Legume consumption in adults and risk of cardiovascular disease and type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Birna Thorisdottir, Erik Kristoffer Arnesen, Linnea Bärebring, Jutta Dierkes, Christel Lamberg-Allardt, Alfons Ramel, Bright I Nwaru, Fredrik Söderlund, Agneta Åkesson
Author Information
  1. Birna Thorisdottir: Faculty of Food Science and Nutrition, University of Iceland, Reykjavik, Iceland. ORCID
  2. Erik Kristoffer Arnesen: Department of Nutrition, Institute of Basic Medical Sciences, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway. ORCID
  3. Linnea Bärebring: Department of Internal Medicine and Clinical Nutrition, Institute of Medicine, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden. ORCID
  4. Jutta Dierkes: Centre for Nutrition, Department of Clinical Medicine, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway. ORCID
  5. Christel Lamberg-Allardt: Department of Food and Nutrition, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland. ORCID
  6. Alfons Ramel: Faculty of Food Science and Nutrition, University of Iceland, Reykjavik, Iceland. ORCID
  7. Bright I Nwaru: Krefting Research Centre, Institute of Medicine, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden. ORCID
  8. Fredrik Söderlund: Unit of Cardiovascular and Nutritional Epidemiology, Institute of Environmental Medicine, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden. ORCID
  9. Agneta Åkesson: Unit of Cardiovascular and Nutritional Epidemiology, Institute of Environmental Medicine, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden. ORCID

Abstract

Objectives: This study aimed to systematically review the evidence for associations between consumption of legumes and cardiovascular disease (CVD), type 2 diabetes (T2D) and their risk factors among healthy adults.
Methods: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Scopus up to 16 May 2022 for ≥4 weeks long randomized (RCT) and non-randomized controlled trials and prospective cohort studies with follow-up ≥12 months, assessing legume intake (beans/lentils/peas/soybeans, excluding peanuts and legume-products/protein/powder/flour) as the intervention or exposure. Outcomes were CVD, coronary heart disease (CHD), stroke, T2D and in intervention trials only: changes in blood lipids, glycemic markers, and blood pressure. Risk of bias (RoB) was evaluated with Cochrane's RoB2, ROBINS-I, and US Department of Agriculture (USDA)'s RoB-NObS. Effect sizes were pooled using random-effects meta-analyses and expressed as relative risk or weighed mean differences with 95% confidence intervals, heterogeneity quantified as . The evidence was appraised according to World Cancer Research Fund's criteria.
Results: Of the 181 full-text articles assessed for eligibility, 47 were included: 31 cohort studies (2,081,432 participants with generally low legume consumption), 14 crossover RCTs (448 participants), one parallel RCT and one non-randomized trial. Meta-analyses of cohort studies were suggestive of null associations for CVD, CHD, stroke and T2D. Meta-analyses of RCTs suggested a protective effect on total cholesterol (mean difference -0.22 mmol/L), low density lipoprotein (LDL)-cholesterol (-0.19 mmol/L), fasting glucose (-0.19 mmol/L), and HOMA-IR (-0.30). Heterogeneity was high ( = 52% for LDL-cholesterol, >75% for others). The overall evidence for associations between consumption of legumes and risk of CVD and T2D was considered .
Conclusion: Legume consumption was not found to influence risk of CVD and T2D in healthy adult populations with generally low legume consumption. However, protective effects on risk factors, seen in RCTs, lend some support for recommending legume consumption as part of diverse and healthy dietary patterns for prevention of CVD and T2D.

