Effect of dietary patterns differing in carbohydrate and fat content on blood lipidand glucose profiles based on weight-loss success of breast-cancer survivors

Table 4 Estimated slope from repeated-measures models of biomarkers by time and dietgroup

Group weight loss	Glucose	CHOL	TRIG	HDL	LDL	CHOL/HDL
Control	0.03 ± 0.12	0.10 ± 0.47	-0.16 ± 0.62	0.20 ± 0.15	0.20 ± 0.40	0.00 ± 0.01
Low fat, low WL	-0.39^a ± 0.12	-1.56^a ± 0.56	-1.60 ± 0.59	0.41^a ± 0.17	-1.06 ± 0.54	-0.02 ± 0.01
Low fat, high WL	-0.60^a ± 0.14	-3.23^a ± 0.65	-2.58^a ± 0.68	0.00 ± 0.20	-2.30^a ± 0.63	-0.04^a ± 0.01
Low carb, low WL	-0.22 ± 0.14	0.01 ± 0.64	-2.44^a ± 0.66	0.69^a ± 0.19	0.15 ± 0.62	-0.03 ± 0.01
Low carb, high WL	-0.47^a ± 0.13	-2.65^a ± 0.59	-4.97^a ± 0.62	0.60^a ± 0.18	-1.42^a ± 0.57	-0.06^a ± 0.01
	P ^b *(adj* ^Pc )
High vs. low WL averaged over diet	0.06 (0.21)	< 0.001 (0.001)	0.004 (0.01)	0.19 (0.38)	0.02 (0.06)	0.04 (0.16)
Low fat vs. low carb averaged over WL	0.21 (0.21)	0.07 (0.07)	0.007 (0.01)	0.02 (0.08)	0.07 (0.13)	0.43 (0.43)
High vs. low WL, low fat	0.21 (0.21)	0.04 (0.07)	0.24 (0.24)	0.12 (0.35)	0.13 (0.13)	0.21 (0.42)
High vs. low WL, low carb	0.14 (0.21)	0.002 (0.006)	0.003 (0.01)	0.760 (0.76)	0.06 (0.13)	0.10 (0.29)

Values are expressed as slope ± SEE. (n = 44 Control; n =50 Low Fat; n = 48 Low Carb) ^aValues within a column arestatistically different from 0 at the 0.05 level. WL, weight loss; SEE, standarderror of the estimate. ^bThe selected contrasts address the question ofwhich slopes are different from each other. ^cAdjusted P byusing the Hochberg step-up procedure to control the family-wise type I error ratewithin each marker. Carb, carbohydrate; CHOL, cholesterol; HDL, high-densitylipoprotein; LDL, low-density lipoprotein; TRIG, triglyceride.

ISSN: 1465-542X