Evaluation of the Healthy Eating Index-Toddlers-2020.

BACKGROUND: With the addition of new guidance for children from birth to 24 months in the Dietary Guidelines for Americans, 2020-2025 (DGA), a Healthy Eating Index (HEI) was developed for toddlers. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the psychometric properties of the HEI-Toddlers-2020, 5 analyses relevant to construct and concurrent validity and 2 related to reliability were examined. DESIGN: Twenty-four-hour diet recall data from the cross-sectional National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (2011-2018) were used. In addition, exemplary menus were analyzed. PARTICIPANTS/SETTING: The main analytic sample included toddlers aged 12 through 23 months (n = 838), with additional analyses of toddlers aged 12 through 35 months (n = 1,717) from the United States. Included participants had valid diet recalls and available weight-for-age data. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Outcomes measures included HEI-Toddlers-2020 total and component scores on menus, population distributions, and correlations. STATISTICAL ANALYSES: HEI total and component scores were calculated using menus from the American Academy of Pediatrics and Healthy Eating Research. Score means and distributions were estimated using a Markov Chain Monte Carlo approach with National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey data (2011-2018). Principal component analysis explored dimensions and Pearson correlations examined components, energy, and Cronbach α. In addition, HEI-Toddlers-2020 and HEI-2020 scores were compared for identical intakes at age 24 months. RESULTS: For validity, exemplary menus received high scores with the HEI-Toddlers-2020. The mean ± SE total HEI-Toddlers-2020 score for toddlers aged 12 through 23 months was 62.9 ± 0.78 and ranged from 40.1 to 84.4 (1st to 99th percentile). Correlation between diet quality and diet quantity was low (-0.15); the scree plot revealed multiple factors. In addition, total scores for identical intakes were approximately 1.5 points higher for HEI-Toddlers-2020 compared with HEI-2020 (difference range for component scores, -4.97 to 4.89). For reliability, most of the intercorrelations among components were low to moderate (0 to 0.49), with a few exceptions among related components. Cronbach α was .48. These results indicate that the index is multidimensional, with no single component driving the total score, and no unnecessary components that are highly correlated with another component. CONCLUSIONS: The results demonstrated evidence supportive of validity and reliability. The HEI-Toddlers-2020 can be used to assess alignment with the DGA for toddlers.

The 2018 World Cancer Research Fund (WCRF)/American Institute for Cancer Research (AICR) score and diabetes risk in the Diabetes Prevention Program Outcomes Study (DPPOS).

BACKGROUND: The 2018 World Cancer Research Fund/American Institute for Cancer Research (WCRF/AICR) 3rd expert report highlights up-to-date Cancer Prevention Recommendations that may reduce burdens of many chronic diseases, including diabetes. This study examined if following a lifestyle that aligns with the recommendations - assessed via the 2018 WCRF/AICR Score - was associated with lower risk of type 2 diabetes in high-risk adults participating in the Diabetes Prevention Program Outcomes Study (DPPOS). METHODS: The Diabetes Prevention Program (DPP) randomized adults at high risk for diabetes to receive a lifestyle intervention (ILS), metformin (MET) or a placebo (PLB) (mean: 3.2 years), with additional follow-up in DPPOS for 11 years (mean: 15 years total). 2018 WCRF/AICR Scores included seven components: body weight, physical activity, plant-based foods, fast foods, red and processed meat, sugar-sweetened beverages, and alcohol; the optional breastfeeding component was excluded. Scores ranged 0-7 points (with greater scores indicating greater alignment with the recommendations) and were estimated at years 0, 1, 5, 6, 9, and 15 (N=3,147). Fasting glucose and HbA1c were measured every six months and oral glucose tolerance tests were performed annually. Adjusted Cox proportional hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used to examine the association of both Score changes from years 0-1 and time-dependent Score changes on diabetes risk through DPP and year 15. RESULTS: Scores improved within all groups over 15 years (p<0.001); ILS Scores improved more than MET or PLB Scores after 1 year (p<0.001). For every 1-unit improvement from years 0-1, there was a 31% and 15% lower diabetes risk in ILS (95% CI: 0.56-0.84) and PLB (95% CI: 0.72-0.97) through DPP, and no significant association in MET. Associations were greatest among American Indian participants, followed by non-Hispanic White and Hispanic participants. Score changes from years 0-1 and time-dependent Score changes in ILS and PLB remained associated with lower risk through year 15. CONCLUSIONS: Score improvements were associated with long-term, lower diabetes risk among high-risk adults randomized to ILS and PLB, but not MET. Future research should explore impact of the Score on cancer risk. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Diabetes Prevention Program: NCT00004992 ; Diabetes Prevention Program Outcomes Study: NCT00038727.

Sex disparities in the incidence of 21 cancer types: Quantification of the contribution of risk factors.

