Substituting Lean Beef for Carbohydrate in a Healthy Dietary Pattern Does Not Adversely Affect the Cardiometabolic Risk Factor Profile in Men and Women at Risk for Type 2 Diabetes.

BACKGROUND: Observational evidence suggests that red meat intake is associated with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and cardiovascular disease incidence, but few randomized controlled trials have assessed effects of lean, unprocessed red meat intake on insulin sensitivity and other cardiometabolic risk factors. OBJECTIVE: This study compared the USDA Healthy US-Style Eating Pattern, low in saturated fat and red meat (<40 g/d red meat; USDA-CON), with a modified version with an additional 150 g/d lean beef as an isocaloric replacement for carbohydrate (USDA-LB) on insulin sensitivity and cardiometabolic risk markers. METHODS: Participants (7 men, 26 women; 44.4 y old) with overweight/obesity [BMI (kg/m2) = 31.3] and prediabetes and/or metabolic syndrome completed this randomized, crossover, controlled-feeding trial consisting of two 28-d treatments (USDA-CON and USDA-LB) separated by a ≥14-day washout. Insulin sensitivity (primary outcome variable), lipoprotein lipids, apolipoproteins (apoA-I and apoB), and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) (secondary outcome variables), in plasma or serum, and blood pressures were assessed at baseline and the end of each diet period. RESULTS: USDA-LB and USDA-CON did not differ significantly in effects on whole-body insulin sensitivity and other indicators of carbohydrate metabolism, lipoprotein lipids, apoA-I and apoB, hs-CRP, and blood pressures. USDA-LB produced a shift toward less cholesterol carried by smaller LDL subfractions compared with USDA-CON [least-squares geometric mean ratios for LDL1+2 cholesterol of 1.20 (P = 0.016) and LDL3+4 cholesterol of 0.89 (P = 0.044)] and increased peak LDL time versus USDA-CON (1.01; P = 0.008). CONCLUSIONS: Substituting lean, unprocessed beef for carbohydrate in a Healthy US-Style Eating Pattern resulted in a shift toward larger, more buoyant LDL subfractions, but otherwise had no significant effects on the cardiometabolic risk factor profile in men and women with prediabetes and/or metabolic syndrome.This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT03202680.

Effects of Consuming Almonds on Insulin Sensitivity and Other Cardiometabolic Health Markers in Adults With Prediabetes.

Objective: This study was designed to assess the effects of replacing high-carbohydrate (CHO) foods with raw almonds on insulin sensitivity and cardiometabolic health markers in overweight or obese adults with prediabetes.Method: This randomized crossover study consisted of two 6-week dietary intervention periods, separated by a ≥ 4-week washout. Subjects incorporated 1.5 oz of raw almonds twice daily or isocaloric CHO-based foods into their diets, with instructions to maintain body weight. Dietary intakes as well as insulin sensitivity, CHO metabolism indices, lipoprotein lipids and particles, and inflammatory markers were assessed.Results: Thirty-three subjects (17 male, 16 female), mean age 48.3 ± 2.2 years and body mass index 30.5 ± 0.7 kg/m2, provided evaluable data. Compared to CHO, almonds resulted in significantly (p < 0.01) higher intakes of protein, fat (unsaturated fatty acids), fiber, and magnesium and significantly (p < 0.001) lower intakes of CHO and sugars. No differences were observed between diet conditions for changes from baseline in the insulin sensitivity index from a short intravenous glucose tolerance test or other indices of glucose homeostasis. No significant differences were observed in biomarkers of cardiovascular risk except that the CHO intervention led to a shift toward a higher concentration of cholesterol in small, dense low-density lipoprotein subfraction 3+4 (LDL3 + 4) particles (p = 0.024 vs almonds).Conclusions: Intake of 3.0 oz/d raw almonds, vs energy-matched CHO foods, improved the dietary nutrient profile, but did not significantly affect insulin sensitivity and most markers of cardiometabolic health in overweight and obese men and women with prediabetes.

Effects of substituting eggs for high-carbohydrate breakfast foods on the cardiometabolic risk-factor profile in adults at risk for type 2 diabetes mellitus.

