Study population
The SUN Project is a continuous, dynamic, multipurpose and prospective cohort [26]. All participants are university graduates, which reduces the potential confounding related to educational level and socioeconomic status, and increases the validity and reliability of the information [27]. Self-reported mailed and electronic questionnaires are collected at baseline and every 2 years to gather information related to socio-demographics, lifestyle, and medical history, including mortality and its causes. Participants who did not respond to any of the five follow-up mailings were contacted by email or phone. By December 2019, a total of 22,894 participants were enrolled in the SUN cohort. For these analyses, we excluded 341 participants recruited after March 2017 (to ensure a minimum follow-up of 2 years); 350 participants with prevalent CVD; 2,114 individuals with energy intake outside of predefined limits (men: < 800 or > 4,000 kcal/day; women: < 500 or > 3,500 kcal/day) [28]; and 1,671 participants without follow-up (retention rate 91.7%). Therefore, 18,418 participants were the basis for our analyses (Fig. 1).
Bioethics
Participants received written information about the information collected in the questionnaires, their privacy rights to protect their data, and future feedback of the finding of the project from the research team. Potential candidates were additionally informed about their right to refuse to participate or withdraw from the study at any time without reprisal, according to the ethical standards of the Declaration of Helsinki. Voluntary completion of the baseline questionnaire was considered as informed consent for participation in the study. The Research Ethics Committee of the University of Navarra approved the study. The SUN cohort is registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT02669602.
Dietary assessment
Baseline dietary information and after 10 years of follow-up was evaluated using a self-administered food frequency questionnaire (FFQ). The questionnaire has been previously validated, and the reproducibility for the majority of foods and nutrients is good [29,30,31]. The FFQ consists of 136 items and includes 9 food groups: (1) dairy products, (2) eggs, meat, and fish, (3) vegetables, (4) fruits, (5) legumes and cereals, (6) oils and fats, (7) pastries, (8) beverages and (9) miscellaneous. For each food, participants reported how often, on average, during the previous year they had consumed, specifying serving size with different options from “never or almost never” to “more than six times a day.”
Spanish food composition tables were used to calculate dietary intake, considering the daily intake of each food and the composition of nutrients [32, 33]. The ad hoc computer system was used to calculate the daily consumption of each food by multiplying the typical serving size by the frequency of consumption.
MQI assessment
As previously explained, the MQI was constructed based on three sub-indices, the Carbohydrate Quality Index (CQI), the Fat Quality Index (FQI), and the Healthy Plate Protein source Quality Index (HPPQI). The CQI has been used in previous cohort and trial studies to evaluate their association with CVD [34], plasma metabolomic profiles [35], and changes in cardiovascular risk factors [36]. The CQI is based on four equally weighted carbohydrate quality domains: glycemic index (GI), total dietary fiber intake (g/d), ratio of whole grains/ total cereals (whole grains + refined cereals + products prepared with refined flours), and the ratio of solid/total carbohydrates (liquids + solids).
The FQI has been used in nutritional adequacy [37] and CVD investigations [38]. For the calculation of FQI, monounsaturated fatty acids (MUFA), PUFA, SFA, and trans-fat acids (TFA) were taken into account as follows: FQI = (MUFA + PUFA)/(SFA + TFA), receiving equally weighting.
Lastly, the HPPQI has been used in a previous study conducted by our group [24] and it was calculated based on the following ratio: HPPQI = (seafood + poultry + pulses + nuts)/(red and processed meats + cheese), considering the first food group as healthy sources of protein and the second group as unhealthy sources, according to the Harvard’s Healthy Eating Plate [39].
To calculate the MQI, participants were classified into quintiles for each sub-index (CQI, FQI, and HPPQI), assigning values ranging from 1 (lowest quality) to 5 (highest quality). All the sub-index values were summed up, resulting in an MQI score ranging from 3 (poorest macronutrient quality) to 15 (highest macronutrient quality). Lastly, we classified participants into quartiles according to their total MQI score (Table 1).
Table 1 Components of the Macronutrient Quality Index (MQI) Other dietary scores
Adherence to the Mediterranean diet (MedDiet) was assessed with the well-known score proposed by Trichopoulou et al. [40]. The total score range was from 0 to 9, with higher scores indicating greater adherence.
To assess adherence to the Provegetarian pattern, we used the score proposed by Martínez-González et al. [41]. The total score was calculated by summing up the values of the quintiles of vegetable food (1 point for the lowest quintile and 5 points for the highest quintile) and the values of the quintiles of animal food inversely weighted (1 point for the highest quintile and 5 points for the lowest quintile). The final score ranged from 12 (worst adherence) to 60 points (best adherence) [41].
