Evidence Hub

Associations of the glycaemic index and the glycaemic load with risk of type 2 diabetes in 127 594 people from 20 countries (PURE): a prospective cohort study

V. Miller, David J A Jenkins, M. Dehghan, Kristie Srichaikul, S. Rangarajan, A. Mente, Viswanathan Mohan, S. Swaminathan et al.

The Lancet Diabetes and Endocrinology, 2024

127 participants · 42 citations

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The association between the glycaemic index and the glycaemic load with type 2 diabetes incidence is controversial. We aimed to evaluate this association in an international cohort with diverse glycaemic index and glycaemic load diets.

METHODS

The PURE study is a prospective cohort study of 127 594 adults aged 35-70 years from 20 high-income, middle-income, and low-income countries. Diet was assessed at baseline using country-specific validated food frequency questionnaires. The glycaemic index and the glycaemic load were estimated on the basis of the intake of seven categories of carbohydrate-containing foods. Participants were categorised into quintiles of glycaemic index and glycaemic load. The primary outcome was incident type 2 diabetes. Multivariable Cox Frailty models with random intercepts for study centre were used to calculate hazard ratios (HRs).

FINDINGS

During a median follow-up of 11·8 years (IQR 9·0-13·0), 7326 (5·7%) incident cases of type 2 diabetes occurred. In multivariable adjusted analyses, a diet with a higher glycaemic index was significantly associated with a higher risk of diabetes (quintile 5 vs quintile 1; HR 1·15 [95% CI 1·03-1·29]). Participants in the highest quintile of the glycaemic load had a higher risk of incident type 2 diabetes compared with those in the lowest quintile (HR 1·21, 95% CI 1·06-1·37). The glycaemic index was more strongly associated with diabetes among individuals with a higher BMI (quintile 5 vs quintile 1; HR…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 127 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free