BACKGROUND: Cancer incidence is higher in men than in women at most shared anatomic sites for currently unknown reasons. The authors quantified the extent to which behaviors (smoking and alcohol use), anthropometrics (body mass index and height), lifestyles (physical activity, diet, medications), and medical history collectively explain the male predominance of risk at 21 shared cancer sites. METHODS: Prospective cohort analyses (n = 171,274 male and n = 122,826 female participants; age range, 50-71 years) in the National Institutes of Health-AARP Diet and Health Study (1995-2011). Cancer-specific Cox regression models were used to estimate male-to-female hazard ratios (HRs). The degree to which risk factors explained the observed male-female risk disparity was quantified using the Peters-Belson method. RESULTS: There were 26,693 incident cancers (17,951 in men and 8742 in women). Incidence was significantly lower in men than in women only for thyroid and gallbladder cancers. At most other anatomic sites, the risks were higher in men than in women (adjusted HR range, 1.3-10.8), with the strongest increases for bladder cancer (HR, 3.33; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.93-3.79), gastric cardia cancer (HR, 3.49; 95% CI, 2.26-5.37), larynx cancer (HR, 3.53; 95% CI, 2.46-5.06), and esophageal adenocarcinoma (HR, 10.80; 95% CI, 7.33-15.90). Risk factors explained a statistically significant (nonzero) proportion of the observed male excess for esophageal adenocarcinoma and cancers of liver, other biliary tract, bladder, skin, colon, rectum, and lung. However, only a modest proportion of the male excess was explained by risk factors (ranging from 50% for lung cancer to 11% for esophageal adenocarcinoma). CONCLUSIONS: Men have a higher risk of cancer than women at most shared anatomic sites. Such male predominance is largely unexplained by risk factors, underscoring a role for sex-related biologic factors.

The 2018 World Cancer Research Fund/American Institute for Cancer Research Score and Cancer Risk: A Longitudinal Analysis in the NIH-AARP Diet and Health Study.

BACKGROUND: We examined associations between adherence to the 2018 World Cancer Research Fund/American Institute for Cancer Research (WCRF/AICR) Cancer Prevention Recommendations using the standardized 2018 WCRF/AICR Score and cancer risk among older U.S. adults. METHODS: Participants included 215,102 adults in the NIH-AARP Diet and Health Study followed between 2004 and 2011 (mean 7.0 person-years). Scores (range: 0-7 points) were calculated from self-reported weight, physical activity, and diet and alcohol intake measures. Outcomes included 17 cancers reviewed by WCRF/AICR (cases: male n = 11,066; female n = 8,865) and top three U.S. cancers in males (total n = 4,658; lung n = 2,211; prostate n = 920; colorectal n = 1,527) and females (total n = 5,957; lung n = 1,475; post-menopausal breast n = 3,546; colorectal n = 936). Cox proportional hazard ratios (HRs) were estimated for score and cancer risk associations, stratifying by sex and smoking status. RESULTS: Each one-point score increase was associated with 6% to 13% reduced cancer risk across combined outcomes, except for male never smokers' risk for top three cancers and male current smokers' risk for both combined cancer outcomes. Higher scores were associated with decreased lung cancer risk only among male former smokers (HR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.79-0.89) and female current smokers (HR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.82-0.96). Higher scores were associated with 7% to 19% decreased breast cancer risk across smoking strata and 10% to 14% decreased colorectal cancer risk among male and female never and former smokers. CONCLUSIONS: Greater recommendations adherence was associated with reduced cancer risk. IMPACT: Findings emphasize the importance of considering combined contributions of multiple lifestyle factors for cancer prevention among older adults and the potential modifying role of smoking history.

The 2018 World Cancer Research Fund/American Institute for Cancer Research (WCRF/AICR) Score and All-Cause, Cancer, and Cardiovascular Disease Mortality Risk: A Longitudinal Analysis in the NIH-AARP Diet and Health Study.

Background: The World Cancer Research Fund/American Institute for Cancer Research (WCRF/AICR) published Cancer Prevention Recommendations in 2018 focused on modifiable lifestyle factors. Objectives: The aim was to examine how adherence to WCRF/AICR recommendations via the 2018 WCRF/AICR score is associated with risk for all-cause, cancer, and cardiovascular disease (CVD) mortality outcomes among older US adults. Methods: Baseline and follow-up questionnaire data (n = 177,410) were used to calculate weight, physical activity, and diet components of the 2018 WCRF/AICR score (0-7 total points). Adjusted HRs and 95% CIs were estimated, stratified by sex and smoking status. Results: There were 16,055 deaths during a mean of 14.2 person-years. Each 1-point score increase was associated with a 9-26% reduced mortality risk for all outcomes, except for current male smokers' cancer mortality risk. When the score was categorized comparing highest (5-7 points) with lowest (0-2 points) scores, associations with reduced all-cause mortality risk were strongest in former smokers (HRmales: 0.51; 95% CI: 0.43, 0.61; HRfemales: 0.38; 95% CI: 0.31, 0.46), followed by current smokers (HRmales: 0.55; 95% CI: 0.34, 0.89; HRfemales: 0.44; 95% CI: 0.32, 0.59) and never smokers (HRmales: 0.57; 95% CI: 0.47, 0.70; HRfemales: 0.50; 95% CI: 0.41, 0.60). An association with cancer mortality risk was also seen in former smokers (HRmales: 0.59; 95% CI: 0.43, 0.81; HRfemales: 0.52; 95% CI: 0.37, 0.73) and female current (HRfemales: 0.55; 95% CI: 0.32, 0.96) and never (HRfemales: 0.57; 95% CI: 0.40, 0.80) smokers; findings were not statistically significant in other strata. For CVD mortality, highest compared with lowest scores were associated with a 49-73% risk reduction, except in male never and current smokers. In exploratory analysis, physical activity, body weight, alcohol, and plant-based foods were found to be predominant components in the score. Conclusions: Greater 2018 WCRF/AICR scores were associated with lower mortality risk among older adults. Future research can explore how smoking modifies these relations, and further examine different populations and other cancer-relevant outcomes.

