Dietary Inflammatory Index and Inflammatory Biomarkers: Correlations with CRP and IL-6 in Research and Clinical Applications

Abstract

This comprehensive review examines the evidence linking the Dietary Inflammatory Index (DII) with key inflammatory biomarkers CRP and IL-6, addressing both methodological considerations and clinical applications. We explore the foundational biology connecting diet to inflammation, methodological approaches for DII implementation across populations, analytical challenges in interpreting biomarker data, and comparative validation of inflammatory indices. Recent studies across diverse clinical contexts—including pregnancy, rheumatoid arthritis, PCOS, and malnutrition—demonstrate both consistent patterns and important exceptions in DII-biomarker correlations. For research and drug development professionals, this synthesis provides critical insights for designing robust nutritional interventions, interpreting inflammatory biomarker data, and developing targeted anti-inflammatory therapies that account for dietary influences on inflammatory pathways.

Understanding the Diet-Inflammation Axis: Biological Mechanisms Linking DII to CRP and IL-6

Chronic, low-grade inflammation is a well-established subclinical driver of numerous non-communicable diseases (NCDs), including cardiovascular diseases, type 2 diabetes, various cancers, and osteoporosis [1] [2] [3]. As a modifiable lifestyle factor, diet plays a critical role in modulating systemic inflammation. However, quantifying the overall inflammatory effect of an individual's entire diet, which contains numerous pro- and anti-inflammatory components, presents a significant challenge. To address this, researchers developed the Dietary Inflammatory Index (DII) to provide a standardized, quantitative measure for assessing the inflammatory potential of a whole diet [4]. This guide objectively compares the DII's conceptual framework and performance with other emerging dietary inflammatory metrics, providing researchers and drug development professionals with the experimental data and methodologies essential for evaluating their application in clinical and population studies.

Conceptual Framework and Development of the DII

The DII is an a priori index, meaning its development was based on pre-existing scientific knowledge rather than derived from a specific dataset. Its primary purpose is to translate complex dietary intake information into a single, interpretable score that reflects the diet's overall inflammatory potential [3] [4].

Foundational Methodology

The development of the DII was a multi-stage process grounded in a systematic review of the literature up to 2010. The foundational methodology can be summarized as follows [4]:

• Literature Review and Parameter Selection: Researchers identified 45 dietary parameters (including nutrients, bioactive compounds, and specific foods) based on peer-reviewed articles that reported associations between these parameters and six established inflammatory biomarkers: IL-1β, IL-4, IL-6, IL-10, TNF-α, and CRP.
• Scoring the Inflammatory Effect: For each dietary parameter, a literature-derived "inflammatory effect score" was assigned. This score reflects the consensus from the literature on whether the parameter increases (+1), decreases (-1), or has no effect (0) on the core inflammatory biomarkers.
• Global Intake Database: To standardize individual dietary intake against a global reference, the researchers established a global mean intake and standard deviation for each parameter using dietary data from 11 countries worldwide.
• Individual DII Calculation: An individual's DII is computed by:
  • Comparing their reported intake of each parameter to the global mean.
  • Converting this comparison into a Z-score and then a percentile to minimize the effect of "right skewing."
  • Multiplying the percentile value (centered by doubling and subtracting 1) by the parameter's specific inflammatory effect score.
  • Summing the scores across all available parameters to generate the total DII score.

A higher, positive DII score indicates a more pro-inflammatory diet, while a lower, negative score indicates a more anti-inflammatory diet [3] [4].

Conceptual Workflow Diagram

The diagram below illustrates the conceptual framework and computational workflow for deriving the DII score.

Comparative Analysis of Dietary Inflammatory Indices

While the DII is a widely used tool, other indices have been developed using different methodological approaches. The table below provides a structured comparison of the DII with two other prominent indices: the Empirical Dietary Inflammatory Pattern (EDIP) and the empirical Anti-inflammatory Diet Index (eADI).

