Key result
Habitually skipping breakfast is linked to ~157% higher prevalence of generalized atherosclerosis versus high-energy breakfast.
Why the study?
Skipping breakfast is an unhealthy habit associated with increased cardiovascular risk, but its association with cardiovascular risk factors and the presence, distribution, and extension of subclinical atherosclerosis needed exploration.
Does skipping breakfast increase the prevalence of subclinical atherosclerosis in asymptomatic adults?
Cross-Sectional (n=4,052)
Does skipping breakfast increase the prevalence of subclinical atherosclerosis in asymptomatic adults?
Odds Ratio: 2.57 (95% CI 1.54–4.31)
Skipping breakfast is associated with an increased prevalence of subclinical atherosclerosis independently of conventional cardiovascular risk factors.
Captured external expert commentary on this paper, strongest first. Original sources are linked where available.
“Our results indicate that there is an independent association between breakfast consumption and cardiovascular disease. A higher caloric intake in the morning could result in better glucose regulation throughout the day, as well as increased satiety and balanced appetite regulation that could prevent overeating during the day.”
“Many people have the false belief that skipping breakfast will help them lose weight, when in fact it can have the reverse consequence. The truth is that eating a nutritious breakfast will help you maintain a healthy metabolic balance, which reduces your risk of obesity, diabetes, and heart disease.”
“It's not that you skip breakfast, you get plaques. For many people, skipping breakfast is part of a cluster of bad habits.”
Skipping breakfast was associated with subclinical atherosclerosis; hypothesis-generating for causality, prospective studies needed before practice implications.
BACKGROUND: Daily habits, including the number and quality of eating occasions, are potential targets for primary prevention strategies with large health impacts. Skipping breakfast is considered a frequent and unhealthy habit associated with an increased cardiovascular (CV) risk. OBJECTIVES: The study sought to explore the association between different breakfast patterns and CV risk factors and the presence, distribution, and extension of subclinical atherosclerosis. METHODS: Cross-sectional analysis was performed within the PESA (Progression of Early Subclinical Atherosclerosis) study, a prospective cohort of asymptomatic (free of CV events at baseline) adults 40 to 54 years of age. Lifestyle and multivascular imaging data along with clinical covariates were collected from 4,052 participants. Multivariate logistic regression models were used in the analysis. RESULTS: Three patterns of breakfast consumption were studied: high-energy breakfast, when contributing to >20% of total daily energy intake (27% of the population); low-energy breakfast, when contributing between 5% and 20% of total daily energy intake (70% of the population); and skipping breakfast, when consuming <5% of total daily energy (3% of the population). Independent of the presence of traditional and dietary CV risk factors, and compared with high-energy breakfast, habitual skipping breakfast was associated with a higher prevalence of noncoronary (odds ratio: 1.55; 95% confidence interval: 0.97 to 2.46) and generalized (odds ratio: 2.57; 95% confidence interval: 1.54 to 4.31) atherosclerosis. CONCLUSION: Skipping breakfast is associated with an increased odds of prevalent noncoronary and generalized atherosclerosis independently of the presence of conventional CV risk factors. (Progression of Early Subclinical Atherosclerosis [PESA]; NCT01410318).
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Uzhova et al. (2017) conducted a cross-sectional in Subclinical atherosclerosis (n=4,052). Skipping breakfast vs. High-energy breakfast was evaluated on Generalized atherosclerosis (OR 2.57, 95% CI 1.54-4.31). Compared with a high-energy breakfast, habitually skipping breakfast was associated with a higher prevalence of generalized atherosclerosis (OR 2.57; 95% CI 1.54-4.31).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: