1.
The Effect of Low-Carbohydrate Diet on Glycemic Control in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus.
Wang, LL, Wang, Q, Hong, Y, Ojo, O, Jiang, Q, Hou, YY, Huang, YH, Wang, XH
Nutrients. 2018;10(6)
-
-
-
Free full text
Plain language summary
Dietary intervention is a strategy to manage diabetes mellitus, as it can reduce the burden on islet cells and thus improve blood glucose levels, lipid profiles, and cognitive status. The aim of the study was to find out the effectiveness of the ‘six-point formula’ and the effects of a low-fat diet and low-carbohydrate diet on hyperglycaemia. The study is a prospective, single-blind randomized controlled trial which recruited 56 participants with type 2 diabetes mellitus. The participants were randomly allocated to receive either a low-fat diet or a low-carbohydrate diet. Results show that HbA1c levels (the average blood glucose levels in the last 2 – 3 months) in low-carbohydrate diet decreased significantly compared to the low-fat diet. The body mass index and the total cholesterol levels of the participants following the low-carbohydrate diet also decreased. Authors conclude that a low-carbohydrate diet can improve blood glucose, regulate blood lipids, reduce body mass index and decrease insulin doses more than a low-fat diet in Chinese patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE In China, a low-fat diet (LFD) is mainly recommended to help improve blood glucose levels in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). However, a low-carbohydrate diet (LCD) has been shown to be effective in improving blood glucose levels in America and England. A few studies, primarily randomized controlled trials, have been reported in China as well. METHOD Firstly, we designed two 'six-point formula' methods, which met the requirements of LCD and LFD, respectively. Fifty-six T2DM patients were recruited and randomly allocated to the LCD group (n = 28) and the LFD group (n = 28). The LCD group received education about LCD's six-point formula, while the LFD group received education about LFD's six-point formula. The follow-up time was three months. The indicators for glycemic control and other metabolic parameters were collected and compared between the two groups. RESULTS Forty-nine patients completed the study. The proportions of calories from three macronutrients the patients consumed met the requirements of LCD and LFD. Compared to the LFD group, there was a greater decrease in HbA1c level in the LCD group (-0.63% vs. -0.31%, p < 0.05). The dosages of insulin and fasting blood glucoses (FBG) in the third month were lower than those at baseline in both groups. Compared with baseline values, body mass index (BMI) and total cholesterol (TC) in the LCD group were significantly reduced in the third month (p < 0.05); however, there were no statistically significant differences in the LFD group. CONCLUSIONS LCD can improve blood glucose more than LFD in Chinese patients with T2DM. It can also regulate blood lipid, reduce BMI, and decrease insulin dose in patients with T2DM. In addition, the six-point formula is feasible, easily operable, and a practical educational diet for Chinese patients with T2DM.
2.
Anti-Inflammatory Effects of a Vegan Diet Versus the American Heart Association-Recommended Diet in Coronary Artery Disease Trial.
Shah, B, Newman, JD, Woolf, K, Ganguzza, L, Guo, Y, Allen, N, Zhong, J, Fisher, EA, Slater, J
Journal of the American Heart Association. 2018;7(23):e011367
-
-
-
Free full text
Plain language summary
Inflammation plays a central role in the progression of atherosclerosis and is associated with adverse cardiovascular events. The aim of this study was to determine the effects of a vegan versus American Heart Association (AHA)-recommended diet on high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP) [a type of protein found in blood plasma], as well as other markers of inflammation, glucometabolic markers, and lipid profiles in patients with established coronary artery disease (CAD) on guideline-directed medical therapy. This study is a prospective, randomized, open-label, blinded end point study design. The active study duration was 8 weeks, with an interim visit at 4 weeks and a final visit at 8 weeks. Results show: - a significantly greater reduction in hsCRP with a vegan versus AHA-recommended diet in patients with established CAD on guideline-directed medical therapy. - that the degree of weight loss, as measured by both body mass index and waist circumference, did not significantly differ between the 2 diet groups. - that markers of glycaemic control and lipid profiles, overall, also did not significantly differ in the vegan diet group when compared with the AHA-recommended diet group. Authors conclude that in patients with CAD and an elevated hsCRP, despite guideline-directed medical therapy, a vegan diet may be considered to further lower the parameters of inflammation.
