| Literature DB >> 35405981 |
Gemma Chiva-Blanch1,2, Oriol Giró1,2, Montserrat Cofán1,2, Alfonso L Calle-Pascual3,4, Elías Delgado5,6, Ramon Gomis1,3, Amanda Jiménez1,2, Josep Franch-Nadal3,7, Gemma Rojo Martínez3,8, Emilio Ortega1,2.
Abstract
The identification of nutritional patterns associated with the development of type 2 diabetes (T2D) might help lead the way to a more efficient and personalized nutritional intervention. Our study is aimed at evaluating the association between fatty acids (FA) in red blood cell (RBC) membranes, as a quantitative biomarker of regular dietary fat intake, and incident type 2 diabetes in a Spanish population. We included 1032 adult Spaniards (57% women, age 49 ± 15 years, 18% prediabetes), without diabetes at study entry, from the Di@bet.es cohort. Incident diabetes was diagnosed at the end of the study follow-up. The FA percentage in RBC was determined at baseline by gas chromatography. Participants were followed on average 7.5 ± 0.6 years. Lower percentages of linoleic acid (LA), α-linolenic (ALA), and eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA), and higher percentages of docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) in RBC membranes were associated, independently of classical risk factors, with worse glucose metabolism at the end of the study follow-up. In addition, higher percentages of ALA and EPA, and moderate percentages of DHA, were associated with lower risk of diabetes. No significant associations were found for LA and diabetes risk. Dietary patterns rich in vegetables are independently associated with lower risk of both deterioration of glucose regulation and incident diabetes, and should be reinforced for the prevention of diabetes.Entities:
Keywords: alpha-linolenic acid; fatty acids; linoleic acid; omega-3 fatty acids; type 2 diabetes; worse of glucose metabolism
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35405981 PMCID: PMC9002701 DOI: 10.3390/nu14071368
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nutrients ISSN: 2072-6643 Impact factor: 5.717
Baseline characteristics of the subjects included in the study.
| All ( | Normoglycemia ( | Prediabetes ( |
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Female sex | 596 (57.8) | 488 (57.6) | 108 (58.4) | 0.849 |
| Age, years | 49.41 ± 14.94 | 48.01 ± 14.94 | 55.79 ± 13.25 | <0.0001 |
| Hypertension | 219 (21.2) | 153 (18.1) | 66 (35.7) | <0.0001 |
| Family history of diabetes | 389 (37.7) | 312 (36.8) | 77 (41.6) | 0.004 |
| Dyslipidemia | 340 (32.9) | 265 (31.3) | 75 (40.5) | 0.007 |
| Sedentarism | 75 (7.5) | 52 (6.1) | 23 (12.4) | 0.002 |
| Glucose metabolism category | <0.0001 | |||
| Normoglycemia | 847 (82.1) | 847 (100) | - | |
| Impaired fasting glucose (IFG) | 61 (5.9) | - | 61 (33.0) | |
| Impaired glucose tolerance (IGT) | 98 (9.5) | - | 98 (53.0) | |
| IFG and IGT | 26 (2.5) | - | 26 (14.0) | |
| Glucose, mmol/L | 5.22 ± 0.67 | 5.09 ± 0.58 | 5.81 ± 0.71 | <0.0001 |
| Insulin, pmol/L | 66.60 ± 36.89 | 61.80 ± 31.74 | 88.77 ± 49.04 | <0.0001 |
| HOMA-IR | 2.28 ± 1.44 | 2.05 ± 1.16 | 3.34 ± 2.02 | <0.0001 |
| Waist-to-hip ratio | 0.89 ± 0.09 | 0.88 ± 0.09 | 0.93 ± 0.08 | <0.0001 |
| Body fat, % | 33.09 ± 9.36 | 32.22 ± 9.41 | 37.09 ± 8.03 | <0.0001 |
| BMI, Kg/m2 | 27.94 ± 4.75 | 27.33 ± 4.43 | 30.79 ± 5.12 | <0.0001 |
| BMI > 30 Kg/m2 | 306 (29.7) | 210 (24.8) | 96 (51.9) | <0.0001 |
| Total cholesterol, mg/dL | 199.99 ± 40.52 | 198.52 ± 40.14 | 206.74 ± 41.67 | 0.014 |
| cHDL, mg/dL | 52.45 ± 13.15 | 52.80 ± 13.25 | 50.85 ± 12.59 | 0.073 |
| cLDL, mg/dL | 108.40 ± 30.49 | 107.15 ± 29.99 | 114.09 ± 32.15 | 0.006 |
| Triglycerides, mg/dL | 122.90 ± 104.06 | 118.95 ± 109.38 | 140.98 ± 72.63 | 0.010 |
Results are expressed as mean ± standard deviation or number (percentage) as appropriate. p from the comparison between participants with normal glucose metabolism and prediabetes at inclusion. HOMA-IR indicates Homeostatic Model Assessment for Insulin Resistance, and BMI, Body Mass Index.
Progression in the glucose metabolism category during the follow-up in the subjects included in the study.
| Baseline | End of the Follow-Up | |
|---|---|---|
| Diabetes Mellitus (DM) | 0 (0) | 131 (12.7) |
| Known DM | 0 (0) | 70 (6.8) |
| Unknown DM | 0 (0) | 61 (5.9) |
| Glucose metabolism category | ||
| Impaired fasting glucose (IFG) | 61 (5.9) | 72 (7.0) |
| Impaired glucose tolerance (IGT) | 98 (9.5) | 104 (10.1) |
| IFG and IGT | 26 (2.5) | 51 (4.9) |
| Prediabetes | 185 (17.9) | 227 (22.0) |
| Progressors | - | 324 (31.4) |
Results are expressed as number of subjects (percentage of the total population). Progressors are participants who progressed to a worse glucose metabolism category at the end of the study period as compared to the baseline situation.
Figure 1Probability of progression in the glucose metabolism category according to baseline quintiles of fatty acids. Fully adjusted OR, odds ratio; and 95% CI, confidence interval by quintiles (Q) of (a) linoleic acid; (b) α-linolenic acid; (c) EPA; (d) DHA; and (e) Omega 3 index. Q1 to Q5 are the quintiles of the percentage of each fatty acid in the graphs. EPA indicates eicosapentaenoic acid; DHA, docosahexaenoic acid. Omega 3 index is the sum of EPA and DHA.
Figure 2Probability of being diagnosed with diabetes according to baseline quintiles of fatty acids. Fully adjusted OR, odds ratio; and 95% CI, confidence interval by quintiles (Q1) of (a) linoleic acid; (b) α-linolenic acid; (c) EPA; (d) DHA; (e) Omega 3 index. Q1 to Q5 are the quintiles of the percentage of each fatty acid in the graphs. EPA indicates eicosapentaenoic acid; DHA, docosahexaenoic acid. Omega 3 index is the sum of EPA and DHA.