The Accuracy of Portion Size Reporting on Self-Administered Online 24-Hour Dietary Recalls Among Women With Low Incomes.

BACKGROUND: Accurately estimating portion sizes remains a challenge in dietary assessment. Digital images used in online 24-hour dietary recalls may be conducive to accuracy. OBJECTIVE: The current analyses were conducted to examine the accuracy of portion size estimation by women with low incomes who completed 24-hour dietary recalls using the online Automated Self-Administered 24-hour Dietary Assessment Tool (ASA24) in the Food and Eating Assessment Study II. DESIGN: True dietary intake was observed for 3 meals on 1 day through a controlled feeding study conducted from May through July 2016. The following day, participants completed an unannounced 24-hour dietary recall using ASA24, independently or with assistance in a small-group setting. PARTICIPANTS/SETTING: Participants included 302 women aged 18 to 82 years living in the Washington, DC, area who met the income thresholds for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The accuracy of portion size estimation was assessed by comparing the weight truly consumed (observed) and the weight reported for predetermined categories of foods and beverages. STATISTICAL ANALYSES PERFORMED: The differences between observed and reported portions were examined and linear regression tested differences by recall condition. Analyses were conducted by condition and repeated with stratification by racial/ethnic identity, education, and body mass index. RESULTS: On average across foods and beverages, reported portion sizes were 7.4 g (95% CI, 4.3-10.5) and 6.4 g (95% CI, 2.8-10.0) higher than observed portion sizes in the independent and assisted conditions, respectively. Portion sizes were overestimated for small pieces and shaped foods in both conditions, as well as for amorphous/soft foods in the assisted condition and underestimated for single-unit foods in both conditions. Misestimation was fairly consistent by participants' race/ethnicity, education, and body mass index, to varying magnitudes. CONCLUSIONS: Women with low incomes overestimated the amounts of foods and beverages consumed across several categories using online 24-hour dietary recalls with digital images to support portion size estimation. Assistance with ASA24 had little impact on accuracy.

Healthy Eating Index-2015 Scores Among Adults Based on Observed vs Recalled Dietary Intake.

BACKGROUND: The construct and predictive validity of the Healthy Eating Index (HEI) have been demonstrated, but how error in reported dietary intake may affect scores is unclear. OBJECTIVE: These analyses examined concordance between HEI-2015 scores based on observed vs reported intake among adults. DESIGN: Data were from two feeding studies (Food and Eating Assessment STudy, or FEAST, I and II) in which true intake was observed for three meals on 1 day. The following day, participants completed an unannounced 24-hour dietary recall. PARTICIPANTS/SETTING: FEAST I (2012) included 81 men and women, aged 20 to 70 years, living in the Washington, DC, area. FEAST II (2016) included 302 women, aged 18 years or older, with low household incomes and living in the Washington, DC, area. In FEAST I, recalls were completed independently using the Automated Self-Administered 24-hour Dietary Assessment Tool (ASA24-2011) or interviewer-administered using the Automated Multiple-Pass Method. In FEAST II, recalls were completed using ASA24-2016, independently or in a small group setting with assistance. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: HEI-2015 scores were calculated using the population ratio method. STATISTICAL ANALYSES PERFORMED: T-tests determined whether differences between scores based on observed and reported intake were different from zero. FEAST I data were stratified by sex, and in FEAST II, analyses were repeated by education and body mass index (BMI). RESULTS: Differences in total HEI-2015 scores between observed and reported intake ranged from -1.3 to 5.8 points among those completing ASA24 independently in both studies, compared with -2.5 points in the small group setting. For interviewer-administered recalls, the differences were -1.1 for men and 2.3 for women. In FEAST II, total HEI-2015 scores derived from observed intake were lower than scores derived from reported intake among those who had completed high school or less (-3.2, SE 1.1, P<0.01) and those with BMI ≥ 30 (-2.8, SE 1.1, P = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: HEI-2015 scores based on 24-hour dietary recall data are generally well estimated.