Table 1: Comparison of Key Dietary Inflammatory Indices

Feature	Dietary Inflammatory Index (DII)	Empirical Dietary Inflammatory Pattern (EDIP)	Empirical Anti-inflammatory Diet Index (eADI)
Development Approach	A priori (Literature-based) [3]	A posteriori (Data-driven) [3]	A posteriori (Data-driven) [2]
Core Components	45 nutrients, bioactive compounds, and foods [3] [4]	Food groups [3]	17 food groups (11 anti-inflammatory, 6 pro-inflammatory) [2]
Scoring Method	Sum of weighted, standardized nutrient scores [1] [4]	Weighted sum of food group intake [3]	Summed tertile scores of food group consumption (0, 0.5, 1 point) [2]
Interpretation	Higher score = more pro-inflammatory [3] [4]	Higher score = more pro-inflammatory [3]	Higher score = more anti-inflammatory [2]
Key Biomarkers in Validation	CRP, IL-6, TNF-α [4]	CRP, IL-6 [3]	hsCRP, IL-6, TNF-R1, TNF-R2 [2]

Performance Comparison with Inflammatory Biomarkers

The ultimate test for these indices is their ability to predict actual levels of systemic inflammation. The following table summarizes key experimental data from recent studies (2025-2026) correlating these indices with inflammatory biomarkers.

Table 2: Association of Dietary Indices with Inflammatory Biomarkers - Recent Experimental Data (2025-2026)

Index (Study)	Study Population	Key Biomarker Associations	Reported Effect Size / Correlation
DII [5]	124 adults with obesity (Turkey)	CRP	Significant positive correlation (r=0.258, p=0.004) [5]
DII [1]	3,384 adults with osteopenia/osteoporosis (NHANES)	Depression (PHQ-9)	DII mediated lifestyle-depression link (Effect coef.=0.095-0.115) [1]
eADI-17 [2]	4,432 men (Cohort of Swedish Men)	hsCRP, IL-6, TNF-R1, TNF-R2	Each 4.5-point increase associated with 12%, 6%, 8%, and 9% lower concentrations, respectively [2]
EDIP-SP [3]	501 adults (São Paulo Health Survey)	CRP	Positively associated after adjustment for BMI [3]
DII [6]	4,567 participants (Iranian Cohort)	Monocyte-to-HDL Ratio (MHR)	Pro-inflammatory diet increased MHR by 12.9% in healthy individuals [6]
Anti-inflammatory Diet (AnMED) [7]	468 participants (Spanish Study)	Antihypertensive Use	Each unit increase in DII predicted a 14.28% increase in antihypertensive use [7]

Detailed Experimental Protocols

To ensure reproducibility and critical evaluation, this section outlines the detailed methodologies for key experiments cited in the comparison tables.

Objective: To examine the association between lifestyle patterns, DII, and depression in individuals with low bone density. Dietary Assessment: Two 24-hour dietary recall interviews from NHANES (2009-2020). DII Calculation Protocol:

• Intake Standardization: Individual intakes of 27 dietary components (macronutrients, vitamins, minerals, fatty acids, caffeine) were centered by subtracting the global mean intake and divided by the global standard deviation to create Z-scores.
• Percentile Conversion: Z-scores were converted to percentiles to achieve a uniform distribution.
• Centering: Percentiles were doubled and 1 was subtracted to symmetrically distribute the values around 0.
• Inflammatory Weighting: The centered percentiles were multiplied by the respective literature-derived inflammatory effect score for each dietary component.
• Summation: The weighted scores for all components were summed to produce the overall DII score for each participant. Outcome Measurement: Depression was assessed using the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9). Mediation analysis tested the role of DII between lifestyle patterns and PHQ-9 scores.

Objective: To develop and validate a user-friendly empirical Anti-inflammatory Diet Index using multiple inflammatory biomarkers. Study Population: 4,432 men from the Cohort of Swedish Men-Clinical, randomly split into Discovery (n=2,216) and Replication (n=2,216) groups. Dietary Assessment: 145-item Food Frequency Questionnaire (FFQ). Biomarkers: High-sensitivity CRP (hsCRP), IL-6, TNF-R1, TNF-R2. Index Development Protocol (Discovery Group):

• Food Grouping: Dietary data were aggregated into food groups.
• Feature Selection: A 10-fold feature selection with filtering based on Lasso regression was used to identify the food groups most correlated with the four inflammatory biomarkers.
• Scoring System: For each of the 17 selected food groups, consumption tertiles were assigned 0, 0.5, or 1 point. Points were summed, with a higher total eADI-17 score indicating a more anti-inflammatory diet. Validation Protocol (Replication Group): The association of the eADI-17 score with inflammatory biomarkers was examined in the Replication group using multivariable-adjusted linear regression models to ensure robustness.

