HypertensionNCT02600338
Meta-analyses of the Effect of Legumes on Blood Pressure
An observational study of Hypertension and Cardiovascular Disease, run by John Sievenpiper at 1 site in Canada.
Trial summary
Legumes are generally recognized as healthy dietary components, and although beans and legumes are recommended in food guidelines in North America, guidelines vary in regards to how much and how often these foods should be consumed. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Any age
- Conditions the study is for
- Hypertension, Cardiovascular Disease, Dyslipidemia
- What is being tested?
- Legumes
- How many people
- 1 participants
- Where
- 1 siteCanada
- Study dates
- Sep 2014to Sep 2016
- Phase
- Observational
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages Any age
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Study population: Varied
Who may be able to join
- Dietary trials in humans
- Legumes comprising majority of intervention.
- Randomized treatment allocation >=3-weeks
- Suitable control (i.e. exchange of other dietary components for legumes)
- viable endpoint data
Who cannot join
- Non-human studies
- Legumes not majority of intervention, or intervention mainly involves an isolated component of legumes (ex. oil or protein isolate)
- Nonrandomized treatment allocation <3-weeks
- Lack of a suitable control
- no viable endpoint data
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
Canada1 site
Toronto 3-D (Diet, Digestive tract and Disease) Knowledge Synthesis and Clinical Trials Unit, Clinical Nutrition and Risk Factor Modification Centre, St. Michael's Hospital
Toronto, Ontario, M5C 2T2
About this study
Official title: Effect of Legumes on Blood Pressure in Humans: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
Legumes are generally recognized as healthy dietary components, and although beans and legumes are recommended in food guidelines in North America, guidelines vary in regards to how much and how often these foods should be consumed. Furthermore, although North American and European guidelines recommend dietary pulses for glycemic control, dietary pulses and other legumes are not specifically suggested for controlling blood pressure and maintaining heart health. To improve evidence-based guidance for legume recommendations, the investigators propose to conduct a systematic review of clinical studies to assess the effect of eating legumes in exchange for other foods on blood pressure in humans. The systematic review process allows the combining of the results from many small studies in order to arrive at a pooled estimate, similar to a weighted average, of the true effect. The investigators will be able to explore whether eating legumes has different effects in different demographics, and whether or not the effect of legumes depends on how much/often they are eaten. The findings of this proposed knowledge synthesis will help improve the health of Canadians through informing recommendations for the general public, as well as those at risk of heart disease and diabetes.
Read the detailed description
Background: Legumes (e.g. chick peas, beans, lentils, peas, soy, peanuts, lupins) are a source of slowly digestible carbohydrate, vegetable protein, fibre, and potassium. Canada's Food Guide encourages consumption of legumes such as beans, lentils, and tofu "often" as meat alternatives, and the dietary guidelines for Americans include beans, peas, and soy products as "foods to increase", and as possible components of a healthy eating pattern. While the European (EASD), Canadian (CDA), and American (ADA) Diabetes Associations recommend the consumption of dietary pulses as a means of improving diabetes control, and the American Heart Association (AHA) recommends the consumption of a healthy eating pattern which includes legumes for cardiovascular health, consolidated evidence for the specific recommendation of legumes for heart health is lacking.
Need for a review: The lack of data to support health claims and other cardiometabolic recommendations represent an urgent call for stronger evidence. A systematic review and meta-analysis of controlled feeding trials remains the "Gold Standard" of evidence for nutrition guidelines development.
Objectives: To provide evidence-based guidance for public health policy, health claims, and nutrition guidelines relating to legumes, the investigators will conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis (knowledge synthesis) of randomized controlled feeding trials to assess the effect of legumes on blood pressure.
Design: The planning and conduct of the proposed meta-analyses will follow the Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. The reporting will follow the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.
Data sources: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials will be searched using appropriate search terms.
Study selection: Intervention trials that investigate diets high in legumes compared with control diets not-containing legumes on blood pressure outcomes in humans will be included. Studies that are <3-wks duration or lack a control will be excluded.
Data extraction: Independent reviewers (≥2) will extract information about study design, sample size, subject characteristics, type and form of legume, dose, follow-up, and the composition of the background diets. Mean±SEM values will be extracted for all outcomes. Standard computations and imputations will be used to derive missing variance data.
Outcomes: The proposed analysis will assess blood pressure control, looking at systolic, diastolic, and mean arterial blood pressure. Where data for both change-from-baseline differences and end differences are equally available, the investigators will use the difference in change from baseline as the primary end point for analyses.
