| Literature DB >> 29088727 |
Xu Tian1, Xiaohui Xu2, Kai Zhang3, Hui Wang2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Previous research indicated that dietary diversity had favorable association with metabolic syndrome (MetS), and it has not been investigated in China.Entities:
Keywords: Pathology Section; age; dietary diversity score; metabolic syndrome; sex
Year: 2017 PMID: 29088727 PMCID: PMC5650282 DOI: 10.18632/oncotarget.20625
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Oncotarget ISSN: 1949-2553
Characteristics of participants by DDS tertiles1 and sexes
| Female | Male | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tertile 1 | Tertile 2 | Tertile 3 | p trend2 | Tertile 1 | Tertile 2 | Tertile 3 | p trend | |
| Number | 700 | 1026 | 622 | 593 | 905 | 462 | ||
| Age(y) | 50.8 ±14.6 | 47.8 ± 14.2 | 47.9 ± 14.2 | <0.001 | 50.5 ± 15.1 | 49.3 ± 14.7 | 48.7 ± 15.8 | 0.047 |
| ln(income)3 | 9.6 ±1.6 | 10.0 ± 1.4 | 10.5 ± 0.9 | <0.001 | 9.8 ± 1.4 | 10.0 ± 1.6 | 10.4 ± 1.07 | <0.001 |
| Educational level(%)4 | ||||||||
| primary | 59 | 46 | 33 | <0.001 | 40 | 33 | 22 | <0.001 |
| middle | 40 | 49 | 55 | 0.001 | 57 | 62 | 64 | 0.237 |
| high | 1 | 5 | 11 | <0.001 | 3 | 5 | 13 | <0.001 |
| Physical activity(%)5 | ||||||||
| light | 40 | 54 | 75 | <0.001 | 31 | 42 | 59 | <0.001 |
| middle | 13 | 11 | 12 | 0.612 | 14 | 18 | 20 | 0.030 |
| heavy | 47 | 35 | 13 | <0.001 | 55 | 40 | 21 | <0.001 |
| Smoking(%) | 4 | 3 | 2 | 0.033 | 59 | 57 | 56 | 0.607 |
| Drinking(%) | 6 | 9 | 11 | 0.003 | 58 | 64 | 66 | 0.186 |
| Rural (%) | 82 | 73 | 45 | <0.001 | 82 | 73 | 50 | <0.001 |
| North(%) | 47 | 36 | 48 | 0.914 | 45 | 33 | 50 | 0.491 |
| BMI | 23.2±3.6 | 23.2±3.4 | 23.1±3.3 | 0.776 | 22.7±3.2 | 23.1±3.3 | 23.4±3.4 | 0.001 |
| BMI≥28(%) | 11 | 9 | 8 | 0.138 | 5 | 7 | 8 | 0.110 |
1. Tertile cut-points of DDS are as follows: 1st, ≤3; 2nd, 4; 3rd, 5-6. Continuous variables are presented as mean ± SD and categorical variables are presented as percentages.
2. P trend was analyzed by chi-square trends analysis.
3. ln(income) means logarithm of income per capita.
4. Education level (primary school education, middle school education, or above high school education).
5. Physical activity (according to the occupation type, ranging from 1 to 5; this classification conforms to the original data from the CHNS: 1 = very light physical activity, working in a sitting position [e.g., office worker or watch repairer]; 2 = light physical activity, working in a standing position [e.g., sales person or teacher]; 3 = moderate physical activity [e.g., student or driver]; 4 = heavy physical activity [e.g., farmer or dancer]; and 5 = very heavy physical activity [e.g., loader, logger, or miner]; 1 and 2 are classified as light activity, 3 are classified as moderate activity, 4 and 5 are classified as heavy activity).