The Scientist's Toolkit: Key Research Reagents and Materials

The following table details essential materials and resources required for conducting research on the Dietary Inflammatory Index and related inflammatory pathways.

Table 3: Essential Research Reagents and Resources for Dietary Inflammation Studies

Item / Resource	Function / Application	Example Specifications / Notes
Food Frequency Questionnaire (FFQ)	Assesses long-term habitual dietary intake for index calculation.	Should be validated for the target population (e.g., 118-item FFQ [6], 145-item FFQ [2]).
24-Hour Dietary Recall	Captures detailed recent dietary intake for precise nutrient calculation.	Often conducted over multiple days (e.g., two non-consecutive days) to account for daily variation [1].
High-Sensitivity CRP (hsCRP) Assay	Quantifies low levels of systemic inflammation.	Immunonephelometric assays on clinical analyzers (e.g., Architect Ci8200) [2]. Commonly used for validation.
Cytokine Analysis Kits	Measures specific inflammatory cytokines (e.g., IL-6, TNF-α).	Multiplex immunoassays or ELISA kits. Olink Proteomics panels offer high-sensitivity multiplexing [2].
Global Diet Database	Serves as the reference for standardizing individual intakes in DII calculation.	Contains global mean and standard deviation for 45 dietary parameters from 11 countries [4].
Biobanked Plasma/Serum	Source for biomarker analysis in cohort studies.	Collected after overnight fast, processed (centrifugation), and stored at -80°C until analysis [2] [3].
DII Calculation Algorithm	Software or script to compute DII scores from dietary intake data.	Requires the global database and inflammatory effect scores as inputs for the standardization and weighting process [4].
Pirimicarb	Pirimicarb, CAS:23103-98-2, MF:C11H18N4O2, MW:238.29 g/mol	Chemical Reagent
Pirimiphos-methyl	Pirimiphos-methyl Certified Reference Material	Pirimiphos-methyl is a broad-spectrum organophosphate insecticide for research on stored product and agricultural pests. For Research Use Only. Not for human use.

The Dietary Inflammatory Index provides a standardized, literature-based framework for quantifying the inflammatory potential of diet, distinguishing it from data-driven approaches like the EDIP and eADI. Recent experimental data consistently demonstrates that a higher, more pro-inflammatory DII score is associated with elevated levels of CRP [5], adverse hematological inflammatory markers [6], and worse clinical outcomes, including depression [1] and increased need for antihypertensive medication [7]. While the DII is a robust and widely validated tool, the choice of index depends on the research question, population, and desired balance between biological mechanism (DII) and predictive power in specific cohorts (EDIP, eADI). For researchers in drug development and clinical science, these indices offer valuable tools for integrating dietary inflammation into models of disease risk and progression.

Interleukin-6 (IL-6) and C-reactive protein (CRP) represent two interconnected pillars of the human inflammatory response. While traditionally employed as clinical biomarkers for monitoring disease activity and systemic inflammation, contemporary research has revealed their direct roles as active contributors to disease pathogenesis across diverse conditions including cardiovascular disease, neurodegenerative disorders, and autoimmune conditions [8] [9]. This paradigm shift from passive markers to active pathogenic drivers has sparked considerable interest in targeting IL-6 and CRP signaling therapeutically, with recent drug development programs yielding promising results [10]. Understanding the complex biology of these molecules—from their synergistic relationship in the acute phase response to their distinct tissue-level effects—provides critical insights for both diagnostic refinement and therapeutic innovation.

The IL-6-CRP axis exemplifies the intricate connection between immune signaling and end-organ damage. IL-6, a pleiotropic cytokine produced by various immune and non-immune cells, serves as the principal hepatic stimulator for CRP production [9]. CRP, in turn, exists in multiple conformational states with distinct biological activities. The conversion from native pentameric CRP (pCRP) to monomeric CRP (mCRP) at sites of inflammation creates a potent pro-inflammatory mediator that drives complement activation, endothelial dysfunction, and vascular pathology [8]. This review examines the expanded biological roles of IL-6 and CRP, their interplay in health and disease, and the experimental approaches driving these discoveries.