Keywords

References

  1. Stroke. 2015 Dec;46(12):3443-50 [PMID: 26514185]
  2. Am J Clin Nutr. 2014 Jul;100 Suppl 1:437S-42S [PMID: 24871476]
  3. J Nutr. 2021 May 11;151(5):1231-1240 [PMID: 33693815]
  4. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr. 2019;59(7):1071-1090 [PMID: 29039970]
  5. Asia Pac J Public Health. 2015 Jul;27(5):531-41 [PMID: 24958613]
  6. Clin Nutr. 2019 Feb;38(1):348-356 [PMID: 29352655]
  7. Br J Nutr. 2013 Mar 28;109(6):1143-53 [PMID: 22850191]
  8. Br J Nutr. 2014 Jan 28;111(2):353-62 [PMID: 23866068]
  9. Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis. 2011 Feb;21(2):94-103 [PMID: 19939654]
  10. Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis. 2014 Dec;24(12):1262-71 [PMID: 25154028]
  11. Nutrients. 2021 Apr 22;13(5): [PMID: 33922001]
  12. Adv Nutr. 2019 Nov 1;10(Suppl_4):S308-S319 [PMID: 31728500]
  13. Epidemiology. 2017 Nov;28(6):e58-e60 [PMID: 28816709]
  14. Food Nutr Res. 2022 Jun 08;66: [PMID: 35757440]
  15. PLoS One. 2014 Oct 10;9(10):e109552 [PMID: 25303709]
  16. Plants (Basel). 2022 Jan 11;11(2): [PMID: 35050073]
  17. JAMA Netw Open. 2022 Feb 1;5(2):e2146705 [PMID: 35113165]
  18. Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis. 2011 Apr;21(4):237-44 [PMID: 20096543]
  19. BMJ. 2021 Mar 29;372:n71 [PMID: 33782057]
  20. Public Health Nutr. 2018 Mar;21(4):766-776 [PMID: 29143697]
  21. Lancet. 2020 Oct 17;396(10258):1223-1249 [PMID: 33069327]
  22. Clin Nutr. 2018 Jun;37(3):906-913 [PMID: 28392166]
  23. Food Nutr Res. 2020 Jun 18;64: [PMID: 32612488]
  24. J Am Coll Nutr. 2007 Aug;26(4):334-40 [PMID: 17906185]
  25. Eur Heart J. 2020 Jul 21;41(28):2632-2640 [PMID: 32090257]
  26. Biomed Res Int. 2017;2017:8450618 [PMID: 29230416]
  27. Eur J Clin Nutr. 1990 Nov;44(11):819-22 [PMID: 1964898]
  28. Lancet. 2017 Nov 4;390(10107):2037-2049 [PMID: 28864331]
  29. Diabetes Care. 2008 Jul;31(7):1311-7 [PMID: 18390796]
  30. Food Res Int. 2020 Apr;130:108905 [PMID: 32156360]
  31. Am J Public Health. 2021 May;111(5):820-825 [PMID: 33826374]
  32. Eur J Nutr. 2017 Feb;56(1):421-429 [PMID: 26578528]
  33. Public Health Nutr. 2017 Feb;20(2):245-254 [PMID: 28077199]
  34. Am J Clin Nutr. 2007 Mar;85(3):735-41 [PMID: 17344494]
  35. Am J Clin Nutr. 2008 Jan;87(1):162-7 [PMID: 18175751]
  36. Am J Clin Nutr. 2014 Jul;100(1):278-88 [PMID: 24898241]
  37. Am J Clin Nutr. 2018 Jan 1;107(1):120-129 [PMID: 29381797]
  38. Br J Nutr. 2012 Aug;108 Suppl 1:S103-10 [PMID: 22916805]
  39. Int J Epidemiol. 2021 Mar 3;50(1):212-222 [PMID: 33245137]
  40. Chin Med J (Engl). 1981 Jul;94(7):455-8 [PMID: 6796350]
  41. Food Nutr Res. 2020 Jun 18;64: [PMID: 32612492]
  42. J Am Coll Nutr. 2007 Jun;26(3):243-9 [PMID: 17634169]
  43. Ann Nutr Metab. 2006;50(6):512-8 [PMID: 17191025]
  44. Res Synth Methods. 2021 Jan;12(1):55-61 [PMID: 32336025]
  45. BMJ. 2016 Oct 12;355:i4919 [PMID: 27733354]
  46. Stat Methods Med Res. 2019 May;28(5):1579-1596 [PMID: 29742975]
  47. Br J Nutr. 2009 Oct;102(7):1075-83 [PMID: 19646291]
  48. Eur J Clin Nutr. 1992 Sep;46(9):641-8 [PMID: 1327742]
  49. Mol Nutr Food Res. 2020 Feb;64(4):e1900751 [PMID: 31584249]
  50. Food Nutr Res. 2021 Oct 08;65: [PMID: 35291553]
  51. Front Nutr. 2022 Jan 10;8:813742 [PMID: 35083266]
  52. J Nutr. 2021 Dec 3;151(12):3701-3709 [PMID: 34642756]
  53. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019 Oct 3;10:ED000142 [PMID: 31643080]
  54. J Am Heart Assoc. 2017 Oct 24;6(10): [PMID: 29066442]
  55. J Lipid Res. 1997 Jun;38(6):1120-8 [PMID: 9215540]
  56. Adv Nutr. 2019 Jul 1;10(4):590-605 [PMID: 31041447]
  57. Int J Food Sci Nutr. 2021 Nov;72(7):871-878 [PMID: 33541169]
  58. BMJ. 2019 Aug 28;366:l4898 [PMID: 31462531]
  59. Circulation. 2007 Nov 27;116(22):2553-62 [PMID: 18025534]
  60. Nutr Rev. 2017 Dec 1;75(12):990-1006 [PMID: 29202192]
  61. J Acad Nutr Diet. 2019 Sep;119(9):1483-1500.e17 [PMID: 31278047]
  62. Nutr Diabetes. 2020 Mar 20;10(1):8 [PMID: 32198350]
  63. J Am Coll Nutr. 2016;35(1):31-40 [PMID: 25758041]
  64. Diabetes Care. 2004 Dec;27(12):2993-6 [PMID: 15562224]
  65. Nutrients. 2020 May 06;12(5): [PMID: 32384719]
  66. CMAJ. 2014 May 13;186(8):E252-62 [PMID: 24710915]
  67. Food Funct. 2018 May 23;9(5):2576-2588 [PMID: 29666853]
  68. Clin Nutr. 2022 May;41(5):1052-1058 [PMID: 35395555]
  69. Food Funct. 2022 Feb 7;13(3):1651-1658 [PMID: 35080567]
  70. Diabetes Care. 2004 Nov;27(11):2701-6 [PMID: 15505008]
  71. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2019 Jan;73(1):72-78 [PMID: 30315315]
  72. Diabetologia. 2005 Jun;48(6):1126-34 [PMID: 15889235]
  73. BMJ. 2021 Mar 29;372:n160 [PMID: 33781993]
  74. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr. 2021;61(1):85-96 [PMID: 31983216]
  75. Lancet. 2019 Feb 2;393(10170):447-492 [PMID: 30660336]
  76. Nutrients. 2020 Jul 17;12(7): [PMID: 32708949]
  77. Arch Intern Med. 1992 Jul;152(7):1416-24 [PMID: 1627021]
  78. Epidemiol Rev. 1987;9:1-30 [PMID: 3678409]
  79. Stroke. 2012 Mar;43(3):637-44 [PMID: 22207512]
  80. Am J Clin Nutr. 2020 Mar 1;111(3):677-688 [PMID: 31915830]
  81. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019 Mar 13;3:CD009825 [PMID: 30864165]
  82. Br J Nutr. 2009 Jul;102(2):285-92 [PMID: 19138438]
  83. Diabetol Metab Syndr. 2019 Jun 20;11:47 [PMID: 31249633]
  84. Am J Clin Nutr. 2004 Mar;79(3):390-5 [PMID: 14985212]
  85. J Med Food. 2013 Mar;16(3):185-98 [PMID: 23398387]
  86. Am J Prev Med. 2017 Feb;52(2):237-248 [PMID: 28109460]
  87. Am J Clin Nutr. 2000 Apr;71(4):921-30 [PMID: 10731498]
  88. Food Nutr Res. 2020 Jun 18;64: [PMID: 32612489]