Data synthesis: Pooled analyses stratified by underlying disease status will be conducted for each area of metabolic control using the Generic Inverse Variance method with fixed or random effects models, depending on the number of relevant studies obtained. Random-effects models will be used in the case of collection of 5 or more studies, even in the absence of statistically significant between-study heterogeneity, as they yield more conservative summary effect estimates in the presence of residual heterogeneity. Paired analyses will be applied to all crossover trials. Heterogeneity will be tested by the Cochran Q statistic and quantified by the I2-statistic. Sources of heterogeneity will be explored by sensitivity and subgroup analyses. A priori subgroup analyses will include legume type, legume dose, duration of follow-up, sodium intake (absolute level, within-treatment change, and between-treatment change), dietary fibre intake (absolute level, within-treatment change, and between-treatment change), design (crossover, parallel), study quality, and baseline endpoint values. Significant unexplained heterogeneity will be investigated by additional post hoc subgroup analyses. Meta-regression analyses will assess the significance of subgroups analyses. When >=10 studies are available, publication bias will be investigated by inspection of funnel plots and formal testing using the Egger test and the Begg test. If publication bias is suspected, then the investigators will attempt to adjust for funnel plot asymmetry by imputing the missing study data using the Duval and Tweedie trim and fill method.
Evidence Assessment: The strength of the evidence for each outcome will be assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE).
Knowledge translation plan: Results will be disseminated through traditional means such as interactive presentations at local, national, and international scientific meetings and publication in high impact factor journals. Target adopters will include the clinical practice, public health, industry, research communities, and patient groups. Feedback will be incorporated and used to guide areas for future research.
Preliminary findings: The investigators previously conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the effect of dietary pulses (a subset of legumes - does not include leguminous oil-seeds) on glycemic control in 41 controlled feeding trials. It was found that pulses alone or as part of low-glycemic index or high-fibre diets improved markers of glycemic control. The investigators also previously conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the effect of dietary pulses on blood pressure in 8 isocaloric controlled feeding trials. It was found that diets high in dietary pulses significantly lowered systolic and mean arterial blood pressure compared with diets not containing pulses.
Significance: The proposed project will aid in knowledge translation related to the effects of legumes on blood pressure, updating our knowledge synthesis on dietary pulses and broadening it to assess the effect of all types of legumes, and strengthening the evidence-base for dietary recommendations and health claims and improving heart health outcomes through informing healthcare providers and patients, stimulating industry innovation, and guiding future research.
- Conditions
- Hypertension, Cardiovascular Disease, Dyslipidemia, Diabetes, Metabolic Syndrome
- Being tested
- Legumes
- Keywords
- Systematic review and meta-analysis, Evidence-based medicine (EBM), Evidence-based nutrition (EBN), Clinical practice guidelines, Clinical trials, Legumes, Beans, peas, chickpeas, lentils, soy, peanuts, lupins, Cardiometabolic risk factors, Blood pressure
- Medical subject headings
- Hypertension, Cardiovascular Diseases, Dyslipidemias, Diabetes Mellitus, Metabolic Syndrome
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
LegumesOther
beans, peas, chickpeas, lentils, soybeans, lupins, peanuts in whole or flour form
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Systolic blood pressure
Measured: Up to 2-years
Diastolic blood pressure
Measured: Up to 2-years
Mean arterial pressure
Measured: Up to 2-years
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted9 Nov 2015 (estimated)
- Study startSep 2014
- Primary completionSep 2016 (estimated)
- Study completionSep 2016 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for HypertensionStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Observational
- Enrolment
- 1 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- John Sievenpiper
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR), Canada Research Chairs Endowment of the Federal Government of Canada, The Physicians' Services Incorporated Foundation
- Responsible party
- Sponsor-investigator, John Sievenpiper, University of Toronto
- Investigators
- John L Sievenpiper, MD, PhD, FRCPC, Principal investigator, Toronto 3D Knowledge Synthesis and Clinical Trials Unit, Clinical Nutrition and Risk Factor Modification Centre, St. Michael's Hospital and Department of Nutritional Sciences, University of TorontoRussell J de Souza, ScD, RD, Study director, Toronto 3D Knowledge Synthesis and Clinical Trials Unit, Clinical Nutrition and Risk Factor Modification Centre, St. Michael's Hospital and Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McMaster UniversityDavid JA Jenkins, MD, PhD, DSc, Principal investigator, Toronto 3D Knowledge Synthesis and Clinical Trials Unit, Clinical Nutrition and Risk Factor Modification Centre, St. Michael's Hospital and Department of Nutritional Sciences and Medicine, University of TorontoCyril WC Kendall, PhD, Study director, Toronto 3D Knowledge Synthesis and Clinical Trials Unit, Clinical Nutrition and Risk Factor Modification Centre, St. Michael's Hospital and Department of Nutritional Sciences, University of Toronto
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02600338
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- Legumes & BP 2014
- Status last verified
- Nov 2015
- First submitted
- 30 Oct 2015
- Last updated
- 9 Nov 2015
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 9 Nov 2015. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Effect of Legumes on Blood Pressure in Humans: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02600338
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- Legumes & BP 2014
- Conditions
- Hypertension, Cardiovascular Disease, Dyslipidemia, Diabetes, Metabolic Syndrome