Molecular Mechanisms and Signaling Pathways

The IL-6 Signaling Cascade

IL-6 exerts its biological effects through three distinct signaling modes: classical signaling, trans-signaling, and cluster signaling. Classical signaling involves IL-6 binding to membrane-bound IL-6Rα (CD126) and subsequent dimerization with gp130 (CD130), initiating intracellular JAK/STAT pathway activation. This pathway is limited to cells expressing membrane IL-6R, primarily hepatocytes and certain leukocytes. Trans-signaling, by contrast, occurs when IL-6 binds to soluble IL-6R (sIL-6R), forming a complex that can activate any cell expressing gp130, dramatically expanding the cellular targets of IL-6 and contributing to its pro-inflammatory effects in chronic diseases. Cluster signaling, observed in certain immune cells, involves pre-formed receptor complexes on the cell surface.

The downstream effects of IL-6 receptor activation are primarily mediated through the JAK/STAT pathway, particularly STAT3 phosphorylation, which leads to dimerization and nuclear translocation. In the nucleus, STAT3 functions as a transcription factor regulating hundreds of genes involved in inflammation, cell proliferation, and differentiation. Additionally, IL-6 can activate MAPK and PI3K pathways, contributing to its pleiotropic effects on cell survival, apoptosis, and metabolic regulation.

CRP Isoforms and Biological Activities

CRP exists in at least three conformational forms with distinct biochemical properties and biological activities [8] [9]:

• Native pentameric CRP (pCRP): The circulating form primarily synthesized by hepatocytes in response to IL-6 stimulation. pCRP exhibits calcium-dependent binding to phosphocholine on damaged cells and microbial surfaces, activates the classical complement pathway via C1q binding, and serves as the standard form measured in clinical assays.
• Activated pentameric CRP (pCRP): A transitional conformation that occurs when pCRP binds to phosphocholine headgroups exposed on activated cell membranes, particularly under conditions of increased membrane curvature. pCRP exposes neoepitopes not accessible in the native pentamer and exhibits enhanced pro-inflammatory activity.
• Monomeric CRP (mCRP): The tissue-bound form generated through dissociation of pCRP* at sites of inflammation. mCRP exhibits strong pro-inflammatory effects including leukocyte recruitment, platelet activation, and increased endothelial adhesion molecule expression, potentially through interactions with Fcγ receptors and lipid rafts.

Table 1: Biological Characteristics of CRP Isoforms

Parameter	Pentameric CRP (pCRP)	Monomeric CRP (mCRP)
Structure	Pentameric (115 kDa)	Monomeric (23 kDa)
Primary Source	Hepatocytes	Local dissociation of pCRP at inflammatory sites
Solubility	Soluble plasma protein	Tissue-insoluble, membrane-associated
Detection	Standard clinical assays	Specialized immunoassays
Complement Activation	Classical pathway via C1q	Alternative pathway
Inflammatory Activity	Moderate	Potent

The dissociation of pCRP to mCRP represents a crucial amplification step in the inflammatory response. This conformational change occurs preferentially on activated cell membranes, particularly those displaying phosphocholine headgroups due to membrane rearrangement or damage [9]. The resulting mCRP exhibits dramatically different biological activities compared to its pentameric precursor, including enhanced pro-inflammatory effects on endothelial cells, neutrophils, and platelets. This localized conversion mechanism ensures that the potent inflammatory effects of mCRP are largely restricted to sites of tissue injury or inflammation.

The IL-6-CRP Signaling Axis

Figure 1: IL-6 and CRP Signaling Pathway. The diagram illustrates the IL-6 induced JAK-STAT signaling cascade leading to CRP production in hepatocytes, and the subsequent conformational change of pCRP to mCRP at inflammatory sites.

The IL-6-CRP axis represents a fundamental pathway linking immune activation with systemic inflammation. IL-6 stimulation of hepatocytes triggers Janus kinase (JAK) activation, leading to phosphorylation of signal transducer and activator of transcription 3 (STAT3). Phosphorylated STAT3 dimerizes and translocates to the nucleus, where it binds to response elements in the CRP gene promoter, driving transcription and translation of pCRP [9]. This well-established connection explains why CRP levels reliably rise following IL-6 induction during inflammation.

