The EAT-Lancet Planetary Health Diet: Impact on Cardiovascular Disease and the Environment in the EPIC Cohort - Colizzi, Chiara; Beulens, Joline WJ; Vellinga, Reina E; Aleksandrova, Krasimira; Dahm, Christina C; Huybrechts, Inge; Key, Timothy J; Laine, Jessica E; Papier, Keren; Vineis, Paolo; Weiderpass, Elisabete; Agnoli, Claudia; et al. (medRxiv, 2024)
Background Diet plays an important role in the development of cardiovascular diseases and in maintaining sustainable planetary boundaries. The EAT-Lancet Planetary Health Diet could potentially provide co-benefits for human and environmental health, yet evidence on the association between adherence to the EAT-Lancet Planetary Health Diet and risk of cardiovascular events and environmental impact is limited.Methods We investigated the association between adherence to the EAT-Lancet diet and coronary heart disease (CHD) and stroke risk, and with greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, land use, and dietary species richness (DSR). We included 364,745 adult men and women participating in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC) study. Food frequency questionnaires were used to create a score reflecting adherence to the EAT-Lancet diet (EAT-Lancet diet-score), ranging from 0 (no adherence) to 140 (complete adherence). A (pro-) vegetarian version of the score, the EAT-Lancet dietVV-score, was also created, which rewarded low to no consumption of all animal-based foods. Cox proportional hazard regressions were used to study the association of adherence to the EAT-Lancet diet with CHD and stroke incidence. Linear regression analyzed the association with GHG emissions, land use, and DSR.Findings Over a median follow-up of 12·8 years, we identified 12,690 CHD and 7,088 stroke cases. After multivariable adjustment, those most adherent to the EAT-Lancet diet had lower risk of incident stroke (HRQ5vsQ1: 0·59, 95%CI = 0·54 to 0·64), and of incident CHD for those younger than 60 years old at baseline (HRQ5vsQ1: 0·86, 95%CI = 0·79 to 0·93). High adherence to the EAT-Lancet diet reduced GHG emissions by 1·7% (95%CI = -1·9 to -1·5) and land use by 6·2% (95%CI = -6·4 to -5·9). The EAT-Lancet dietVV-score further reduced GHG emissions and land use by 14·3% (95%CI= -14·5 to -14·0) and 18·8% (95%CI = -19·0 to -18·5), respectively, when comparing extreme quintiles, while hazard ratios for CHD and stroke remained unchanged. Those most adherent to the EAT-Lancet diet consumed 16·1% (95%CI = 15·9 to 16·4) more plant species and 19·7% (95%CI = -20·11 to -19·40) fewer animal species.Interpretation Higher adherence to the EAT-Lancet diet was associated with co-benefits for both cardiovascular outcomes and environmental indicators, including dietary species richness. Lower GHG emissions and land use were achieved by further reducing consumption of animal-based products.Funding The coordination of EPIC-Europe is financially supported by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) and also by the Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Public Health, Imperial College London which has additional infrastructure support provided by the NIHR Imperial Biomedical Research Centre (BRC). Exposure indicators were calculated with financial support of the Wereld Kanker Onderzoek Fonds (WKOF), as part of the World Cancer Research Fund International grant programme (IIG_FULL_2020_034).Evidence before this study The authors considered all evidence available to them on the EAT-Lancet Planetary Health Diet, published up until May 2024. The authors searched for relevant articles on the association between adherence to the diet and cardiovascular outcomes and environmental indicators. Studies investigating the association between the diet and outcomes not of interest in this study were not considered. We restricted to evidence from prospective cohort studies with similar analyses and methodology, thereby excluding studies modelling the environmental impact. We found two research articles that explored the association of EAT-Lancet Planetary Health Diet with both cardiovascular outcomes and environmental impact, four that only assessed the association with cardiovascular outcomes, and three only focused on environmental indicators. We found no studies on the association between adherence to the EAT-Lancet Planetary Health Diet and food biodiversity. These studies spanned across varied population groups, focused on different cardiovascular endpoints and reported inconclusive evidence. This also streams from the use of different scores and indices to measure adherence to the EAT-Lancet Planetary Health Diet, which strongly influences evidence on risk