IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v19y2022i17p11060-d906260.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Associations between Advanced Glycation End Products, Body Composition and Mediterranean Diet Adherence in Kidney Transplant Recipients

Author

Listed:
  • Josipa Radić

    (Department of Nephrology and Dialysis, University Hospital of Split, Spinčićeva 1, 21 000 Split, Croatia
    Department of Internal Medicine, University of Split School of Medicine, Šoltanska 2, 21 000 Split, Croatia)

  • Marijana Vučković

    (Department of Nephrology and Dialysis, University Hospital of Split, Spinčićeva 1, 21 000 Split, Croatia)

  • Andrea Gelemanović

    (Mediterranean Institute for Life Sciences (MedILS), 21 000 Split, Croatia)

  • Ela Kolak

    (Department of Nutrition and Dietetics, University Hospital Centre Split, 21 000 Split, Croatia)

  • Dora Bučan Nenadić

    (Department of Nutrition and Dietetics, University Hospital Centre Split, 21 000 Split, Croatia)

  • Mirna Begović

    (School of Medicine, University of Split, Šoltanska 2, 21 000 Split, Croatia)

  • Mislav Radić

    (Department of Internal Medicine, University of Split School of Medicine, Šoltanska 2, 21 000 Split, Croatia
    Division of Clinical Immunology and Rheumatology, Department of Internal Medicine, University Hospital of Split, 21 000 Split, Croatia)

Abstract

There is limited evidence on the associations between dietary patterns, body composition, and nonclassical predictors of worse outcomes such as advanced glycation end products (AGE) in kidney transplant recipients (KTRs). The aim of this cross-sectional study was to determine the level of AGE-determined cardiovascular (CV) risk in Dalmatian KTRs and possible associations between AGE, adherence to the Mediterranean diet (MeDi), and nutritional status. Eighty-five (85) KTRs were enrolled in this study. For each study participant, data were collected on the level of AGE, as measured by skin autofluorescence (SAF), Mediterranean Diet Serving Score (MDSS), body mass composition, anthropometric parameters, and clinical and laboratory parameters. Only 11.76% of the participants were adherent to the MeDi. Sixty-nine percent (69%) of KTRs had severe CV risk based on AGE, while 31% of KTRs had mild to moderate CV risk. The results of the LASSO regression analysis showed that age, dialysis type, dialysis vintage, presence of CV and chronic kidney disease, C- reactive protein level, urate level, percentage of muscle mass, and adherence to recommendations for nuts, meat, and sweets were identified as positive predictors of AGE. The negative predictors for AGE were calcium, phosphate, cereal adherence according to the MeDi, and trunk fat mass. These results demonstrate extremely low adherence to the MeDi and high AGE levels related CV risk in Dalmatian KTRs. Lifestyle interventions in terms of CV risk management and adherence to the MeDi of KTRs should be taken into consideration when taking care of this patient population.