Beyond this hepatic production pathway, local tissue factors regulate CRP bioactivity through conformational changes. At sites of inflammation, pCRP binds to phosphocholine groups exposed on damaged cell membranes, triggering a structural transition to pCRP* and subsequent dissociation into mCRP subunits [8] [9]. This localized conversion creates a microenvironment of enhanced inflammatory activity, as mCRP potently activates complement, promotes leukocyte adhesion, and induces cytokine production—effects that are largely absent in the pentameric form.

Experimental Approaches and Methodologies

Longitudinal Clinical Studies

Longitudinal analysis of inflammatory markers provides critical insights into their dynamics during disease progression and recovery. A 2025 study of COVID-19 patients exemplifies this approach, with blood samples collected at multiple timepoints: within 24 hours of admission (t24h), at 48 hours (t48h), at 7 days (t7d), and long-term post-discharge (greater than 1 month, tLongTerm) [11]. This design enabled researchers to characterize the heterogeneous patterns of inflammatory marker elevation and persistence, revealing distinct patient clusters based on their inflammatory profiles.

Serum levels of heparin-binding protein (HBP), serum amyloid A protein (SAA), IL-6, and CRP were measured using a commercial point-of-care device, allowing for rapid clinical assessment [11]. Viral burden was simultaneously assessed through serum viral spike S-protein levels and specific immunoglobulins G, M, and D against SARS-CoV-2 proteins, while tissue injury was evaluated by measuring HMGB-1 levels. This comprehensive approach facilitated correlation between inflammatory markers, viral load, and tissue damage, providing a systems-level view of the inflammatory response.

Key findings from this longitudinal analysis included the persistent elevation of HBP, CRP, and IL-6 beyond one month post-infection, while SAA levels normalized more rapidly [11]. Patients requiring intensive care demonstrated higher initial levels of CRP, IL-6, and HBP, though only IL-6 remained elevated at 48 hours in patients who subsequently expired. Perhaps most importantly, cluster analysis identified four distinct inflammatory phenotypes with different clinical outcomes, underscoring the limitations of single-marker assessments and highlighting the importance of multi-marker profiling for personalized treatment approaches.

Dietary Intervention Assessment

The relationship between dietary patterns and inflammatory markers represents an active area of investigation with significant public health implications. Multiple research groups have developed indices to quantify the inflammatory potential of diet, including the Dietary Inflammatory Index (DII) and the Empirical Anti-inflammatory Diet Index (eADI) [2] [12]. These tools enable systematic assessment of how dietary components collectively influence systemic inflammation.

The development of eADI exemplifies the rigorous methodology required for creating validated dietary indices. Researchers from the Cohort of Swedish Men-Clinical study analyzed data from 4,432 men with assessment of inflammatory status through four biomarkers: high-sensitivity CRP (hsCRP), IL-6, tumor necrosis factor receptor 1 (TNF-R1), and tumor necrosis factor receptor 2 (TNF-R2) [2]. Dietary intake was assessed using a 145-item food frequency questionnaire (FFQ), with participants indicating consumption frequency across eight predefined categories.

The analytical process involved several key stages. First, researchers randomly divided the cohort into Discovery (n=2,216) and Replication (n=2,216) groups. Using the Discovery group, they employed a 10-fold feature selection with filtering based on Lasso regression to identify food groups most strongly correlated with inflammatory biomarkers [2]. From the selected foods, the eADI was constructed based on summed scores of consumption tertiles. Finally, the association of eADI with inflammatory biomarkers was validated in the Replication group using multivariable-adjusted linear regression models, confirming that each 4.5-point increment in eADI-17 score was associated with significantly lower concentrations of all four inflammatory biomarkers.

Table 2: Dietary Assessment Methodologies in Inflammation Research

Method	Application	Key Components	Inflammatory Markers
Empirical Anti-inflammatory Diet Index (eADI)	Cross-sectional population studies	17 food groups (11 anti-inflammatory, 6 pro-inflammatory)	hsCRP, IL-6, TNF-R1, TNF-R2
Dietary Inflammatory Index (DII)	NHANES analysis	25 nutrients including macronutrients, vitamins, minerals	CRP, IL-6 (literature-derived)
Food Frequency Questionnaire (FFQ)	Cohort of Swedish Men	145 food items, frequency and portion size	hsCRP, IL-6, TNF-R1, TNF-R2
24-hour Dietary Recall	NHANES DII calculation	Detailed nutrient intake assessment	CRP (correlated with stroke risk)

This methodology represents a significant advancement over earlier approaches that relied on single inflammatory biomarkers. The incorporation of multiple markers reflecting different aspects of immune activation provides a more comprehensive assessment of diet's impact on inflammatory status. The resulting eADI-17 includes 17 food groups (11 with anti-inflammatory potential and 6 with pro-inflammatory potential), creating a practical tool for clinical assessment and personalized nutrition recommendations [2].

