Effects of Whole-Grain Consumption on Selected Biomarkers of Systematic Inflammation: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
Hajihashemi P, Haghighatdoost F
Journal of the American College of Nutrition · 39 citations
Review labels
Neutral facts our review recorded about how this study was done. They describe method, never whether we like the result.
How it was studied
- Design
- Meta-analysis (indexed by PubMed)
- Studied in
- People
- Main outcome
- Mechanisms only
- Intake measured by
- Not stated
Who paid for it
- Funding
- Funding not disclosed
Publication
- Published
- 2018-09-05 · J Am Coll Nutr · vol. 38 · issue 3 · pp. 275–285
- Publisher
- Taylor & Francis
- Cited
- 51 citations · more than 69% of similar papers · 1.1× the field average
- References
- 46 works
- Access
- Paywalled
- Research areas
- Nutritional Studies and Diet · Diet, Metabolism, and Disease · Liver Disease Diagnosis and Treatment
- Keywords
- Meta-analysis, Randomized controlled trial, Medicine, Systematic review, Inflammation, Whole grains, Internal medicine, MEDLINE, Food science, Biology, Biochemistry
- MeSH
- humans, inflammation, diet, health status, biomarkers, whole grains
2 authors
From IR
- Parisa HajihashemiIsfahan University of Medical Sciences
- Fahimeh Haghighatdoost · correspondingIsfahan University of Medical Sciences
Abstract
Whole grains have potential benefits in preventing cardiovascular diseases and diabetes; nevertheless, results from randomized clinical trials (RCTs) on inflammatory markers are controversial. The aim of this meta-analysis of RCTs was to examine the effect of whole grains on inflammatory markers A systematic literature search was conducted by using the online database of PubMed, Embase, Google Scholar, and Scopus for relevant studies up to November 2017, using Medical Subject Headings and other related keywords. Only studies that compared the effects of whole grains on inflammatory markers with refined grains were included. From more than 2278 articles, 17 RCTs met the inclusion criteria and were systematically reviewed. Weighted mean differences were estimated and pooled effect size was calculated by random effects model. Thirteen RCTs with 466 participants were included in the meta-analysis. Whole-grain consumption had a significant effect on serum concentration of high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP; Hedges' g: -0.22; 95% confidence interval (CI): -0.45, 0.00; p = 0.047), interleukin-6 (IL-6; -0.28 pg/mL; 95% CI: -0.55, -0.02; p = 0.037) but did not result in a significant decline in serum concentration of tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-α; -0.12 pg/mL; 95% CI: -0.39, 0.15; p = 0.396). Significant heterogeneity was observed between studies for hs-CRP (I2 = 69.0%, p 2 = 96.6%, p 2 = 95.4%, p < 0.001). In sensitivity analysis, the effect of whole grain intake on hs-CRP, IL-6, and TNF-α was not substantially modified by the result of a single study. Meta-regression for duration showed no significant association between the duration of study and changes in serum C-reactive protein levels (β coefficient = 0.006, standard error = 0.036; p = 0.870). Conclusions: This meta-analysis of RCTs suggested that whole grains might affect health status via improving systematic inflammation. Key teaching points: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Whole grains consumption was associated with lower serum levels of hs-CRP and IL-6. Whole grains cannot significantly decrease serum levels of TNF-α. We could not found any source for heterogeneity. The effect of whole grains on serum inflammatory biomarkers was independent from duration.
Abstract via Europe PMC. Copyright remains with the authors or publisher.
Community trust
Loading…
How much do you trust this study's findings?
Comments
Sign in to rate, comment on or flag this study.Sign inSomething wrong here?
Flag this study if its information, labels or funding look wrong. An editor reviews every flag.
Sign in to rate, comment on or flag this study.Sign inEducational information about published research. Not medical advice, and not a recommendation to start or stop anything.