Suggested Citation

  • Josipa Radić & Marijana Vučković & Andrea Gelemanović & Ela Kolak & Dora Bučan Nenadić & Mirna Begović & Mislav Radić, 2022. "Associations between Advanced Glycation End Products, Body Composition and Mediterranean Diet Adherence in Kidney Transplant Recipients," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(17), pages 1-15, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:17:p:11060-:d:906260
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/17/11060/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/17/11060/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Friedman, Jerome H. & Hastie, Trevor & Tibshirani, Rob, 2010. "Regularization Paths for Generalized Linear Models via Coordinate Descent," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 33(i01).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Tutz, Gerhard & Pößnecker, Wolfgang & Uhlmann, Lorenz, 2015. "Variable selection in general multinomial logit models," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 207-222.
    2. Ernesto Carrella & Richard M. Bailey & Jens Koed Madsen, 2018. "Indirect inference through prediction," Papers 1807.01579, arXiv.org.
    3. Rui Wang & Naihua Xiu & Kim-Chuan Toh, 2021. "Subspace quadratic regularization method for group sparse multinomial logistic regression," Computational Optimization and Applications, Springer, vol. 79(3), pages 531-559, July.
    4. Mkhadri, Abdallah & Ouhourane, Mohamed, 2013. "An extended variable inclusion and shrinkage algorithm for correlated variables," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 57(1), pages 631-644.
    5. Masakazu Higuchi & Mitsuteru Nakamura & Shuji Shinohara & Yasuhiro Omiya & Takeshi Takano & Daisuke Mizuguchi & Noriaki Sonota & Hiroyuki Toda & Taku Saito & Mirai So & Eiji Takayama & Hiroo Terashi &, 2022. "Detection of Major Depressive Disorder Based on a Combination of Voice Features: An Exploratory Approach," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(18), pages 1-13, September.
    6. Susan Athey & Guido W. Imbens & Stefan Wager, 2018. "Approximate residual balancing: debiased inference of average treatment effects in high dimensions," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 80(4), pages 597-623, September.
    7. Vincent, Martin & Hansen, Niels Richard, 2014. "Sparse group lasso and high dimensional multinomial classification," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 771-786.
    8. Chen, Le-Yu & Lee, Sokbae, 2018. "Best subset binary prediction," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 206(1), pages 39-56.
    9. Perrot-Dockès Marie & Lévy-Leduc Céline & Chiquet Julien & Sansonnet Laure & Brégère Margaux & Étienne Marie-Pierre & Robin Stéphane & Genta-Jouve Grégory, 2018. "A variable selection approach in the multivariate linear model: an application to LC-MS metabolomics data," Statistical Applications in Genetics and Molecular Biology, De Gruyter, vol. 17(5), pages 1-14, October.
    10. Fan, Jianqing & Jiang, Bai & Sun, Qiang, 2022. "Bayesian factor-adjusted sparse regression," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 230(1), pages 3-19.
    11. Jun Li & Serguei Netessine & Sergei Koulayev, 2018. "Price to Compete … with Many: How to Identify Price Competition in High-Dimensional Space," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(9), pages 4118-4136, September.
    12. Sung Jae Jun & Sokbae Lee, 2020. "Causal Inference under Outcome-Based Sampling with Monotonicity Assumptions," Papers 2004.08318, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2023.
    13. Rina Friedberg & Julie Tibshirani & Susan Athey & Stefan Wager, 2018. "Local Linear Forests," Papers 1807.11408, arXiv.org, revised Sep 2020.
    14. Xiangwei Li & Thomas Delerue & Ben Schöttker & Bernd Holleczek & Eva Grill & Annette Peters & Melanie Waldenberger & Barbara Thorand & Hermann Brenner, 2022. "Derivation and validation of an epigenetic frailty risk score in population-based cohorts of older adults," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-11, December.
    15. Hewamalage, Hansika & Bergmeir, Christoph & Bandara, Kasun, 2021. "Recurrent Neural Networks for Time Series Forecasting: Current status and future directions," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 388-427.
    16. Hui Xiao & Yiguo Sun, 2020. "Forecasting the Returns of Cryptocurrency: A Model Averaging Approach," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-15, November.
    17. Christopher J Greenwood & George J Youssef & Primrose Letcher & Jacqui A Macdonald & Lauryn J Hagg & Ann Sanson & Jenn Mcintosh & Delyse M Hutchinson & John W Toumbourou & Matthew Fuller-Tyszkiewicz &, 2020. "A comparison of penalised regression methods for informing the selection of predictive markers," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(11), pages 1-14, November.
    18. Brian Quistorff & Gentry Johnson, 2020. "Machine Learning for Experimental Design: Methods for Improved Blocking," Papers 2010.15966, arXiv.org.
    19. Heng Chen & Daniel F. Heitjan, 2022. "Analysis of local sensitivity to nonignorability with missing outcomes and predictors," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 78(4), pages 1342-1352, December.
    20. Xinkun Nie & Stefan Wager, 2017. "Quasi-Oracle Estimation of Heterogeneous Treatment Effects," Papers 1712.04912, arXiv.org, revised Aug 2020.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:17:p:11060-:d:906260. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.