Similar approaches have demonstrated the clinical relevance of dietary inflammation. A 2025 analysis of NHANES data involving 9,914 diabetic patients found that those in the highest DII quartile had a 78% increased risk of stroke compared to those in the lowest quartile, with each unit increase in DII associated with a 13% increase in stroke risk [12]. This association remained significant after adjustment for multiple confounders and exhibited a linear dose-response relationship, highlighting the clinical significance of diet-induced inflammation.

Clinical and Therapeutic Implications

Neuropsychiatric Manifestations

The involvement of IL-6 and CRP in neuropsychiatric disorders represents an emerging frontier in psychoneuroimmunology. A 2025 cross-sectional study systematically examined associations between elevated pro-inflammatory cytokines (IL-6, CRP, TNF-α) and neuropsychiatric symptoms of post-acute sequelae of COVID-19 (PASC) [13]. Participants were assessed approximately 6 months after acute infection using standardized neuropsychiatric assessments including the Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale (DASS-21), PTSD Checklist for DSM-5 (PCL-5), and cognitive testing.

The findings revealed significant associations between elevated inflammatory markers and specific neuropsychiatric manifestations. Elevated IL-6 was associated with greater fatigue severity and reduced motivation, while elevated CRP correlated with subjective cognitive complaints ("brain fog") and objective neuropsychological impairment [13]. These associations remained significant after controlling for potential confounders including age, sex, body mass index, and acute COVID-19 severity, suggesting a potential direct role for inflammation in these symptoms.

Notably, the study implemented rigorous biomarker assessment protocols. Blood samples were collected following an overnight fast and processed using standardized methods. CRP was measured using immunoturbidometric methods, while IL-6 and TNF-α were assessed using multiplex immunoassays [13]. This methodological rigor strengthens the validity of the observed associations and supports the potential utility of these biomarkers for stratifying PASC patients based on inflammatory profiles.

Beyond PASC, the relationship between inflammation and depression has been extensively documented. A study of 4,567 participants found distinct relationships between dietary inflammatory index and hematological inflammatory markers in healthy versus depressed individuals [6]. In healthy individuals, a pro-inflammatory diet was associated with altered monocyte-to-HDL ratio (MHR) and lymphocyte-to-HDL ratio (LHR), while these relationships were absent in depressed individuals, suggesting possible inflammatory pathway dysregulation in major depressive disorder.

Therapeutic Targeting of IL-6 and CRP

The recognition of IL-6 and CRP as active mediators of disease pathology has stimulated significant interest in their therapeutic targeting. Recent clinical developments highlight the translation of this biological understanding into clinical practice. In 2025, Novartis acquired an IL-6 targeted antibody (pacibekitug) for $1.4 billion, reflecting the substantial commercial and therapeutic potential of IL-6 pathway inhibition [10]. This fully human IgG2 monoclonal antibody binds IL-6, preventing interaction with its receptor and subsequent pro-inflammatory signaling.

The therapeutic rationale for IL-6 inhibition is particularly strong in cardiovascular disease, where chronic inflammation drives atherosclerotic progression. Pacibekitug offers potential advantages over existing anti-inflammatory therapies, including quarterly dosing convenience compared to monthly regimens required for alternative IL-6 targeting agents [10]. Phase 3 trials will determine whether this approach provides clinical benefit beyond conventional lipid-targeting therapies, potentially establishing inflammation modulation as a standard component of cardiovascular risk reduction.

CRP represents another attractive therapeutic target, though its direct inhibition has proven more challenging. Alternative strategies include targeting the conformational changes that generate pro-inflammatory mCRP or developing small molecules that interfere with CRP binding to its ligands [8] [9]. The elucidation of the structural basis for pCRP dissociation to mCRP has identified potential intervention points to block this amplification step in the inflammatory cascade without completely eliminating CRP's beneficial functions in host defense.

