4.3 Article

Evaluation of an FFQ for assessment of antioxidant intake using plasma biomarkers in an ethnically diverse population

Journal

PUBLIC HEALTH NUTRITION
Volume 12, Issue 12, Pages 2438-2447

Publisher

CAMBRIDGE UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1017/S1368980009005539

Keywords

Carotenoids; Retinal; Tocopherol; Diet; Plasma; Food-frequency questionnaire; Biomarker; Middle-aged adults; Ethnic group

Funding

  1. VicHealth
  2. The Cancer Council Victoria
  3. National Health and Medical Research Council [124317, 126402, 126403, 180705, 180706, 194327, 209057, 251533]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: To evaluate FFQ estimates of dietary intake of individual antioxidants, fruit and vegetables in comparison to plasma concentrations of each antioxidant, and to determine which individual foods are associated with plasma antioxidant concentrations. Design: Dietary (alpha-carotene, beta-carotene, beta-cryptoxanthin, lutein/zeaxanthin, lycopene, retinol, and vitamin E) intakes over 12 months were estimated from a 121-item FFQ. Correlation coefficients, corrected for within-person variability in diet and plasma antioxidants, were used to examine associations between antioxidant concentrations in diet and plasma. Setting: Melbourne Collaborative Cohort Study (MCCS). Results: Correlation coefficients for the carotenoids ranged from 0.28 for lycopene to 0.46 for beta-cryptoxanthin. There was no association between dietary and plasma retinol or dietary vitamin E with plasma alpha- and gamma-tocopherol. Individual plasma carotenoid concentrations were associated with intakes of fruit and vegetables. Conclusions: Our data suggest that the FFQ provides useful information on intakes of each of the carotenoids: alpha-carotene, beta-carotene, beta-cryptoxanthin, lycopene and lutein/zeaxanthin. There was no association between diet and plasma markets of retinol or vitamin E; this may reflect the importance of factors other than intake in modifying circulating levels of these nutrients.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available