Associations of Changes in Blood Lipid Concentrations with Changes in Dietary Cholesterol Intake in the Context of a Healthy Low-Carbohydrate Weight Loss Diet: A Secondary Analysis of the DIETFITS Trial

Elevated blood remnant cholesterol and triglycerides are causally related to the risks of cardiometabolic multimorbidity

The connection between triglyceride-rich lipoproteins and cardiometabolic multimorbidity, characterized by the concurrence of at least two of type 2 diabetes, ischemic heart disease, and stroke, has not been definitively established. We aim to examine the prospective associations between serum remnant cholesterol, triglycerides, and the risks of progression from first cardiometabolic disease to multimorbidity via multistate modeling in the UK Biobank. We also evaluate the causality of these associations via Mendelian randomization using 13 biologically relevant SNPs as the genetic instruments. Here we show that elevated remnant cholesterol and triglycerides are significantly associated with gradually higher risks of cardiometabolic multimorbidity, particularly the progression of ischemic heart disease to the multimorbidity of ischemic heart disease and type 2 diabetes. These results advocate for effective management of remnant cholesterol and triglycerides as a potential strategy in mitigating the risks of cardiometabolic multimorbidity.

Low glycaemic index or low glycaemic load diets for people with overweight or obesity

BACKGROUND

The prevalence of obesity is increasing worldwide, yet nutritional management remains contentious. It has been suggested that low glycaemic index (GI) or low glycaemic load (GL) diets may stimulate greater weight loss than higher GI/GL diets or other weight reduction diets. The previous version of this review, published in 2007, found mainly short-term intervention studies. Since then, randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with longer-term follow-up have become available, warranting an update of this review.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of low glycaemic index or low glycaemic load diets on weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, one other database, and two clinical trials registers from their inception to 25 May 2022. We did not apply any language restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included RCTs with a minimum duration of eight weeks comparing low GI/GL diets to higher GI/GL diets or any other diets in people with overweight or obesity.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods. We conducted two main comparisons: low GI/GL diets versus higher GI/GL diets and low GI/GL diets versus any other diet. Our main outcomes included change in body weight and body mass index, adverse events, health-related quality of life, and mortality. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence for each outcome.

MAIN RESULTS

In this updated review, we included 10 studies (1210 participants); nine were newly-identified studies. We included only one study from the previous version of this review, following a revision of inclusion criteria. We listed five studies as 'awaiting classification' and one study as 'ongoing'. Of the 10 included studies, seven compared low GI/GL diets (233 participants) with higher GI/GL diets (222 participants) and three studies compared low GI/GL diets (379 participants) with any other diet (376 participants). One study included children (50 participants); one study included adults aged over 65 years (24 participants); the remaining studies included adults (1136 participants). The duration of the interventions varied from eight weeks to 18 months. All trials had an unclear or high risk of bias across several domains.  Low GI/GL diets versus higher GI/GL diets Low GI/GL diets probably result in little to no difference in change in body weight compared to higher GI/GL diets (mean difference (MD) -0.82 kg, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.92 to 0.28; I2 = 52%; 7 studies, 403 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Evidence from four studies reporting change in body mass index (BMI) indicated low GI/GL diets may result in little to no difference in change in BMI compared to higher GI/GL diets (MD -0.45 kg/m2, 95% CI -1.02 to 0.12; I2 = 22%; 186 participants; low-certainty evidence)at the end of the study periods. One study assessing participants' mood indicated that low GI/GL diets may improve mood compared to higher GI/GL diets, but the evidence is very uncertain (MD -3.5, 95% CI -9.33 to 2.33; 42 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Two studies assessing adverse events did not report any adverse events; we judged this outcome to have very low-certainty evidence. No studies reported on all-cause mortality.    For the secondary outcomes, low GI/GL diets may result in little to no difference in fat mass compared to higher GI/GL diets (MD -0.86 kg, 95% CI -1.52 to -0.20; I2 = 6%; 6 studies, 295 participants; low certainty-evidence). Similarly, low GI/GL diets may result in little to no difference in fasting blood glucose level compared to higher GI/GL diets (MD 0.12 mmol/L, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.21; I2 = 0%; 6 studies, 344 participants; low-certainty evidence).  Low GI/GL diets versus any other diet Low GI/GL diets probably result in little to no difference in change in body weight compared to other diets (MD -1.24 kg, 95% CI -2.82 to 0.34; I2 = 70%; 3 studies, 723 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). The evidence suggests that low GI/GL diets probably result in little to no difference in change in BMI compared to other diets (MD -0.30 kg in favour of low GI/GL diets, 95% CI -0.59 to -0.01; I2 = 0%; 2 studies, 650 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Two adverse events were reported in one study: one was not related to the intervention, and the other, an eating disorder, may have been related to the intervention. Another study reported 11 adverse events, including hypoglycaemia following an oral glucose tolerance test. The same study reported seven serious adverse events, including kidney stones and diverticulitis. We judged this outcome to have low-certainty evidence. No studies reported on health-related quality of life or all-cause mortality. For the secondary outcomes, none of the studies reported on fat mass. Low GI/GL diets probably do not reduce fasting blood glucose level compared to other diets (MD 0.03 mmol/L, 95% CI -0.05 to 0.12; I2 = 0%; 3 studies, 732 participants; moderate-certainty evidence).  AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The current evidence indicates there may be little to no difference for all main outcomes between low GI/GL diets versus higher GI/GL diets or any other diet. There is insufficient information to draw firm conclusions about the effect of low GI/GL diets on people with overweight or obesity. Most studies had a small sample size, with only a few participants in each comparison group. We rated the certainty of the evidence as moderate to very low. More well-designed and adequately-powered studies are needed. They should follow a standardised intervention protocol, adopt objective outcome measurement since blinding may be difficult to achieve, and make efforts to minimise loss to follow-up. Furthermore, studies in people from a wide range of ethnicities and with a wide range of dietary habits, as well as studies in low- and middle-income countries, are needed.

Statin therapy is not warranted for a person with high LDL-cholesterol on a low-carbohydrate diet

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Although there is an extensive literature on the efficacy of the low carbohydrate diet (LCD) for weight loss and in the management of type 2 diabetes, concerns have been raised that the LCD may increase cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk by increasing the level of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C). We have assessed the value of LDL-C as a CVD risk factor, as well as effects of the LCD on other CVD risk factors. We have also reviewed findings that provide guidance as to whether statin therapy would be beneficial for individuals with high LDL-C on an LCD.

RECENT FINDINGS

Multiple longitudinal trials have demonstrated the safety and effectiveness of the LCD, while also providing evidence of improvements in the most reliable CVD risk factors. Recent findings have also confirmed how ineffective LDL-C is in predicting CVD risk.

SUMMARY

Extensive research has demonstrated the efficacy of the LCD to improve the most robust CVD risk factors, such as hyperglycemia, hypertension, and atherogenic dyslipidemia. Our review of the literature indicates that statin therapy for both primary and secondary prevention of CVD is not warranted for individuals on an LCD with elevated LDL-C who have achieved a low triglyceride/HDL ratio.