Dietary n-3 alpha-linolenic and n-6 linoleic acids modestly lower serum lipoprotein(a) concentration but differentially influence other atherogenic lipoprotein traits: A randomized trial.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is a causal, genetically determined cardiovascular risk factor. Limited evidence suggests that dietary unsaturated fat may increase serum Lp(a) concentration by 10-15 %. Linoleic acid may increase Lp(a) concentration through its endogenous conversion to arachidonic acid, a process regulated by the fatty acid desaturase (FADS) gene cluster. We aimed to compare the Lp(a) and other lipoprotein trait-modulating effects of dietary alpha-linolenic (ALA) and linoleic acids (LA). Additionally, we examined whether FADS1 rs174550 genotype modifies Lp(a) responses. METHODS: A genotype-based randomized trial was performed in 118 men homozygous for FADS1 rs174550 SNP (TT or CC). After a 4-week run-in period, the participants were randomized to 8-week intervention diets enriched with either Camelina sativa oil (ALA diet) or sunflower oil (LA diet) 30-50 mL/day based on their BMI. Serum lipid profile was measured at baseline and at the end of the intervention. RESULTS: ALA diet lowered serum Lp(a) concentration by 7.3 % (p = 0.003) and LA diet by 9.5 % (p < 0.001) (p = 0.089 for between-diet difference). Both diets led to greater absolute decreases in individuals with higher baseline Lp(a) concentration (p < 0.001). Concentrations of LDL cholesterol (LDL-C), non-HDL-C, remnant-C, and apolipoprotein B were lowered more by the ALA diet (p < 0.01). Lipid or lipoprotein responses were not modified by the FADS1 rs174550 genotype. CONCLUSIONS: A considerable increase in either dietary ALA or LA from vegetable oils has a similar Lp(a)-lowering effect, whereas ALA may lower other major atherogenic lipids and lipoproteins to a greater extent than LA. Genetic differences in endogenous PUFA conversion may not influence serum Lp(a) concentration.

Prevalence of eating disorder symptoms in people with insulin-dependent-diabetes: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

AIMS: To examine the prevalence of eating disorder symptoms (EDS) in 16 years and older individuals with insulin-dependent diabetes including both clinical and subclinical eating disorder symptoms. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Embase, Scopus, PsycINFO, and CINAHL databases to discover studies reporting prevalence of eating disorder symptoms in patients with insulin-dependent diabetes (both type 1 and type 2). We performed a meta-analysis to estimate the pooled prevalence of eating disorder symptoms and an independent meta-analysis to estimate the prevalence of insulin omission. RESULTS: A total of 45 studies were included in the meta-analysis of eating disorder symptoms. Diabetes Eating Problem Survey (DEPS-R) was the most frequently used screening tool (in 43 % of studies, n = 20). The pooled prevalence of eating disorder symptoms was 24 % (95 % CI 0.21-0.28), whereas in studies using DEPS-R, it was slightly higher, 27 % (95 % CI 0.24-0.31), with the prevalence ratio (PR) of 1.1. The prevalence differed between screening tools (χ2 = 85.83, df = 8, p < .0001). The sex distribution was associated with the observed prevalences; in studies with a higher female prevalence (>58 %), the pooled eating disorder symptom prevalence was higher [30 % (95 % CI 0.26-0.34) vs. 18 % (95 % Cl 0.14-0.22), PR 1.7]. The prevalence of insulin omission was 21 % (95 % CI 0.13-0.33). CONCLUSIONS: Eating disorder symptoms and insulin omission are common in patients with insulin-dependent diabetes regardless of age. DEPS-R is the most used screening tool. Studies with a higher proportion of female participants report higher prevalence rates.