Population Attributable Risks of Subtypes of Esophageal and Gastric Cancers in the United States.

INTRODUCTION: To help target preventive strategies, we estimated US population attributable risks (PARs) of demographic and potentially modifiable risk factors for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC), esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC), gastric cardia adenocarcinoma (GCA), and gastric noncardia adenocarcinoma (GNCA). METHODS: We prospectively examined the associations for risk factors and these cancers in 490,605 people in the National Institutes of Health-the American Association of Retired Persons Diet and Health cohort Diet and Health Study cohort from 1995 to 2011. Exposures were obtained from the baseline questionnaire. Diagnoses of gastroesophageal reflux disease were extracted for a subset of eligible National Institutes of Health-the American Association of Retired Persons Diet and Health cohort subjects through linkage to Medicare and then multiply imputed for non-Medicare-eligible subjects. Hazard ratios were calculated using multivariable-adjusted Cox proportional hazards regression. Adjusted population attributable risks were calculated for the US population aged 50-71 years by combining the hazard ratios with the estimated joint distribution of risk factor prevalence from the 2015 National Health Interview Survey. RESULTS: Smoking remained the most important risk factor for ESCC and was estimated to cause more than 1/3 of EAC and GCA and 1/10 of GNCA. Obesity and gastroesophageal reflux disease were associated with more than 1/2 of EAC and 1/3 of GCA. Compared with each lowest-risk level category, common risk factors were estimated to be associated with 73.7% of ESCC (95% confidence interval [CI]: 62.1%-85.4%), 70.3% of EAC (95% CI: 64.4%-76.2%), 69.3% of GCA (95% CI: 61.0%-77.7%), and 33.6% of GNCA (95% CI: 21.7%-45.5%). DISCUSSION: These factors accounted for a large proportion of esophageal and gastric cancers in the United States, highlighting opportunities for education and intervention to reduce the burden of these highly fatal cancers.

Gastroesophageal reflux disease: A risk factor for laryngeal squamous cell carcinoma and esophageal squamous cell carcinoma in the NIH-AARP Diet and Health Study cohort.

BACKGROUND: Prior studies have suggested that gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) may be associated with risk of squamous cancers of the larynx and esophagus; however, most of these studies have had methodological limitations or insufficient control for potential confounders. METHODS: We prospectively examined the association between GERD and esophageal adenocarcinoma (EADC), esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC), and laryngeal squamous cell carcinoma (LSCC) in 490,605 participants of the NIH-AARP Diet and Health Study cohort who were 50-71 years of age at baseline. Exposure to risk factors were obtained from the baseline questionnaire. GERD diagnosis was extracted among eligible participants via linkage to Medicare diagnoses codes and then multiply imputed for non-Medicare-eligible participants. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs of GERD were computed using Cox regression. RESULTS: From 1995 to 2011, we accrued 931 cases of EADC, 876 cases of LSCC, and 301 cases of ESCC in this cohort and estimated multivariable-adjusted HRs of 2.23 (95% CI, 1.72-2.90), 1.91 (95% CI, 1.24-2.94), and 1.99 (95% CI, 1.39-2.84) for EADC, LSCC, and ESCC, respectively. The associations were independent of sex, smoking status, alcohol intake, and follow-up time periods. We estimated that among the general population in the United States, 22.04% of people aged 50-71 years suffered from GERD. Using risk factor distributions for the United States from national survey data, 16.92% of LSCC cases and 17.32% of ESCC cases among individuals aged 50-71 years were estimated to be associated with GERD. CONCLUSION: GERD is a common gastrointestinal disorder, but future prospective studies are needed to replicate our findings. If replicated, they may inform clinical surveillance of GERD patients and suggest new avenues for prevention of these malignancies.

Insulin Resistance in Healthy U.S. Adults: Findings from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES).

BACKGROUND: Insulin is fundamental in two conditions that are epidemic in the United States and globally: obesity and type II diabetes. Given insulin's established mechanistic involvement in energy balance and glucose tolerance, we examined its relationship to common health-related endpoints in a large population-based sample. METHODS: The National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey is a cross-sectional study that uses a complex multistage probability design to obtain a representative sample of the United States population. Adult participants were included from 8 successive 2-year data waves (1999-2014), including 9,224 normal individuals, 7,699 prediabetic, and 3,413 diabetic subjects. The homeostatic model for insulin resistance (HOMA-IR) was available for 20,336 participants and its relationship with demographic, anthropometric, and clinical data was analyzed. We examined the relationship of HOMA-IR to 8 groups of outcome variables: general health, anthropometric/metabolic [waist size, body mass index (BMI)], cardiovascular (blood pressure), lipid [triglycerides, high-density lipoprotein (HDL)], hepatic [alanine aminotransferase (ALT), gamma-glutamyl transferase (GGT)], hematologic [white blood cells (WBC), hemoglobin (Hgb), platelets], inflammatory (C-reactive protein), and nutritional (vitamins D and C, serum folate, and pyridoxine) variables. RESULTS: HOMA-IR was generally strongly, monotonically, and highly significantly associated with adjusted outcomes in normal subjects, although clinical laboratory values were generally within normal bounds across insulin quartiles. In the normal subset, the odds ratio and 95% confidence interval for a quartile change in HOMA-IR for obesity (BMI > 30) was 3.62 (3.30-3.97), and for the highest quintile for the triglyceride/HDL the ratio was 2.00 (1.77-2.26), for GGT it was 1.40 (1.24-1.58), and for WBC it was 1.28 (1.16-1.40). The relationship of HOMA-IR to the various outcomes was broadly similar to that observed in prediabetics and diabetics with a few exceptions. CONCLUSIONS: HOMA-IR levels in a large sample of normal individuals are associated with poorer general health and adverse changes across a wide range of markers. A similar pattern of alterations is observed in prediabetic and diabetic samples. IMPACT: Clinically, checking insulin levels may be helpful to identify patients that merit further observation and are candidates for early interventions.

Operationalizing the 2018 World Cancer Research Fund/American Institute for Cancer Research (WCRF/AICR) Cancer Prevention Recommendations: A Standardized Scoring System.

BACKGROUND: Following the publication of the 2018 World Cancer Research Fund (WCRF) and American Institute for Cancer Research (AICR) Third Expert Report, a collaborative group was formed to develop a standardized scoring system and provide guidance for research applications. METHODS: The 2018 WCRF/AICR Cancer Prevention Recommendations, goals, and statements of advice were examined to define components of the new Score. Cut-points for scoring were based on quantitative guidance in the 2018 Recommendations and other guidelines, past research that operationalized 2007 WCRF/AICR Recommendations, and advice from the Continuous Update Project Expert Panel. RESULTS: Eight of the ten 2018 WCRF/AICR Recommendations concerning weight, physical activity, diet, and breastfeeding (optional), were selected for inclusion. Each component is worth one point: 1, 0.5, and 0 points for fully, partially, and not meeting each recommendation, respectively (Score: 0 to 7-8 points). Two recommendations on dietary supplement use and for cancer survivors are not included due to operational redundancy. Additional guidance stresses the importance of accounting for other risk factors (e.g., smoking) in relevant models. CONCLUSIONS: The proposed 2018 WCRF/AICR Score is a practical tool for researchers to examine how adherence to the 2018 WCRF/AICR Recommendations relates to cancer risk and mortality in various adult populations.

The Provision of Assistance Does Not Substantially Impact the Accuracy of 24-Hour Dietary Recalls Completed Using the Automated Self-Administered 24-H Dietary Assessment Tool among Women with Low Incomes.

Background: Evidence is lacking informing the use of the Automated Self-Administered 24-h Dietary Assessment Tool (ASA24) with populations characterized by low income. Objective: This study was conducted among women with low incomes to evaluate the accuracy of ASA24 recalls completed independently and with assistance. Methods: Three hundred and two women, aged ≥18 y and with incomes below the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program thresholds, served themselves from a buffet; amounts taken as well as plate waste were unobtrusively weighed to enable calculation of true intake for 3 meals. The following day, women completed ASA24-2016 independently (n = 148) or with assistance from a trained paraprofessional in a small group (n = 154). Regression modeling examined differences by condition in agreement between true and reported foods; energy, nutrient, and food group intakes; and portion sizes. Results: Participants who completed ASA24 independently and those who received assistance reported matches for 71.9% and 73.5% (P = 0.56) of items truly consumed, respectively. Exclusions (consumed but not reported) were highest for lunch (at which participants consumed approximately 2 times the number of distinct foods and beverages compared with breakfast and dinner). Commonly excluded foods were additions to main dishes (e.g., tomatoes in salad). On average, excluded foods contributed 43.6 g (46.2 kcal) and 40.1 g (43.2 kcal) among those in the independent and assisted conditions, respectively. Gaps between true and reported intake were different between conditions for folate and iron. Within conditions, significant gaps were observed for protein, vitamin D, and meat (both conditions); vitamin A, iron, and magnesium (independent); and folate, calcium, and vegetables (assisted). For foods and beverages for which matches were reported, no difference in the gap between true and reported portion sizes was observed by condition (P = 0.22). Conclusions: ASA24 performed relatively well among women with low incomes; however, accuracy was somewhat lower than previously observed among adults with a range of incomes. The provision of assistance did not significantly impact accuracy.

Evaluation of the Healthy Eating Index-2015.

