4.6 Article

Soy isoflavone intake lowers serum LDL cholesterol: A meta-analysis of 8 randomized controlled trials in humans

期刊

JOURNAL OF NUTRITION
卷 134, 期 9, 页码 2395-2400

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/jn/134.9.2395

关键词

isoflavones; LDL; cholesterol; soy protein; meta-analysis

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Clinical trials have noted hypocholesterolemic effects of soy protein intake, but the components responsible are not known. This meta-analysis of 8 randomized controlled trials was conducted to more precisely evaluate the effects of isoflavones on blood LDL cholesterol concentration independently of soy protein level. PubMed was searched for English-language randomized controlled trial articles published from 1966 to 2003 that described the effects of soy protein isolate (SPI) intake with measured isoflavone levels on blood lipids in humans using the search terms soy protein, isoflavones, and cholesterol. From 31 articles identified by the search, 8 articles (with 10 low vs. high isoflavone comparisons) were selected for the meta-analysis. Subjects in each comparison consumed similar dietary fat, cholesterol, and fiber; the reported body weight of subjects did not change significantly during treatment. Serum LDL cholesterol concentration in subjects who consumed SPI (mean 50 g/d) with high isoflavone content (mean intake 96 mg/d) decreased by 0.15 mmol/L (95% CI: 0.08 to 0.23 mmol/L; P < 0.0001) compared with those who consumed the same SPI level with low isoflavone content (mean intake 6 mg/d). Decreases in serum LDL cholesterol concentration in hypercholesterolemic and normocholesterolemic subjects were 0.18 mmol/L (95% CI: 0.01 to 0.35 mmol/L; P = 0.03) and 0.14 mmol/L (95% CI: 0.06, 0.23 mmol/L; P = 0.0008), respectively. With identical soy protein intake, high isoflavone intake led to significantly greater decreases in serum LDL cholesterol than low isoflavone intake, demonstrating that isoflavones have LDL cholesterol-lowering effects independent of soy protein.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据