Abstract
Background Dietary interventions may play a role in secondary cardiovascular prevention. hsCRP (High-sensitivity C-reactive protein) is a marker of risk for major adverse cardiovascular outcomes in coronary artery disease. Methods and Results The open-label, blinded end-point, EVADE CAD (Effects of a Vegan Versus the American Heart Association-Recommended Diet in Coronary Artery Disease) trial randomized participants (n=100) with coronary artery disease to 8 weeks of a vegan or American Heart Association-recommended diet with provision of groceries, tools to measure dietary intake, and dietary counseling. The primary end point was high-sensitivity C-reactive protein. A linear regression model compared end points after 8 weeks of a vegan versus American Heart Association diet and adjusted for baseline concentration of the end point. Significance levels for the primary and secondary end points were set at 0.05 and 0.0015, respectively. A vegan diet resulted in a significant 32% lower high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (β, 0.68, 95% confidence interval [0.49-0.94]; P=0.02) when compared with the American Heart Association diet. Results were consistent after adjustment for age, race, baseline waist circumference, diabetes mellitus, and prior myocardial infarction (adjusted β, 0.67 [0.47-0.94], P=0.02). The degree of reduction in body mass index and waist circumference did not significantly differ between the 2 diet groups (adjusted β, 0.99 [0.97-1.00], P=0.10; and adjusted β, 1.00 [0.98-1.01], P=0.66, respectively). There were also no significant differences in markers of glycemic control between the 2 diet groups. There was a nonsignificant 13% reduction in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol with the vegan diet when compared with the American Heart Association diet (adjusted β, 0.87 [0.78-0.97], P=0.01). There were no significant differences in other lipid parameters. Conclusions In patients with coronary artery disease on guideline-directed medical therapy, a vegan diet may be considered to lower high-sensitivity C-reactive protein as a risk marker of adverse outcomes. Clinical Trial Registration URL http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT 02135939.
3.
Effect of an Intensive Lifestyle Intervention on Glycemic Control in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes: A Randomized Clinical Trial.
Johansen, MY, MacDonald, CS, Hansen, KB, Karstoft, K, Christensen, R, Pedersen, M, Hansen, LS, Zacho, M, Wedell-Neergaard, AS, Nielsen, ST, et al
JAMA. 2017;318(7):637-646
-
-
-
Free full text
-
Plain language summary
First-line treatment of Type 2 diabetes includes diet, physical activity, and weight loss prior to or in parallel with initiation of medication. The aim of this study was to examine whether an intensive lifestyle intervention results in equivalent blood sugar control compared with standard care. A secondary aim was to test whether an intensive lifestyle intervention leads to a reduction in glucose-lowering medication in participants with Type 2 diabetes. The study was a randomized, assessor-blind clinical study of 98 adults with Type 2 diabetes diagnosed for less than 10 years. The participants were randomly assigned (2:1; stratified by sex) to the lifestyle group (n = 64) or the standard care group (n = 34). Results show that an intensive lifestyle intervention did not achieve comparable blood sugar control in comparison with standard care, however, the former led to a substantial and parallel reduction in glucose-lowering medication. The authors conclude that even though a lifestyle intervention compared to standard care did not result in the expected glycaemic control, it was still in a direction consistent with benefit.
Abstract
Importance: It is unclear whether a lifestyle intervention can maintain glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes. Objective: To test whether an intensive lifestyle intervention results in equivalent glycemic control compared with standard care and, secondarily, leads to a reduction in glucose-lowering medication in participants with type 2 diabetes. Design, Setting, and Participants: Randomized, assessor-blinded, single-center study within Region Zealand and the Capital Region of Denmark (April 2015-August 2016). Ninety-eight adult participants with non-insulin-dependent type 2 diabetes who were diagnosed for less than 10 years were included. Participants were randomly assigned (2:1; stratified by sex) to the lifestyle group (n = 64) or the standard care group (n = 34). Interventions: All participants received standard care with individual counseling and standardized, blinded, target-driven medical therapy. Additionally, the lifestyle intervention included 5 to 6 weekly aerobic training sessions (duration 30-60 minutes), of which 2 to 3 sessions were combined with resistance training. The lifestyle participants received dietary plans aiming for a body mass index of 25 or less. Participants were followed up for 12 months. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcome was change in hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) from baseline to 12-month follow-up, and equivalence was prespecified by a CI margin of ±0.4% based on the intention-to-treat population. Superiority analysis was performed on the secondary outcome reductions in glucose-lowering medication. Results: Among 98 randomized participants (mean age, 54.6 years [SD, 8.9]; women, 47 [48%]; mean baseline HbA1c, 6.7%), 93 participants completed the trial. From baseline to 12-month follow-up, the mean HbA1c level changed from 6.65% to 6.34% in the lifestyle group and from 6.74% to 6.66% in the standard care group (mean between-group difference in change of -0.26% [95% CI, -0.52% to -0.01%]), not meeting the criteria for equivalence (P = .15). Reduction in glucose-lowering medications occurred in 47 participants (73.5%) in the lifestyle group and 9 participants (26.4%) in the standard care group (difference, 47.1 percentage points [95% CI, 28.6-65.3]). There were 32 adverse events (most commonly musculoskeletal pain or discomfort and mild hypoglycemia) in the lifestyle group and 5 in the standard care group. Conclusions and Relevance: Among adults with type 2 diabetes diagnosed for less than 10 years, a lifestyle intervention compared with standard care resulted in a change in glycemic control that did not reach the criterion for equivalence, but was in a direction consistent with benefit. Further research is needed to assess superiority, as well as generalizability and durability of findings. Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02417012.