BACKGROUND: The Healthy Eating Index (HEI), a diet quality index that measures alignment with the Dietary Guidelines for Americans, was updated with the 2015-2020 Dietary Guidelines for Americans. OBJECTIVE AND DESIGN: To evaluate the psychometric properties of the HEI-2015, eight questions were examined: five relevant to construct validity, two related to reliability, and one to assess criterion validity. DATA SOURCES: Three data sources were used: exemplary menus (n=4), National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2011-2012 (N=7,935), and the National Institutes of Health-AARP (formally known as the American Association of Retired Persons) Diet and Health Study (N=422,928). STATISTICAL ANALYSES: Exemplary menus: Scores were calculated using the population ratio method. National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2011-2012: Means and standard errors were estimated using the Markov Chain Monte Carlo approach. Analyses were stratified to compare groups (with t tests and analysis of variance). Principal components analysis examined the number of dimensions. Pearson correlations were estimated between components, energy, and Cronbach's coefficient alpha. National Institutes of Health-AARP Diet and Health Study: Adjusted Cox proportional hazards models were used to examine scores and mortality outcomes. RESULTS: For construct validity, the HEI-2015 yielded high scores for exemplary menus as four menus received high scores (87.8 to 100). The mean score for National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey was 56.6, and the first to 99th percentile were 32.6 to 81.2, respectively, supporting sufficient variation. Among smokers, the mean score was significantly lower than among nonsmokers (53.3 and 59.7, respectively) (P<0.01), demonstrating differentiation between groups. The correlation between diet quality and diet quantity was low (all <0.25) supporting these elements being independent. The components demonstrated multidimensionality when examined with a scree plot (at least four dimensions). For reliability, most of the intercorrelations among the components were low to moderate (0.01 to 0.49) with a few exceptions, and the standardized Cronbach's alpha was .67. For criterion validity, the highest vs the lowest quintile of HEI-2015 scores were associated with a 13% to 23% decreased risk of all-cause, cancer, and cardiovascular disease mortality. CONCLUSIONS: The results demonstrated evidence supportive of construct validity, reliability, and criterion validity. The HEI-2015 can be used to examine diet quality relative to the 2015-2020 Dietary Guidelines for Americans.

Dietary Flavonoid Intake Reduces the Risk of Head and Neck but Not Esophageal or Gastric Cancer in US Men and Women.

Background: Flavonoids are bioactive polyphenolic compounds found in fruits, vegetables, and beverages of plant origin. Previous studies have shown that flavonoid intake reduces the risk of certain cancers; however, few studies to date have examined associations of flavonoids with upper gastrointestinal cancers or used prospective cohorts.Objective: Our study examined the association between intake of flavonoids (anthocyanidins, flavan-3-ols, flavanones, flavones, flavonols, and isoflavones) and risk of head and neck, esophageal, and gastric cancers.Methods: The NIH-AARP Diet and Health Study is a prospective cohort study that consists of 469,008 participants. Over a mean 12-y follow-up, 2453 head and neck (including 1078 oral cavity, 424 pharyngeal, and 817 laryngeal), 1165 esophageal (890 adenocarcinoma and 275 squamous cell carcinoma), and 1297 gastric (625 cardia and 672 noncardia) cancer cases were identified. We used Cox proportional hazards regression models to estimate HRs and CIs for the associations between flavonoid intake assessed at study baseline and cancer outcomes. For 56 hypotheses examined, P-trend values were adjusted using the Benjamini-Hochberg (BH) procedure for false discovery rate control.Results: The highest quintile of total flavonoid intake was associated with a 24% lower risk of head and neck cancer (HR: 0.76; 95% CI: 0.66, 0.86; BH-adjusted 95% CI: 0.63, 0.91; P-trend = 0.02) compared with the lowest quintile. Notably, anthocyanidins were associated with a 28% lower risk of head and neck cancer (HR: 0.72; 95% CI: 0.62, 0.82; BH-adjusted 95% CI: 0.59, 0.87; P-trend = 0.0005), and flavanones were associated with a 22% lower risk of head and neck cancer (HR: 0.78; 95% CI: 0.68, 0.89; BH-adjusted 95% CI: 0.64, 0.94; P-trend: 0.02). No associations between flavonoid intake and risk of esophageal or gastric cancers were found.Conclusions: Our results indicate that flavonoid intake is associated with lower head and neck cancer risk. These associations suggest a protective effect of dietary flavonoids on head and neck cancer risk, and thus potential as a risk reduction strategy.

The Use of Digital Images in 24-Hour Recalls May Lead to Less Misestimation of Portion Size Compared with Traditional Interviewer-Administered Recalls.

