Table 4.
LCD score and CAC incidence and change (Longitudinal)
| Incidence of CAC (N=264) in those with CAC=0 at baseline (N=2,892) | Change in CAC score in those with CAC>0 at baseline (N=2,722) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
||||||
| Hazard ratio* | 95% CI* | Regression coefficients† | SE† | |||
|
| ||||||
| Overall LCD score | ||||||
| Q1 | 1 | 0 | ||||
| Q2 | 0.98 | 0.66, 1.46 | 16.6 | 10.3 | ||
| Q3 | 0.92 | 0.61, 1.38 | 26.6 | 10.7 | ||
| Q4 | 0.98 | 0.68, 1.46 | 16.8 | 11.2 | ||
| Q5 | 1.29 | 0.87, 1.91 | −16.4 | 11.9 | ||
| P for linear trend | 0.46 | 0.69 | ||||
| Animal-based LCD score | ||||||
| Q1 | 1 | 0 | ||||
| Q2 | 0.81 | 0.55, 1.21 | 19.3 | 10.3 | ||
| Q3 | 0.68 | 0.44, 1.05 | 19.2 | 10.7 | ||
| Q4 | 0.97 | 0.65, 1.43 | −5.6 | 11.3 | ||
| Q5 | 1.22 | 0.83, 1.79 | −5.8 | 11.2 | ||
| P for linear trend | 0.40 | 0.88 | ||||
| Plant-based LCD score | ||||||
| Q1 | 1 | 0 | ||||
| Q2 | 1.05 | 0.71, 1.54 | 4.5 | 10.8 | ||
| Q3 | 0.71 | 0.48, 1.07 | −1.4 | 10.7 | ||
| Q4 | 1.18 | 0.82, 1.70 | −8.5 | 10.9 | ||
| Q5 | 0.95 | 0.64, 1.41 | −10.6 | 11.2 | ||
| P for linear trend | 0.94 | 0.55 | ||||
LCD, low-carbohydrate-diet; CAC, coronary artery calcium; CI, confidence interval; SE, standard error; Q, quintile.
*
From Cox proportional hazard regression model. Time to event was from baseline to incident CAC. The model was adjusted for age, gender, race, educational level, body mass index, physical activity, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, triglycerides, total energy intake, alcohol use, smoking and tobacco use, history of hypertension and diabetes status at baseline
†
From robust regression Adjusted for above covariates plus the interval between CAC exams.