4.7 Article

Vitamin C and hyperglycemia in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer - Norfolk (EPIC-Norfolk) study - A population-based study

期刊

DIABETES CARE
卷 23, 期 6, 页码 726-732

出版社

AMER DIABETES ASSOC
DOI: 10.2337/diacare.23.6.726

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

OBJECTIVE - To examine the cross-sectional association between plasma vitamin C, self-reported diabetes, and HbA(1c). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS - Data from a population-based study of diet, cancer, and chronic disease were analyzed. A total of 2,898 men and 3,560 women 45-74 years of age who were registered with general practices in Norfolk, U.K., were recruited to the European Prospective Investigation Into Cancer-Norfolk study between 1995 and 1998. RESULTS- Mean plasma vitamin C levels were significantly higher in individuals with HbA(1c) levels <7% than in those with self-reported diabetes or prevalent undiagnosed hyperglycemia (HbA(1c) greater than or equal to 7%). An inverse gradient of mean plasma vitamin C was found in both sexes across quintiles of HbA(1c) distribution <7%. The odds ratio (95% CI) of having prevalent undiagnosed hyperglycemia per 20 mu mol/l (or 1 SD) increase in plasma vitamin C was 0.70 (0.52-0.95) (adjusted for sex, age, BMI, waist-to-hip ratio, tertiary education, any use of dietary supplements, vegetarian diet, alcohol consumption, physical activity, dietary vitamin E, dietary fiber, dietary saturated Fat, and smoking history). The unadjusted change in HbA(1c) per 20 mu mol/l increase in vitamin C estimated by linear regression was - 0.12% (- 0.14 to - 0.09) in men and -0.09% (-0.11 to -0.07) in women. After adjusting for the possible confounders, these values were - 0.08% (- 0.11 to -0.04) in men and -0.05% (-0.07 to -0.03) in women. CONCLUSIONS - An inverse association was found between plasma vitamin C and HbA(1c). Dietary measures to increase plasma vitamin C may be an important public health strategy for reducing the prevalence of diabetes.

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

4.7
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