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0consumptionCVDT2Drisk2legume-0evidenceassociationscardiovasculardiseasetypehealthycohortstudieslowRCTsmmol/LreviewlegumesdiabetesfactorsadultsRCTnon-randomizedtrialsinterventionCHDstrokebloodmeanparticipantsgenerallyoneMeta-analysesprotective19LegumediseasesObjectives:studyaimedsystematicallyamongMethods:searchedMEDLINEEmbaseCochraneCentralRegisterControlledTrialsScopus16May2022≥4weekslongrandomizedcontrolledprospectivefollow-up≥12monthsassessingintakebeans/lentils/peas/soybeansexcludingpeanutslegume-products/protein/powder/flourexposureOutcomescoronaryheartonly:changeslipidsglycemicmarkerspressureRiskbiasRoBevaluatedCochrane'sRoB2ROBINS-IUSDepartmentAgricultureUSDA'sRoB-NObSEffectsizespooledusingrandom-effectsmeta-analysesexpressedrelativeweigheddifferences95%confidenceintervalsheterogeneityquantifiedappraisedaccordingWorldCancerResearchFund'scriteriaResults:181full-textarticlesassessedeligibility47included:3108143214crossover448paralleltrialsuggestivenullsuggestedeffecttotalcholesteroldifference22densitylipoproteinLDL-cholesterolfastingglucoseHOMA-IR30Heterogeneityhigh=52%LDL-cholesterol>75%othersoverallconsideredConclusion:foundinfluenceadultpopulationsHowevereffectsseenlendsupportrecommendingpartdiversedietarypatternspreventiondiabetes:systematicmeta-analysisPeasbeansmellitusfabaceaehumannutritionlentilsnon-communicablepulses

Similar Articles

Cited By