OBJECTIVES: To assess effects of egg-based versus non-egg, higher-carbohydrate (CHO) breakfast meals on cardiometabolic health markers in overweight or obese adults with prediabetes and/or metabolic syndrome. METHODS: This randomized, crossover study included two 4-week dietary interventions, separated by a ≥4-week washout. Subjects incorporated into their habitual diets breakfast meals containing either 2 eggs/day for 6 days/week (Egg condition), or energy-matched, non-egg, higher-CHO-based foods (Non-Egg condition). Dietary intakes, insulin sensitivity, and other CHO metabolism indices, lipid biomarkers, high-sensitivity C-reactive protein, and blood pressures were measured. RESULTS: Thirty men and women with mean age 54.1 ± 1.9 years and body mass index 31.9 ± 0.7 kg/m2 provided data. Neither diet condition significantly altered insulin sensitivity indices, but the homeostasis model assessment for insulin resistance was significantly (p = 0.028) higher after the Non-Egg vs. the Egg condition. Low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) was decreased from baseline (119 mg/dL) by 2.9 and 6.0% with Egg and Non-Egg breakfasts, respectively (p = 0.023). Systolic blood pressure was reduced from baseline (127 mm Hg) by 2.7 and 0.0% with Egg and Non-Egg, respectively (p = 0.018). Diet records indicated 149 kcal/day higher (p = 0.008) energy intake from non-study foods during the Egg condition; however, weight change from baseline did not differ between conditions. CONCLUSION: Compared with the baseline diet, consumption of 12 eggs/week for 4 weeks at breakfast was associated with less reduction in LDL-C, and more lowering of systolic blood pressure, than observed with non-egg-based, energy-matched, control foods higher in CHO.

Diet and prevention of type 2 diabetes mellitus: beyond weight loss and exercise.

INTRODUCTION: Insulin resistance (IR) and pancreatic beta-cell dysfunction are core pathophysiologic features of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Select lifestyle and pharmacologic interventions, including weight loss, physical activity, a Mediterranean diet intervention, and hypoglycemic agents, have been shown to prevent or delay T2DM. However, dietary factors other than weight loss may also impact risk, mainly through effects to enhance insulin sensitivity, although some may also directly or indirectly impact pancreatic beta-cell function. AREAS COVERED: A literature review of observational studies and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was conducted, and the research indicates dietary factors showing promise for reducing T2DM risk include higher intakes of cereal fibers, unsaturated fatty acids, magnesium, and polyphenols (e.g. anthocyanins), while reducing dietary glycemic load, added sugars, and high-sugar beverages. EXPERT COMMENTARY: While these dietary factors are mainly supported by evidence from observational studies and RCTs of surrogate markers for T2DM, they are consistent with current recommendations to emphasize consumption of whole grains, nuts, seeds, legumes, seafood, fruits, and vegetables, while limiting intakes of saturated fatty acids, refined carbohydrates, and processed meats. Additional dietary intervention RCTs are needed to assess the efficacy of these promising dietary interventions for delaying or preventing the onset of T2DM.

Statin use and risk for type 2 diabetes: what clinicians should know.

Statins are the first line of pharmacologic treatment for the management of hypercholesterolemia in patients at risk for atherosclerotic cardiovascular (CV) disease. In recent years, several randomized, controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies have reported increased risk for new-onset type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2D) with statin treatment, particularly with use of high-intensity statins that reduce low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) by 50% or more. This paper summarizes the data from RCTs and observational studies for statin-associated T2D risk, and puts into perspective this evidence, weighed against the established benefits of statin therapy for CV risk reduction. In RCTs, the increase in T2D risk with statin therapy appears to be attributable mainly to those with major T2D risk factors. The increase in incidence of T2D in those with major risk is approximately 25% for statin use, compared to placebo, and for intensive statin therapy compared to moderate-intensity statin therapy. However, in those with major T2D risk factors, the number of CV disease events prevented for each excess case of T2D is close to or greater than one, indicating that the risk-benefit ratio still strongly favors use of statin therapy, or intensive statin therapy, for patients with sufficient CV disease risk to warrant cholesterol-lowering drug therapy. Recommendations are summarized for evaluation of the T2D risk factor profile before initiation of and during statin therapy. In addition, the importance of lifestyle management and other preventive measures is emphasized for management of risks for both T2D and CV disease events in patients receiving statin therapy.