Research Reagents and Methodological Tools

Table 3: Essential Research Reagents for IL-6 and CRP Investigations

Reagent Category	Specific Examples	Research Applications	Technical Considerations
CRP Isoform-Specific Antibodies	Anti-pCRP-8D8 (native pentamer), Anti-mCRP/pCRP* 9C9 and 3H12 (dissociated forms) [9]	Discrimination of CRP conformational states in tissue and plasma	Different fixation methods may affect epitope preservation
Multiplex Immunoassay Platforms	Olink Proteomics (NPX quantification), Luminex xMAP technology	Simultaneous measurement of multiple inflammatory biomarkers (IL-6, TNF-R1, TNF-R2)	Normalized Protein Expression (NPX) values follow log2-scale interpretation
High-Sensitivity CRP Assays	Immunoturbidometric methods (Architect Ci8200 analyzer) [2]	Quantification of low-grade inflammation in cardiometabolic studies	Standardized fasting blood collection protocols required
IL-6 Pathway Modulators	Tocilizumab (IL-6R antagonist), Pacibekitug (IL-6 antibody) [10]	Experimental validation of IL-6-dependent mechanisms	Differential effects on classical vs. trans-signaling
Dietary Assessment Tools	Food Frequency Questionnaires (FFQ), 24-hour dietary recall	Calculation of Dietary Inflammatory Index (DII)	Multiple assessment days improve accuracy of usual intake estimation

The investigation of IL-6 and CRP biology requires specialized research tools that continue to evolve in sophistication. Isoform-specific antibodies have been particularly instrumental in advancing understanding of CRP biology, enabling researchers to distinguish between the different conformational states that exhibit distinct biological activities [9]. The anti-pCRP-8D8 antibody specifically recognizes the circulating pentamer, while antibodies such as 9C9 and 3H12 detect neoepitopes exposed in the dissociated pCRP* and mCRP forms, facilitating investigation of CRP dissociation in pathological conditions.

Advanced immunoassay platforms provide the sensitivity and multiplexing capability necessary for comprehensive inflammatory profiling. The Olink Proteomics platform, utilized in the Cohort of Swedish Men study, offers simultaneous measurement of multiple inflammatory biomarkers with high sensitivity and specificity, using normalized protein expression (NPX) values that allow relative quantification across samples [2]. These technological advances have enabled large-scale epidemiological studies examining the relationship between numerous environmental factors, including diet, and inflammatory status.

Therapeutic agents targeting the IL-6 pathway serve dual purposes as both clinical treatments and research tools. IL-6 receptor antagonists like tocilizumab have been used to validate the functional significance of IL-6 signaling in various disease models, while the development of direct IL-6 antibodies such as pacibekitug provides additional tools for dissecting the specific contributions of IL-6 to disease pathogenesis [10]. These biological tools continue to refine our understanding of the complex roles played by IL-6 and CRP in health and disease.

The biological roles of IL-6 and CRP extend far beyond their traditional status as non-specific inflammatory markers. Rather, they function as integrated components of a sophisticated inflammatory network with specific effects on disease pathogenesis across multiple organ systems. The IL-6-CRP axis represents a particularly important pathway, with IL-6 serving as the primary inducer of hepatic CRP production, and CRP undergoing tissue-specific conformational changes that locally amplify inflammatory responses.

Contemporary research approaches have been essential in elucidating these complex relationships. Longitudinal studies with multi-marker assessment, dietary intervention studies utilizing validated inflammatory indices, and sophisticated assays capable of discriminating between CRP isoforms have collectively advanced our understanding of inflammatory biology. These methodological advances have revealed the heterogeneous nature of inflammatory responses and the potential for personalized approaches to inflammation modulation.

The therapeutic targeting of IL-6 and CRP pathways represents a promising frontier in the management of inflammatory diseases. The significant investment in IL-6 targeted therapies reflects growing recognition of the clinical importance of this pathway, while ongoing research into CRP modulation may yield novel approaches to controlling inflammation-driven tissue damage. As our understanding of these molecules continues to evolve, so too will our ability to harness this knowledge for improved patient outcomes across a spectrum of inflammatory conditions.