BACKGROUND: The Automated Self-Administered 24-hour (ASA24) dietary recall system enhances the feasibility of collecting high-quality intake data in population-based studies. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess the accuracy of portion size reporting in the ASA24 compared with interviewer-administered recalls. METHODS: True intake for 3 meals was ascertained in 81 adults aged 20-70 y from the Washington, DC area. Participants were randomly assigned to complete an unannounced ASA24 or an interviewer-administered Automated Multiple-Pass Method (AMPM) recall the following day. An adapted Bland-Altman approach was used to assess agreement between true and reported portion sizes. Linear regression was used to assess log-scale differences between true and reported portion sizes by recall mode. The proportions of reported portion sizes within 10% and 25% of truth were estimated. Analyses were conducted for all foods and drinks and predetermined categories. RESULTS: Mean differences between true and reported portion sizes were 3.7 g for the ASA24 and 11.8 g for the AMPM. According to the Bland-Altman-type plots, between 92% and 100% (depending on food or drink category and recall mode) of observations fell within the limits of agreement. After adjustment for multiple testing, the mean ratio of reported to true portion sizes was significantly >1 for the categories of all foods and drinks, all foods excluding liquids, amorphous or soft foods, and small pieces among AMPM respondents. Misestimation in the AMPM was significantly different from that in the ASA24 for all foods and drinks and for all foods excluding liquids. Small proportions of reported portions fell within 10% (16.2% for the ASA24 and 14.9% for the AMPM) and 25% (37.5% for the ASA24 and 33.2% for the AMPM) of truth. CONCLUSIONS: The results raise the possibility that digital images tailored to different types and formats of foods may facilitate improved estimation of amounts eaten but highlight the need for continued work in this aspect of dietary assessment. This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT00978406.

Performance of the Automated Self-Administered 24-hour Recall relative to a measure of true intakes and to an interviewer-administered 24-h recall.

BACKGROUND: The Automated Self-Administered 24-hour Recall (ASA24), a freely available Web-based tool, was developed to enhance the feasibility of collecting high-quality dietary intake data from large samples. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to assess the criterion validity of ASA24 through a feeding study in which the true intake for 3 meals was known. DESIGN: True intake and plate waste from 3 meals were ascertained for 81 adults by inconspicuously weighing foods and beverages offered at a buffet before and after each participant served him- or herself. Participants were randomly assigned to complete an ASA24 or an interviewer-administered Automated Multiple-Pass Method (AMPM) recall the following day. With the use of linear and Poisson regression analysis, we examined the associations between recall mode and 1) the proportions of items consumed for which a match was reported and that were excluded, 2) the number of intrusions (items reported but not consumed), and 3) differences between energy, nutrient, food group, and portion size estimates based on true and reported intakes. RESULTS: Respondents completing ASA24 reported 80% of items truly consumed compared with 83% in AMPM (P = 0.07). For both ASA24 and AMPM, additions to or ingredients in multicomponent foods and drinks were more frequently omitted than were main foods or drinks. The number of intrusions was higher in ASA24 (P < 0.01). Little evidence of differences by recall mode was found in the gap between true and reported energy, nutrient, and food group intakes or portion sizes. CONCLUSIONS: Although the interviewer-administered AMPM performed somewhat better relative to true intakes for matches, exclusions, and intrusions, ASA24 performed well. Given the substantial cost savings that ASA24 offers, it has the potential to make important contributions to research aimed at describing the diets of populations, assessing the effect of interventions on diet, and elucidating diet and health relations. This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT00978406.

Higher diet quality is associated with decreased risk of all-cause, cardiovascular disease, and cancer mortality among older adults.

Increased attention in dietary research and guidance has been focused on dietary patterns, rather than on single nutrients or food groups, because dietary components are consumed in combination and correlated with one another. However, the collective body of research on the topic has been hampered by the lack of consistency in methods used. We examined the relationships between 4 indices--the Healthy Eating Index-2010 (HEI-2010), the Alternative Healthy Eating Index-2010 (AHEI-2010), the alternate Mediterranean Diet (aMED), and Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension (DASH)--and all-cause, cardiovascular disease (CVD), and cancer mortality in the NIH-AARP Diet and Health Study (n = 492,823). Data from a 124-item food-frequency questionnaire were used to calculate scores; adjusted HRs and 95% CIs were estimated. We documented 86,419 deaths, including 23,502 CVD- and 29,415 cancer-specific deaths, during 15 y of follow-up. Higher index scores were associated with a 12-28% decreased risk of all-cause, CVD, and cancer mortality. Specifically, comparing the highest with the lowest quintile scores, adjusted HRs for all-cause mortality for men were as follows: HEI-2010 HR: 0.78 (95% CI: 0.76, 0.80), AHEI-2010 HR: 0.76 (95% CI: 0.74, 0.78), aMED HR: 0.77 (95% CI: 0.75, 0.79), and DASH HR: 0.83 (95% CI: 0.80, 0.85); for women, these were HEI-2010 HR: 0.77 (95% CI: 0.74, 0.80), AHEI-2010 HR: 0.76 (95% CI: 0.74, 0.79), aMED HR: 0.76 (95% CI: 0.73, 0.79), and DASH HR: 0.78 (95% CI: 0.75, 0.81). Similarly, high adherence on each index was protective for CVD and cancer mortality examined separately. These findings indicate that multiple scores reflect core tenets of a healthy diet that may lower the risk of mortality outcomes, including federal guidance as operationalized in the HEI-2010, Harvard's Healthy Eating Plate as captured in the AHEI-2010, a Mediterranean diet as adapted in an Americanized aMED, and the DASH Eating Plan as included in the DASH score.