- Keywords
- Systematic review and meta-analysis, Evidence-based medicine (EBM), Evidence-based nutrition (EBN), Clinical practice guidelines, Clinical trials, Legumes, Beans, peas, chickpeas, lentils, soy, peanuts, lupins, Cardiometabolic risk factors
- Study type
- Observational
- Recruitment status
- Unknown status
- Enrolment
- 1 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- John SievenpiperUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR), Canada Research Chairs Endowment of the Federal Government of Canada, The Physicians' Services Incorporated Foundation
- Study start
- Sep 2014
- Primary completion
- Sep 2016 (estimated)
- Study completion
- Sep 2016 (estimated)
- First posted
- 9 Nov 2015 (estimated)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Legumes are generally recognized as healthy dietary components, and although beans and legumes are recommended in food guidelines in North America, guidelines vary in regards to how much and how often these foods should be consumed. Furthermore, although North American and European guidelines recommend dietary pulses for glycemic control, dietary pulses and other legumes are not specifically suggested for controlling blood pressure and maintaining heart health. To improve evidence-based guidance for legume recommendations, the investigators propose to conduct a systematic review of clinical studies to assess the effect of eating legumes in exchange for other foods on blood pressure in humans. The systematic review process allows the combining of the results from many small studies in order to arrive at a pooled estimate, similar to a weighted average, of the true effect. The investigators will be able to explore whether eating legumes has different effects in different demographics, and whether or not the effect of legumes depends on how much/often they are eaten. The findings of this proposed knowledge synthesis will help improve the health of Canadians through informing recommendations for the general public, as well as those at risk of heart disease and diabetes.
Detailed description
Background: Legumes (e.g. chick peas, beans, lentils, peas, soy, peanuts, lupins) are a source of slowly digestible carbohydrate, vegetable protein, fibre, and potassium. Canada's Food Guide encourages consumption of legumes such as beans, lentils, and tofu "often" as meat alternatives, and the dietary guidelines for Americans include beans, peas, and soy products as "foods to increase", and as possible components of a healthy eating pattern. While the European (EASD), Canadian (CDA), and American (ADA) Diabetes Associations recommend the consumption of dietary pulses as a means of improving diabetes control, and the American Heart Association (AHA) recommends the consumption of a healthy eating pattern which includes legumes for cardiovascular health, consolidated evidence for the specific recommendation of legumes for heart health is lacking.
Need for a review: The lack of data to support health claims and other cardiometabolic recommendations represent an urgent call for stronger evidence. A systematic review and meta-analysis of controlled feeding trials remains the "Gold Standard" of evidence for nutrition guidelines development.
Objectives: To provide evidence-based guidance for public health policy, health claims, and nutrition guidelines relating to legumes, the investigators will conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis (knowledge synthesis) of randomized controlled feeding trials to assess the effect of legumes on blood pressure.
Design: The planning and conduct of the proposed meta-analyses will follow the Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. The reporting will follow the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.
Data sources: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials will be searched using appropriate search terms.
Study selection: Intervention trials that investigate diets high in legumes compared with control diets not-containing legumes on blood pressure outcomes in humans will be included. Studies that are <3-wks duration or lack a control will be excluded.
Data extraction: Independent reviewers (≥2) will extract information about study design, sample size, subject characteristics, type and form of legume, dose, follow-up, and the composition of the background diets. Mean±SEM values will be extracted for all outcomes. Standard computations and imputations will be used to derive missing variance data.
Outcomes: The proposed analysis will assess blood pressure control, looking at systolic, diastolic, and mean arterial blood pressure. Where data for both change-from-baseline differences and end differences are equally available, the investigators will use the difference in change from baseline as the primary end point for analyses.
Data synthesis: Pooled analyses stratified by underlying disease status will be conducted for each area of metabolic control using the Generic Inverse Variance method with fixed or random effects models, depending on the number of relevant studies obtained. Random-effects models will be used in the case of collection of 5 or more studies, even in the absence of statistically significant between-study heterogeneity, as they yield more conservative summary effect estimates in the presence of residual heterogeneity. Paired analyses will be applied to all crossover trials. Heterogeneity will be tested by the Cochran Q statistic and quantified by the I2-statistic. Sources of heterogeneity will be explored by sensitivity and subgroup analyses. A priori subgroup analyses will include legume type, legume dose, duration of follow-up, sodium intake (absolute level, within-treatment change, and between-treatment change), dietary fibre intake (absolute level, within-treatment change, and between-treatment change), design (crossover, parallel), study quality, and baseline endpoint values. Significant unexplained heterogeneity will be investigated by additional post hoc subgroup analyses. Meta-regression analyses will assess the significance of subgroups analyses. When >=10 studies are available, publication bias will be investigated by inspection of funnel plots and formal testing using the Egger test and the Begg test. If publication bias is suspected, then the investigators will attempt to adjust for funnel plot asymmetry by imputing the missing study data using the Duval and Tweedie trim and fill method.