Ascertainment of CVD
CVD was the primary endpoint of our study and it was included inquired in by every self-reported follow-up questionnaire collected every 2 years. When the participant reported a CVD event, we requested the medical documentation and a team of cardiologists adjudicated the event, blinded to the dietary exposures. The endpoint was a composite of acute myocardial infarction with or without ST elevation, stroke (both confirmed by a review of medical records with the prior permission of relatives), and cardiovascular death. Cardiovascular events were generally self-reported. Medical records of participants were requested to confirm cases and finally, cardiovascular events were confirmed by a cardiologist who was blind to diet and lifestyle exposure. Additionally, all potential cases were reviewed by a team of expert physicians. Nonfatal stroke was defined as a focal neurological deficit of sudden onset with a duration of more than 24 h and vascular mechanism. Diagnosis of myocardial infarction was defined using universal criteria [42]. Deceases from cardiovascular causes were confirmed by death certificates, medical records, or records linked to the National Institute of Statistics. For participants lost during follow-up, we consulted the National Death Index of Spain at least once a year, to identify any member of the cohort who may have died.
Other covariates
Additional covariates include anthropometric measurements, habits related to health and lifestyle. The validity of self-reported anthropometric information (weight and height) has been previously evaluated in a subsample of the SUN cohort [43].
Statistical analysis
We describe the baseline characteristics of participants adjusted for age and sex using the inverse probability weighting method according to quartiles of the MQI. Proportions for categorical variables and means and standard deviation (SD) for quantitative variables were calculated.
Cox proportional hazard regression models were used to estimate the association between the quartiles of MQI and CVD incidence. Hazard ratios (HRs) were calculated with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for each quartile, considering Q1 as the reference category. The interpretation of HR > 1 was considered a higher CVD risk, whereas HR < 1 was considered a lower probability of CVD.
Based on the existing literature and also on previous findings of the SUN cohort on [44, 45], we adjusted our models as follows: age was used as underlying time-variable in all models; model 1 was adjusted for sex, age (deciles), and stratified by year entering the cohort; model 2 was additionally adjusted for total energy intake (kcal/d, continuous), marital status (single, married, widowed, separated and others), educational level (years of higher education, continuous), smoking (never, current, and former smoker), accumulated smoking habit (pack-years, continuous), alcohol intake (never, < 5 women or < 10 men g/d, 5–25 women or 10–50 men g/d, and > 25 women or > 50 men g/d), physical activity (metabolic equivalent-h/week, continuous), snacking between meals (yes/no), body mass index (BMI [kg/m2, linear and quadratic terms, continuous]), time spent sitting (hours/week, continuous), weight gain in the previous 5 years before entering the cohort (< 3 kg and ≥ 3 kg) and following a special diet at baseline (yes/no); model 3, was additionally adjusted for family history of CVD (yes/no), and any diagnosis of diabetes (yes/no), hypertension (yes/no), hypercholesterolemia (yes/no), dyslipidemia (yes/no), depression (yes/no), cancer (yes/no); and lastly, model 4 was adjusted for total carbohydrate intake (g/d, continuous), total fat intake (g/d, continuous), and total protein intake (g/d, continuous).
Linear trend tests were performed through successive quartiles, assigning the median value of each quartile, and treating the resulting variables as continuous.
To minimize any effect of dietary variation, we used repeated measurements with updated data and cumulative diet average information of the MQI and its components, with a complete repetition of the FFQ after 10 years of follow-up. For the analysis of repeated measures, the mean between the baseline FFQ and the 10 year FFQ (i.e., cumulative average exposure) was calculated to assess a more realistic diet based on the MQI.
We additionally evaluated the combined effects of adherence to the MedDiet and the Provegetarian dietary pattern with the MQI. For both indexes, participants were categorized into two groups (below and above the median), interpreted as “low adherence” and “high adherence”, respectively, while the MQI was categorized into three groups (Q1, Q2-Q3, and Q4). We considered as reference category the Q4 of the MQI and the highest adherence to MedDiet or Provegetarian dietary pattern.
The following sensitivity analyses and subgroup analyses were additionally performed to assess the robustness of our findings: (a) selection by sex, only men or women participants, (b) only participants < 45 years or ≥ 45 years, (c) censoring participants at > 50 years, (d) only health professionals or only non-health professionals participants, (e) exclusion of participants with hypercholesterolemia and prevalent hypertension, (f) using different predefined energy intake limits (5th percentile and 95th percentile), (g) exclusion of participants with prevalent cancer, (h) exclusion of participants who followed a special diet at baseline, (i) exclusion of participants with ≥ 30 items missing in the FFQ, and (j) exclusion of participants with early CVD (≤ 2 years).
Finally, the Nelson-Aalen curves were used to represent the cumulative risk of CVD during the follow-up of the study according to tertiles of MQI (T1: < 8, T2:8–10 y T3 ≥ 11).
Statistical analyses were conducted using STATA version 16 (STATA Corporation) with the SUN database updated in December 2019. All p value were two-tailed, and statistical significance was deemed in the conventional cut-off p < 0.05.