Dietary intake and metabolic risk factors of participants by DDS tertiles1 and sexes
| Female | Male | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tertile 1 | Tertile 2 | Tertile 3 | p trend2 | Tertile 1 | Tertile 2 | Tertile 3 | p trend | |
| Number | 700 | 1026 | 622 | 593 | 905 | 462 | ||
| Nutrients | ||||||||
| Total energy (kcal/day) | 1848±554 | 2007±578 | 1967±525 | <0.001 | 2182±622 | 2378±655 | 2344±626 | <0.001 |
| Carbonhydrate (g/day) | 280±97 | 274±95 | 257±83 | <0.001 | 330±112 | 320±101 | 302±92 | <0.001 |
| Protein (g/day) | 51±16 | 63±20 | 66±18 | <0.001 | 60±18 | 74±22 | 77±23 | <0.001 |
| Fat (g/day) | 58±30 | 73±32 | 75±29 | <0.001 | 65±32 | 84±38 | 89±38 | <0.001 |
| Foods(g/day) | ||||||||
| Grain | 369±143 | 340±131 | 304±121 | <0.001 | 437±159 | 406±147 | 366±147 | <0.001 |
| Vegetables | 288±148 | 307±141 | 286±133 | 0.910 | 320±156 | 326±149 | 304±136 | 0.105 |
| Fruit | 7±37 | 29±73 | 143±99 | <0.001 | 7±39 | 17±55 | 133±104 | <0.001 |
| Meat | 57±79 | 121±87 | 142±82 | <0.001 | 77±100 | 144±92 | 162±95 | <0.001 |
| Dairy | 0±3 | 1±17 | 42±76 | <0.001 | 0±4 | 1±15 | 33±68 | <0.001 |
| Bean | 39±58 | 91±70 | 104±66 | <0.001 | 39±62 | 101±74 | 115±74 | <0.001 |
| Mets Markers | ||||||||
| Waist circumference | 81±10 | 80±10 | 80±10 | 0.007 | 83±10 | 83±10 | 85±10 | 0.001 |
| Serum triglyceride | 132±103 | 127±90 | 126±90 | 0.220 | 137±117 | 155±149 | 167±171 | 0.001 |
| HDL-C | 58±17 | 57±14 | 58±14 | 0.600 | 55±15 | 55±18 | 51±16 | 0.001 |
| Fasting blood glucose | 95±22 | 93±19 | 92±14 | 0.076 | 96±22 | 96±24 | 96±25 | 0.448 |
| Systolic blood pressure | 121±17 | 119±17 | 119±16 | 0.032 | 124±16 | 124±16 | 122±15 | 0.210 |
| Diastolic blood pressure | 78±10 | 77±10 | 78±10 | 0.154 | 81±10 | 81±11 | 81±10 | 0.454 |
| MetS3 (%) | 19 | 17 | 16 | 0.236 | 9 | 11 | 14 | 0.031 |
| Abdominal adiposity (%) | 24 | 20 | 20 | 0.165 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 0.684 |
| High serum triglyceride level (%) | 26 | 26 | 25 | 0.562 | 28 | 34 | 35 | 0.060 |
| Low HDL-C (%) | 31 | 34 | 28 | 0.433 | 11 | 15 | 22 | <0.001 |
| Abnormal glucose homeostasis (%) | 24 | 22 | 20 | 0.164 | 24 | 26 | 24 | 0.942 |
| Elevated blood pressure (%) | 34 | 27 | 28 | 0.085 | 41 | 40 | 39 | 0.657 |
1. Tertile cut-points of DDS are as follow: 1st, ≤ 3; 2nd, 4; 3rd, 5-6. Continuous variables are presented as mean ± SD and categorical variables are presented as percentages.
2. P trend was analyzed by chi-square trends analysis.
3. MetS was defined as the presence of three or more of the following components: (1) abdominal adiposity (WC ≥102 cm in men and ≥ 88 cm in women; (2) low serum HDL-cholesterol < 40 mg/dL for men and <50 mg/dL for women); (3) high serum triglyceride levels (<150 mg/dL); (4) elevated blood pressure (SBP ≥130mmHg or DBP ≥ 85 mmHg); and (5) abnormal glucose homeostasis (fasting plasma glucose level ≥100 mg/dL).