Evidence Assessment: The strength of the evidence for each outcome will be assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE).
Knowledge translation plan: Results will be disseminated through traditional means such as interactive presentations at local, national, and international scientific meetings and publication in high impact factor journals. Target adopters will include the clinical practice, public health, industry, research communities, and patient groups. Feedback will be incorporated and used to guide areas for future research.
Preliminary findings: The investigators previously conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the effect of dietary pulses (a subset of legumes - does not include leguminous oil-seeds) on glycemic control in 41 controlled feeding trials. It was found that pulses alone or as part of low-glycemic index or high-fibre diets improved markers of glycemic control. The investigators also previously conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the effect of dietary pulses on blood pressure in 8 isocaloric controlled feeding trials. It was found that diets high in dietary pulses significantly lowered systolic and mean arterial blood pressure compared with diets not containing pulses.
Significance: The proposed project will aid in knowledge translation related to the effects of legumes on blood pressure, updating our knowledge synthesis on dietary pulses and broadening it to assess the effect of all types of legumes, and strengthening the evidence-base for dietary recommendations and health claims and improving heart health outcomes through informing healthcare providers and patients, stimulating industry innovation, and guiding future research.
Study design
Who may qualify
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Child, Adult, Older adult
- Study population
- Varied
Key inclusion criteria (5 listed)
- Dietary trials in humans
- Legumes comprising majority of intervention.
- Randomized treatment allocation >=3-weeks
- Suitable control (i.e. exchange of other dietary components for legumes)
- viable endpoint data
Key exclusion criteria (5 listed)
- Non-human studies
- Legumes not majority of intervention, or intervention mainly involves an isolated component of legumes (ex. oil or protein isolate)
- Nonrandomized treatment allocation <3-weeks
- Lack of a suitable control
- no viable endpoint data
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Legumesbeans, peas, chickpeas, lentils, soybeans, lupins, peanuts in whole or flour form | Other | – |
Primary outcome
Systolic blood pressure
Time frame: Up to 2-years
Diastolic blood pressure
Time frame: Up to 2-years
Mean arterial pressure
Time frame: Up to 2-years
Results and safety
Results are not available in the source record.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 9 Nov 2015.
Related trials for Hypertension
Active, not recruiting
Digital Reinforcement of Motivational Interviewing Micro-Skills Among Primary Care Healthcare Professionals
Hypertension (Without Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus)
Recruiting
Investigating Vascular Properties of HEMI and SPG Signals in Individuals With or at Risk for Chronic Kidney Disease
Chronic Kidney Disease, Hypertension (HTN)
Recruiting
Trial Phase: Syndemic Adapted Medly Uganda
Mental Health
Not yet recruitingPhase 2/3
An Open-Label Extension Study to Evaluate Inhaled Treprostinil SMI in Participants With Pulmonary Hypertension Associated With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (PH-COPD)
Pulmonary Hypertension Associated With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
Enrolling by invitation
Testing Implementation Strategies to Support Clinic Fidelity to an Outpatient Hypertension Bundle
Pregnancy Related, Hypertension
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
John L Sievenpiper, MD, PhD, FRCPC principal investigator
Toronto 3D Knowledge Synthesis and Clinical Trials Unit, Clinical Nutrition and Risk Factor Modification Centre, St. Michael's Hospital and Department of Nutritional Sciences, University of Toronto
Russell J de Souza, ScD, RD study director
Toronto 3D Knowledge Synthesis and Clinical Trials Unit, Clinical Nutrition and Risk Factor Modification Centre, St. Michael's Hospital and Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McMaster University
David JA Jenkins, MD, PhD, DSc principal investigator
Toronto 3D Knowledge Synthesis and Clinical Trials Unit, Clinical Nutrition and Risk Factor Modification Centre, St. Michael's Hospital and Department of Nutritional Sciences and Medicine, University of Toronto
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
An observational study of Hypertension and Cardiovascular Disease, run by John Sievenpiper at 1 site in Canada.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 5 inclusion and 5 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: status not confirmed, as of the sponsor's last update on 9 Nov 2015. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Canada. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
Results are not available in the source record.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Systolic blood pressure (time frame: Up to 2-years). The study lists 3 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 9 Nov 2015.