Fast-food menu offerings vary in dietary quality, but are consistently poor.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate five popular fast-food chains' menus in relation to dietary guidance. DESIGN: Menus posted on chains' websites were coded using the Food and Nutrient Database for Dietary Studies and MyPyramid Equivalents Database to enable Healthy Eating Index-2005 (HEI-2005) scores to be assigned. Dollar or value and kids' menus and sets of items promoted as healthy or nutritious were also assessed. SETTING: Five popular fast-food chains in the USA. SUBJECTS: Not applicable. RESULTS: Full menus scored lower than 50 out of 100 possible points on the HEI-2005. Scores for Total Fruit, Whole Grains and Sodium were particularly dismal. Compared with full menus, scores on dollar or value menus were 3 points higher on average, whereas kids' menus scored 10 points higher on average. Three chains marketed subsets of items as healthy or nutritious; these scored 17 points higher on average compared with the full menus. No menu or subset of menu items received a score higher than 72 out of 100 points. CONCLUSIONS: The poor quality of fast-food menus is a concern in light of increasing away-from-home eating, aggressive marketing to children and minorities, and the tendency for fast-food restaurants to be located in low-income and minority areas. The addition of fruits, vegetables and legumes; replacement of refined with whole grains; and reformulation of offerings high in sodium, solid fats and added sugars are potential strategies to improve fast-food offerings. The HEI may be a useful metric for ongoing monitoring of fast-food menus.

Update of the Healthy Eating Index: HEI-2010.

The Healthy Eating Index (HEI) is a measure of diet quality in terms of conformance with federal dietary guidance. Publication of the 2010 Dietary Guidelines for Americans prompted an interagency working group to update the HEI. The HEI-2010 retains several features of the 2005 version: (a) it has 12 components, many unchanged, including nine adequacy and three moderation components; (b) it uses a density approach to set standards, eg, per 1,000 calories or as a percentage of calories; and (c) it employs least-restrictive standards; ie, those that are easiest to achieve among recommendations that vary by energy level, sex, and/or age. Changes to the index include: (a) the Greens and Beans component replaces Dark Green and Orange Vegetables and Legumes; (b) Seafood and Plant Proteins has been added to capture specific choices from the protein group; (c) Fatty Acids, a ratio of polyunsaturated and monounsaturated to saturated fatty acids, replaces Oils and Saturated Fat to acknowledge the recommendation to replace saturated fat with monounsaturated and polyunsaturated fatty acids; and (d) a moderation component, Refined Grains, replaces the adequacy component, Total Grains, to assess overconsumption. The HEI-2010 captures the key recommendations of the 2010 Dietary Guidelines and, like earlier versions, will be used to assess the diet quality of the US population and subpopulations, evaluate interventions, research dietary patterns, and evaluate various aspects of the food environment.

Prospective case-control study of premenopausal serum estradiol and testosterone levels and breast cancer risk.

INTRODUCTION: Breast cancer is frequently a hormonally dependent cancer, and associations of circulating estrogens and androgens with subsequent breast cancer risk are well established in postmenopausal women. Associations of serum estrogens and androgens with breast cancer risk in premenopausal women are less well studied. The objective of this study was to determine whether estradiol and testosterone levels in serum collected before menopause are associated with subsequent breast cancer risk. METHODS: We conducted a prospective case-control study of 266 participants who were registered in the Columbia, Missouri, Serum Bank and not using exogenous hormones at the time of blood collection. Each of 98 in situ or invasive breast cancer cases with prediagnostic serum collected before menopause was matched to two controls by age, date, menstrual cycle day, and time of day of blood collection. Estradiol and testosterone concentrations were quantified by using specific radioimmunoassays, and sex hormone-binding globulin (SHBG) was quantified with a chemiluminescent immunoassay to allow calculation of the non-SHBG bound hormone fractions. Data were analyzed by using conditional logistic regression. All tests of statistical significance were two-sided. RESULTS: Serum testosterone was strongly and significantly associated with breast cancer risk. The relative odds (OR) for increasing quartiles of total testosterone were 1.0, 2.1 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.9 to 4.8), 1.5 (95% CI, 0.6 to 3.4), and 3.3 (95% CI, 1.5 to 7.5, P(trend) = 0.006). Comparable ORs for the non-SHBG bound fraction of testosterone that is bioavailable were 1.0, 1.7 (95% CI, 0.7 to 4.2), 1.7 (95% CI, 0.7 to 4.0), and 4.2 (95% CI, 1.6 to 10.9, P(trend) = 0.002). Total and non-SHBG-bound estradiol were not associated with breast cancer, but extreme variation in levels across the menstrual cycle coupled with relatively small numbers, particularly for analyses stratified by cycle phase, limited the power to detect associations. CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest that premenopausal women with elevated serum testosterone levels are at an increased risk of breast cancer.