Multivariable adjusted1 association between MetS at DDS tertiles
| Total population ( | Female ( | Male ( | |
|---|---|---|---|
| DDS1(referent) | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| DDS2(ORs) | 1.081(0.876, 1.334)2 | 0.998(0.759, 1.287) | 1.323(0.921, 1.899) |
| DDS3(ORs) | 1.013(0.780, 1.315) | 0.868(0.622, 1.210) | 1.386(0.903, 2.128) |
| Female(ORs) | 1.537(1.178, 2.004) | ||
| Age(ORs) | 1.154(1.107, 1.203) | 1.181(1.113, 1.252) | 1.152(1.080, 1.230) |
| Square of age(ORs) | 0.999(0.998, 0.999) | 0.999(0998, 0.999) | 0.999(0.998, 0.999) |
1 Adjusted for age, square of age, educational level (primary, middle and high), ln (income), smoking (current smoking or no), drinking (current drink or no) , physical activity (light, moderate and heavy), localization (urban or rural; north or south), total energy intake and fat share. For total population regression, sex was added in addition.
2 Values are ORs (95%CI) unless otherwise indicated.
Figure 1Association between predicted probability of having metabolic syndrome and age
Left panel: association between predicted probability of having MetS and age in total population: the solid black line indicates the fitted probability of having metabolic syndrome at different age, the two gray dash lines indicate the 95% CI of fitted probability. Right panel: association between predicted probability of having MetS and age in female and male: the thick solid gray line indicates the fitted probability of having MetS at different age in female, and the two thin solid gray lines indicate the 95% CI of fitted probability of female; the thick dash black line indicates the fitted probability of having MetS at different age in male, and the two thin black dash lines indicate the 95% CI of fitted probability of male; The two vertical black dash lines divided participants into three groups: young: ≥18 & ≤45; adult: >45 & ≤60; old: >60). Adjusted for age, square of age, educational level (primary, middle and high), logarithm of income, smoking (yes/no), drinking (current drink or no), physical activity (light, moderate and heavy), localization (urban or rural; north or south), total energy intake and fat share. For total population regression, sex was also added as covariates.
Figure 2Real prevalence of having metabolic syndrome at each age group
Left panel: prevalence of MetS at each age group for male. Right panel: prevalence of MetS at each age group for female. The Boxes are the 75th and 25th percentiles, and the white line within the box is the median value. Two gray horizontal lines refer to the upper and lower adjacent values. The upper adjacent value = 75th percentile+1.5×(75th percentile-25th percentile), and the lower adjacent value = 25th percentile-1.5×(75th percentile-25th percentile). Outside values, which are defined as those greater than the upper adjacent value or smaller than the lower adjacent value, are excluded from the box graph.
Multivariable1 adjusted analysis of the association between DDS and MetS and its components for each age group
