Background The sodium‐glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors are a class of oral hypoglycemic agents. We undertake a systematic review and meta‐analysis of prospective studies to determine the effect of SGLT2 on blood pressure (BP) among individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Methods and Results PubMed‐Medline, Web of Science, Cochrane Database, and Google Scholar databases were searched to identify trial registries evaluating the impact of SGLT2 on BP. Random‐effects models meta‐analysis was used for quantitative data synthesis. The meta‐analysis indicated a significant reduction in systolic BP following treatment with SGLT2 (weighted mean difference −2.46 mm Hg [95% CI −2.86 to −2.06]). The weighted mean differences for the effect on diastolic BP was −1.46 mm Hg (95% CI −1.82 to −1.09). In these subjects the weighted mean difference effects on serum triglycerides and total cholesterol were −2.08 mg/dL (95% CI −2.51 to −1.64) and 0.77 mg/dL (95% CI 0.33‐1.21), respectively. The weighted mean differences for the effect of SGLT2 on body weight was −1.88 kg (95% CI −2.11 to −1.66) across all studies. These findings were robust in sensitivity analyses. Conclusions Treatment with SGLT2 glucose cotransporter inhibitors therefore has beneficial off‐target effects on BP in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and may also be of value in improving other cardiometabolic parameters including lipid profile and body weight in addition to their expected effects on glycemic control. However, our findings should be interpreted with consideration for the moderate statistical heterogeneity across the included studies.

Little is known about the long-term association between low-carbohydrate diets (LCDs) and mortality. We evaluated the link between LCD and overall or cause-specific mortality using both individual data and pooled prospective studies. Data on diets from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES; 1999–2010) were analysed. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards were applied to determine the hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for mortality for each quartile of the LCD score, with the lowest quartile (Q1—with the highest carbohydrates intake) used as reference. We used adjusted Cox regression to determine the risk ratio (RR) and 95% CI, as well as random effects models and generic inverse variance methods to synthesize quantitative and pooled data, followed by a leave-one-out method for sensitivity analysis. Overall, 24 825 participants from NHANES study were included (mean follow-up 6.4 years). After adjustment, participants with the lowest carbohydrates intake (quartile 4 of LCD) had the highest risk of overall (32%), cardiovascular disease (CVD) (50%), cerebrovascular (51%), and cancer (36%) mortality. In the same model, the association between LCD and overall mortality was stronger in the non-obese (48%) than in the obese (19%) participants. Findings on pooled data of nine prospective cohort studies with 462 934 participants (mean follow-up 16.1 years) indicated a positive association between LCD and overall (RR 1.22, 95% CI 1.06–1.39, P < 0.001, I² = 8.6), CVD (RR 1.13, 95% CI 1.02–1.24, P < 0.001, I² = 11.2), and cancer mortality (RR 1.08, 95% CI 1.01–1.14, P = 0.02, I² = 10.3). These findings were robust in sensitivity analyses. Our study suggests a potentially unfavourable association of LCD with overall and cause-specific mortality, based on both new analyses of an established cohort and by pooling previous cohort studies. Given the nature of the study, causality cannot be proven; we cannot rule out residual bias. Nevertheless, further studies are needed to extend these important findings, which if confirmed, may suggest a need to rethink recommendations for LCD in clinical practice.

Objectives Dietary supplements may ameliorate SARS-CoV-2 infection, although scientific evidence to support such a role is lacking. We investigated whether users of the COVID-19 Symptom Study app who regularly took dietary supplements were less likely to test positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection. Design App-based community survey. Setting 445 850 subscribers of an app that was launched to enable self-reported information related to SARS-CoV-2 infection for use in the general population in the UK (n=372 720), the USA (n=45 757) and Sweden (n=27 373). Main exposure Self-reported regular dietary supplement usage (constant use during previous 3 months) in the first waves of the pandemic up to 31 July 2020. Main outcome measures SARS-CoV-2 infection confirmed by viral RNA reverse transcriptase PCR test or serology test before 31 July 2020. Results In 372 720 UK participants (175 652 supplement users and 197 068 non-users), those taking probiotics, omega-3 fatty acids, multivitamins or vitamin D had a lower risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection by 14% (95% CI (8% to 19%)), 12% (95% CI (8% to 16%)), 13% (95% CI (10% to 16%)) and 9% (95% CI (6% to 12%)), respectively, after adjusting for potential confounders. No effect was observed for those taking vitamin C, zinc or garlic supplements. On stratification by sex, age and body mass index (BMI), the protective associations in individuals taking probiotics, omega-3 fatty acids, multivitamins and vitamin D were observed in females across all ages and BMI groups, but were not seen in men. The same overall pattern of association was observed in both the US and Swedish cohorts. Conclusion In women, we observed a modest but significant association between use of probiotics, omega-3 fatty acid, multivitamin or vitamin D supplements and lower risk of testing positive for SARS-CoV-2. We found no clear benefits for men nor any effect of vitamin C, garlic or zinc. Randomised controlled trials are required to confirm these observational findings before any therapeutic recommendations can be made.

Introduction We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to estimate the prevalence of overweight and obesity in children (aged 5–12 years) and adolescents (aged 12–19 years) in Asian countries. Study design: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Material and methods We...

Increased protein intake is suggested as a strategy to slow or reverse the loss of muscle mass and strength observed in sarcopenia, but results from studies that directly tested this possibility have been inconsistent. We assessed the evidence on the effects of whole protein supplementation or higher-protein diets, without the use of amino acids or supplements known to stimulate hypertrophy, alone or in combination with resistance exercise (RE) interventions, on lean body mass (LBM) and strength in older adults. A systematic search was conducted using PubMed, Medline, Web of Science, and Cochrane CENTRAL databases from January 1990 to July 2021. Randomized controlled trials that assessed the effects of protein supplementation and/or higher-protein dietary interventions in older adults (mean age ≥50 y) on total LBM, appendicular lean mass (ALM), and handgrip (HG) and knee extension (KE) strength were included. Twenty-eight studies were identified. In pooled analysis, compared with lower protein controls, protein supplementation did not have a significant positive effect on total LBM [weighted mean difference in change (WMD): 0.34; 95% CI: –0.21, 0.89; I² = 90.01%], ALM (WMD: 0.4; 95% CI: –0.01, 0.81; I² = 90.38%), HG strength (WMD: 0.69; 95% CI: –0.69, 2.06; I² = 94.52%), or KE strength (WMD: 1.88; 95% CI: –0.6, 4.35; I² = 95.35%). However, in interventions that used also RE, statistically significant positive effects of protein were observed for ALM (WMD: 0.54; 95% CI: 0.03, 1.05; I² = 89.76%) and HG (WMD: 1.71; 95% CI: 0.12, 3.30; I² = 88.71%). Meta-regression revealed no significant association between age, per-meal protein dose, duration, and baseline protein intake with change in any outcome. Subgroup analysis revealed the statistically significant effects on ALM occurred only in sarcopenic/frail populations (WMD: 0.88; 95% CI: 0.51, 1.25; I² = 79.0%). Most studies (n = 22) had some risk of bias. In older adults performing RE, increased protein intake leads to greater ALM and HG strength compared with lower protein controls. Without RE, protein has no additional benefit on changes in total LBM, ALM, or HG strength.