estimates. Similarly, evidence on greenhouses gas emissions and land use are hindered by the use of different methodologies to calculate the associated environmental impact of foods and beverages.Added value of this study This study benefits from the use of a large pan-European cohort, which used a standardized nutrient and food database to determine individual dietary intake, as well as environmental data derived by Life Cycle Assessment analyses validated at the European level. The use of two diet scores—one representing an omnivorous version of the EAT-Lancet Planeatry Health Diet (EAT-Lancet diet-score) and the other representing a plant-based variation (EAT-Lancet dietVV-score) —demonstrates that greater environmental benefits can be achieved with the EAT-Lancet dietVV-score by further restricting consumption of animal-based products, without impacting the benefits on human health. The study adds to the current evidence on the impact of the EAT-Lancet Planetary Health Diet on both cardiovascular health and environmental well-being, and additionally supports evidence of an association between adherence to the EAT-Lancet Planetary Health Diet and food biodiversity. The association with food biodiversity adds an important complementary measure of health and sustainability to the current body of evidence on co-benefits of the EAT-Lancet Planetary Health Diet.Implications of all the available evidence Our findings substantiate the co-benefits of adherence to the EAT-Lancet Planeatry Health Diet found in previous studies for cardiovascular health and environmental indicators, with evidence from a large pan-European population-based study. This research study found evidence that adherence to the EAT-Lancet diet was associated with lower risk of stroke across the whole population and with lower risk of CHD among those younger than 60 years old. This study also highlights the impact of the ways in which we operationalise adherence to the EAT-Lancet Planetary Health Diet, emphasizing its importance for comparing studies and developing national policies.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThe coordination of EPIC-Europe is financially supported by International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) and also by the Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Public Health, Imperial College London which has additional infrastructure support provided by the NIHR Imperial Biomedical Research Centre (BRC). The national cohorts are supported by: Danish Cancer Society (Denmark); German Cancer Aid, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), German Institute of Human Nutrition Potsdam-Rehbruecke (DIfE), Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) (Germany); Associazione Italiana per la Ricerca sul Cancro-AIRC-Italy, Italian Ministry of Health, Italian Ministry of University and Research (MUR), Compagnia di San Paolo (Italy); Dutch Ministry of Public Health, Welfare and Sports (VWS), the Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development (ZonMW), World Cancer Research Fund (WCRF), (The Netherlands); Instituto de Salud Carlos III (ISCIII), Regional Governments of Andalucia, Asturias, Basque Country, Murcia and Navarra, and the Catalan Institute of Oncology - ICO (Spain); Swedish Cancer Society, Swedish Research Council and County Councils of Skane and Vasterbotten (Sweden); Cancer Research UK (C864/A14136 to EPIC-Norfolk; C8221/A29017 to EPIC-Oxford), Medical Research Council (MR/N003284/1, MC-UU_12015/1 and MC_UU_00006/1 to EPIC-Norfolk; MR/Y013662/1 to EPIC-Oxford) (United Kingdom). Previous support has come from Europe against Cancer Programme of the European Commission (DG SANCO). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of this manuscript.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:The European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC) study was approved by the Ethical Review Boards of the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) and the Institutional Review Board of each participating EPIC center.I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.YesEPIC data and biospecimens are available for investigators who seek to answer important questions on health and disease in the context of research projects that are consistent with the legal and ethical standard practices of the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), WHO, and the EPIC centres. The primary responsibility for accessing the data, obtained in the frame of the present publication, belongs to the EPIC centres that provided them. Access to EPIC data can be requested to the EPIC Steering Committee, as detailed in the EPIC-Europe Access Policy.