| Indices | Female | Male | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DDS1 | DDS2 | DDS3 | P trend | DDS1 | DDS2 | DDS3 | P trend | ||
| MetS2 | Young3 | 1 | 0.50(0.34, 0.74)6 | 0.37(0.22, 0.64) | 0.000 | 1 | 1.17(0.73, 1.88) | 1.05(0.59, 1.89) | 0.731 |
| Adult4 | 1 | 1.31(0.96, 1.79) | 1.02(0.68, 1.53) | 0.564 | 1 | 1.59(1.04, 2.44) | 2.18(1.30, 3.65) | 0.002 | |
| Old5 | 1 | 1.18(0.80, 1.76) | 1.69(1.05, 2.72) | 0.030 | 1 | 1.18(0.69, 2.02) | 0.85(0.42, 1.73) | 0.870 | |
| Component of metabolic syndrome | |||||||||
| High serum TGs | Young | 1 | 0.64(0.47, 0.87) | 0.52(0.35, 0.80) | 0.000 | 1 | 1.25(0.93, 1.68) | 1.20(0.82, 1.74) | 0.214 |
| Adult | 1 | 1.25(0.94, 1.66) | 1.43(1.01, 2.01) | 0.030 | 1 | 1.56(1.17, 2.08) | 1.30(0.89, 1.91) | 0.032 | |
| Old | 1 | 1.37(0.96, 1.95) | 1.06 (0.67, 1.68) | 0.364 | 1 | 0.71(0.47, 1.06) | 0.71(0.44, 1.16) | 0.076 | |
| Low HDL | Young | 1 | 1.10(0.84, 1.44) | 0.83(0.59, 1.17) | 0.444 | 1 | 2.05(1.38, 3.30) | 2.89(1.85, 4.52) | 0.000 |
| Adult | 1 | 1.24(0.95, 1.63) | 0.82(0.58, 1.16) | 0.624 | 1 | 1.42(0.95, 2.11) | 2.00(1.24, 3.24) | 0.004 | |
| Old | 1 | 1.05(0.74, 1.49) | 0.74 (0.47, 1.17) | 0.333 | 1 | 0.59(0.33, 1.06) | 1.03(0.56, 1.90) | 0.618 | |
| Abdominal adiposity | Young | 1 | 0.49(0.34, 0.70) | 0.46(0.29, 0.74) | 0.000 | 1 | 0.74(0.30, 1.84) | 0. 74(0.26, 2.14) | 0.529 |
| Adult | 1 | 1.20(0.89, 1.62) | 1.03(0.70, 1.51) | 0.621 | 1 | 1.29(0.61, 2. 74) | 0.72(0.25, 2.10) | 0.737 | |
| Old | 1 | 1.26(0.86, 1.86) | 1.80(1.15, 2.82) | 0.009 | 1 | 0.33(0.07, 1.46) | 0.20(0.03, 1.54) | 0.060 | |
| Elevated blood pressure | Young | 1 | 0.41(0.30, 0.57) | 0.26(0.17, 0.41) | 0.000 | 1 | 0.49(0.36, 0.66) | 0.51(0.34, 0.76) | 0.000 |
| Adult | 1 | 1.00(0.75, 1.31) | 1.18(0.84, 1.65) | 0.432 | 1 | 1.08(0.81, 1.43) | 1.21(0.83, 1.77) | 0.315 | |
| Old | 1 | 1.54(1.09, 2.19) | 2. 62(1.67, 4.09) | 0.000 | 1 | 2.49(1.76, 3.53) | 1.54(1.00, 2.35) | 0.000 | |
| Impaired fasting glucose | Young | 1 | 0.47(0.33, 0.67) | 0.37(0.23, 0.59) | 0.000 | 1 | 0.71(0.50, 1.00) | 0.63(0.41, 0.98) | 0.018 |
| Adult | 1 | 1.32(0.98, 1.78) | 1.31(0.91, 1.90) | 0.071 | 1 | 1.29(0.95, 1.75) | 1.29(0.86, 1.94) | 0.113 | |
| Old | 1 | 1.36(0.95, 1.96) | 1.50(0.95, 2.38) | 0.035 | 1 | 1.35(0.93, 1.97) | 1.04(0.65, 1.68) | 0.442 | |
1 Adjusted for educational level (primary, middle and high), logarithm of income, smoking (yes/no), drinking (current drink or no) , physical activity (light, moderate and heavy), localization (urban or rural; north or south), total energy intake and fat share.
2 Metabolic syndrome was defined as the presence of three or more of the following components: (1) abdominal adiposity (WC ≥ 102 cm in men and ≥ 88 cm in women; (2) low serum HDL-cholesterol <40 mg/dL for men and <50 mg/dL for women); (3) high serum triglyceride levels (<150 mg/dL); (4) elevated blood pressure (SBP ≥130mmHg or DBP ≥ 85 mmHg); and (5)abnormal glucose homeostasis (fasting plasma glucose level ≥100 mg/dL).
3 Young is defined as ≤ 45 y
4 Adult is defined as <45 y and ≤ 60 y
5 Old is defined as <60 y
6 Values are ORs (95%CI) unless otherwise indicated.