TABLE 4.
Body composition and measures of ectopic fat, following randomization to almond and control snacks1
| Control,2nmax = 51 | Almonds,2nmax = 54 | Main comparison between groups4 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Baseline3 | Change | Baseline3 | Change | ||
| Physical activity by accelerometry,5 cpm | 74.2 ± 17.1 | 1.5 (−4.0, 7.1) | 74.6 ± 21.8 | −2.4 (−7.7, 2.8) | −4.0 (−11.6, 3.6) |
| BMI, kg/m2 | 27.1 ± 4.4 | −0.2 (−0.4, 0.0) | 27.2 ± 4.5 | 0.1 (−0.1, 0.3) | 0.2 (−0.1, 0.5) |
| WC, cm | 93.3 ± 11.7 | 0.1 (−0.9, 1.2) | 94.1 ± 12.2 | −0.6 (−1.6, 0.5) | −0.7 (−2.2, 0.8) |
| Body fat, % | 31.1 ± 7.7 | −0.5 (−1.1, 0.0) | 32.2 ± 7.7 | 0.3 (−0.3, 0.8) | 0.8 (−0.0, 1.6) |
| MRI and 1H-MRS | |||||
| Liver fat % | 2.7 (2.5) | 0.4 (−0.5, 1.3) | 1.7 (1.7) | 1.1 (0.1, 2.0) | 0.7 (−0.6, 2.0) |
| IHL % | 2.9 (4.0) | 0.1 (−1.3, 1.6) | 1.7 (2.3) | −0.6 (−2.1, 0.8) | −0.8 (−2.8, 1.3) |
| UI | 0.21 ± 0.12 | 0.03 (−0.06, 0.12) | 0.32 ± 0.20 | 0.01 (−0.08, 0.10) | −0.02 (−0.15, 0.10) |
| PUI | 0.03 (0.11) | 0.02 (−0.05, 0.10) | 0.04 (0.21) | 0.03 (−0.04, 0.10) | 0.01 (−0.09, 0.11) |
| SI | 0.77 (0.13) | −0.03 (−0.12, 0.05) | 0.70 (0.35) | −0.01 (−0.10, 0.08) | 0.02 (−0.10, 0.15) |
| Pancreatic fat, % | 10.7 (3.8) | 0.1 (−1.1, 1.3) | 10.7 (3.2) | 0.1 (−1.1, 1.4) | 0.0 (−1.7, 1.8) |
| SAT, mL | 13,703 ± 5290 | 678 (−41, 1397) | 12,981 ± 5264 | −20 (−771, 732) | −697 (−1741, 347) |
| VAT, mL | 3492 ± 1930 | −13 (−95, 69) | 3009 ± 1889 | 34 (−50, 118) | 47 (−71, 165) |
| IMCL | 0.037 ± 0.027 | 0.002 (−0.005, 0.010) | 0.030 ± 0.014 | −0.005 (−0.012, 0.003) | −0.007 (−0.018, 0.003) |
| EMCL | 0.035 (0.027) | 0.001 (−0.009, 0.010) | 0.020 (0.015) | −0.001 (−0.011, 0.009) | −0.001 (−0.015, 0.013) |
1Values of change and main comparison of the changes between groups are presented as mean (95% CI) generated from estimated marginal means from ANCOVA.
MRI/MRS scanning was planned on a subset of study participants: n = 50 (25 per group). Not all data were analyzed due to technical problems. Physical activity by accelerometery: n = 45 (control) and 50 (almond). BMI: n = 45 (control) and 50 (almond). WC: n = 49 (control) and 51 (almond). Body fat: n = 49 (control) and 52 (almond). Liver fat and pancreatic fat: n = 26 (control) and 24 (almond). IHL, UI, PUI, and SI: n = 22 (control) and 23 (almond). SAT: n = 24 (control) and 22 (almond). VAT: n = 23 (control) and 22 (almond). IMCL and EMCL: n = 23 (control) and 22 (almond).
Median (IQR) for liver fat, IHL, PUI, SI, pancreatic fat, and EMCL data because they are nonnormally distributed. Mean ± SD for other data that are normally distributed. Baseline biomarker values were not different between the 2 groups.
ANCOVA, adjusted for baseline outcome value and baseline BMI (mean difference in change from baseline, almonds minus control); there were no significant differences between groups. ANCOVA assumptions were met.
5Physical activity by accelerometery data were generated from heart rate variability monitoring. Cpm, counts per minute; EMCL, extramyocellular lipid; IHL, intrahepatic lipid; IMCL, intramyocellular lipid; PUI, polyunsaturation index; SAT, subcutaneous fat; SI, saturation index; UI, unsaturation index; VAT, visceral fat; WC, waist circumference; 1H-MRS, proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy.