{Reference Type}: Journal Article
{Title}: Associations of fruit intake with adiposity and cardiometabolic biomarkers in UK Biobank.
{Author}: Trichia E;MacLean F;Perez-Cornago A;Tong TYN;Emberson JR;Key TJ;Lewington S;Carter JL;
{Journal}: BMC Public Health
{Volume}: 24
{Issue}: 1
{Year}: 2024 Aug 16
{Factor}: 4.135
{DOI}: 10.1186/s12889-024-19505-7
{Abstract}: BACKGROUND: Fruit consumption has been associated with a lower cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk but the underlying mechanisms are unclear. We investigated the cross-sectional and prospective associations of fruit consumption with markers of adiposity, blood pressure, lipids, low-grade inflammation, glycaemia, and oxidative stress.
METHODS: The main analyses included 365 534 middle-aged adults from the UK Biobank at baseline, of whom 11 510, and 38 988 were included in the first and second follow-up respectively, free from CVD and cancer at baseline. Fruit consumption frequency at baseline was assessed using a questionnaire. We assessed the cross-sectional and prospective associations of fruit with adiposity (body mass index, waist circumference and %body fat), systolic and diastolic blood pressure, lipids (low-density and high-density lipoproteins, triglycerides and apolipoprotein B), glycaemia (haemoglobin A1c), low-grade inflammation (C-reactive protein) and oxidative stress (gamma-glutamyl-transferase) using linear regression models adjusted for socioeconomic and lifestyle factors. Analyses were repeated in a subset with two to five complete 24-h dietary assessments (n = 26 596) allowing for adjustment for total energy intake.
RESULTS: Fruit consumption at baseline generally showed weak inverse associations with adiposity and biomarkers at baseline. Most of these relationships did not persist through follow-up, except for inverse associations with diastolic blood pressure, C-reactive protein, gamma-glutamyl transferase and adiposity. However, for most mechanisms, mean levels varied by less than 0.1 standard deviations (SD) between high and low fruit consumption (> 3 vs < 1 servings/day) in further adjusted models (while the difference was < 0.2 SD for all of them). For example, waist circumference and diastolic blood pressure were 1 cm and 1 mmHg lower in high compared to low fruit intake at the first follow-up (95% confidence interval: -1.8, -0.1 and -1.8, -0.3, respectively). Analyses in the 24-h dietary assessment subset showed overall similar associations.
CONCLUSIONS: We observed very small differences in adiposity and cardiometabolic biomarkers between those who reported high fruit consumption vs low, most of which did not persist over follow-up. Future studies on other mechanisms and detailed assessment of confounding might further elucidate the relevance of fruit to cardiovascular disease.