg iron from the toppings (assumes all iron from toppings is from the meat, as the iron content of cheese and vegetables is minimal); Average haem iron content for salami (61%) and ham (36%) is 48.5%, thus the haem content of Pizza is 0.69 mg × 0.485 = 0.34 mg/100 g. ‡ Pie calculations: DQESv2 weight is 169.3 g and total iron is 1.21 mg/100 g. The Australian minimum standard for meat content is 25%, but the survey results show up to 38%, so assume 30% meat content. Using 48% haem content for minced beef [17], haem content pie is 1.21 mg × 0.30 × 0.48 = 0.17 mg/100 g.
Figure 1Directed Acyclic Graph (DAG) for the identification of potential confounders. The exposure of interest is haem iron and the outcome of interest is self-reported diagnosed anaemia. The directed acyclic graph makes explicit the causative model we are testing and the relationship of the co-variates. In order to identify confounders, the arrows coming out of haem iron are removed, since these are causative, and any “back door” paths that remain between haem iron and anaemia are identified. The back door paths need not follow the direction of the arrows. Adjusting for a co-variate “closes” the back door path, i.e., removes confounding, assuming that the co-variate is measured without error. A back door path is considered already closed if it passes through a “collider”, i.e., a node with 2 arrows pointing into it. Adjusting for a collider re-opens that path and increases the potential confounding.
Characteristics of young cohort ALSWH women in the study sample at survey three (baseline) and associations with self-reported diagnosed iron deficiency at survey five.
| Characteristic | No | Diagnosis of | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age in years | 27.6 (1.45) | 27.6 (1.45) | 0.271 |
| Mean (SD) | |||
| Individual Income (%) | |||
| <$37,000 annually | 56.2 | 59.1 | |
| >$37,000 annually | 43.8 | 40.9 | 0.144 |
| Highest education level (%) | 33.6 | 29.9 | |
| Year 10 or equivalent, trade/apprenticeship or diploma | 17.5 | 17.8 | |
| Year 12 or equivalent Bachelors or higher degree | 49.0 | 52.3 | 0.124 |
| Body Mass Index (kg/m2) | 24.6 (5.29) | 24.6 (5.58) | 0.787 |
| Mean (SD) | |||
| Haem iron intake (mg/day) | 1.38 (1.21) | 1.26 (1.15) | 0.0001 |
| Median (IQR) | |||
| Heavy menstruation (%) | |||
| Sometimes | 65.5 | 63.5 | |
| Often | 34.5 | 36.5 | 0.637 |
| Alcohol (drinks/week) | 0 (7) | 0 (6) | 0.0257 |
| Median (IQR) * | |||
| Smoking (cigarettes/week) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 0.4754 |
| Median (IQR) * | |||
| Type 2 diabetes (%) | 0.330 | 0.400 | 0.774 |
| Asthma (%) | 9.68 | 12.3 | 0.0260 |
| Hypertension (%) | 1.92 | 2.25 | 0.548 |
| Depression (%) | 11.2 | 12.5 | 0.319 |
SD, standard deviation; IQR, interquartile range. * Reported as whole units.
Haem iron intake measured at survey 3 (baseline) and modelled as a predictor of self-reported diagnosed iron deficiency at survey 4 (2006) and survey 5 (2009) for Australian Longitudinal Study of Women’s Health young cohort women using univariate and multivariate logistic regression.
| Predictor | Unadjusted Odds Ratio | Unadjusted 95% CI ( | Adjusted Odds Ratio * | Adjusted 95% CI ( | Energy-Adjusted Odds Ratio † | Energy-Adjusted 95% CI ( |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Survey 4 | ||||||
| Haem Iron Intake (mg/day) | 0.96 | 0.90, 1.02 (0.172) | 0.91 | 0.84, 0.99 (0.020) | 0.90 | 0.82, 1.00 (0.044) |
| Survey 5 | ||||||
| Haem Iron Intake (mg/day) | 0.95 | 0.89, 1.01 (0.102) | 0.89 | 0.82, 0.97 (0.007) | 0.87 | 0.78, 0.96 (0.007) |
* Adjusted for income, education, smoking, alcohol consumption. † Energy-adjusted haem iron intake using Willet’s residual method [28], adjusted for income, education, smoking, and alcohol consumption.