Systemic low-grade inflammation is a key pathophysiological process in the development of non-communicable diseases, including cardiovascular disease, type 2 diabetes, and various cancers [3] [14]. Dietary patterns represent a modifiable factor that significantly influences inflammatory status through multiple biochemical pathways. Understanding the specific mechanisms through which nutrition modulates inflammation is crucial for researchers and drug development professionals seeking to develop targeted therapeutic interventions.

The inflammatory response involves a complex cascade of mediators, including acute-phase proteins such as C-reactive protein (CRP) and pro-inflammatory cytokines like interleukin-6 (IL-6) and tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α) [15] [16]. These biomarkers serve as critical indicators of inflammatory status and are increasingly used to evaluate the efficacy of nutritional interventions. This review synthesizes current evidence on nutritional modulation of inflammatory pathways, with particular focus on the correlation between dietary inflammatory indices and specific biomarkers including CRP and IL-6.

Key Inflammatory Biomarkers and Their Clinical Significance

Inflammation monitoring in clinical research relies on specific biomarkers that reflect systemic inflammatory status. C-reactive protein (CRP), an acute-phase protein produced by the liver in response to inflammation, serves as one of the most widely used clinical biomarkers. Interleukin-6 (IL-6), a pro-inflammatory cytokine released in response to various stressors, stimulates hepatic production of CRP and peaks within 90-120 minutes after an inflammatory trigger [15]. Tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α) represents another key cytokine in the inflammatory cascade.

The clinical significance of these biomarkers is substantial. Research demonstrates that IL-6 has superior prognostic value compared to CRP in certain clinical contexts. A secondary analysis of the EFFORT trial found that medical inpatients with high IL-6 levels (≥11.2 pg/mL) had a more than 3-fold increase in 30-day mortality compared to those with lower levels (adjusted HR 3.5, 95% CI 1.95-6.28, p < 0.001) [15]. Furthermore, patients with elevated inflammation showed diminished response to nutritional interventions, suggesting that inflammatory status may predict therapeutic efficacy.

Table 1: Key Inflammatory Biomarkers in Nutritional Research

Biomarker	Biological Function	Peak Concentration	Clinical Significance
CRP	Acute-phase protein produced by liver	1-2 days after trigger	Most reliable clinical assay for CVD risk assessment; endorsed by CDC/AHA [14]
IL-6	Pro-inflammatory cytokine	90-120 minutes after trigger	Strong predictor of 30-day mortality (adjusted HR 3.5 for high levels); impacts nutritional therapy efficacy [15]
TNF-α	Pro-inflammatory cytokine	Within 2 hours	Associated with cartilage breakdown in osteoarthritis; reduced by probiotic/synbiotic interventions [17] [18]

Dietary Assessment Methods for Inflammatory Potential

Several validated indices have been developed to quantify the inflammatory potential of diets, each with distinct methodological approaches and applications in research settings.

Dietary Inflammatory Index (DII)

The DII is an a priori index derived from peer-reviewed research publications assessing associations between dietary factors and inflammatory biomarkers. Comprising 45 dietary parameters including nutrients, bioactive compounds, and foods, the DII generates a continuous score where higher values indicate pro-inflammatory dietary patterns [3]. The computation involves calculating z-scores for consumed nutrients based on mean daily intakes and standard deviations from global nutritional datasets, transforming these to percentile scores, and multiplying by inflammatory effect scores for each parameter [5].

Empirical Dietary Inflammatory Pattern (EDIP)

The EDIP represents an a posteriori, data-driven index derived using reduced rank regression in cohort studies. An adaptation for the São Paulo population (EDIP-SP), focusing on high processed meat intake and low consumption of fruits, vegetables, rice, and beans, has demonstrated positive associations with plasma CRP concentrations [3]. In comparative studies, EDIP-SP showed more consistent associations with inflammatory biomarkers than other indices, explaining a higher percentage of variance in CRP levels [19] [3].

Empirical Anti-Inflammatory Diet Index (eADI)

Recently developed through a cross-sectional study of 4,432 men, the eADI-17 incorporates 17 food groups (11 anti-inflammatory and 6 pro-inflammatory) selected based on correlations with multiple inflammatory biomarkers including hsCRP, IL-6, TNF-R1, and TNF-R2 [20]. Each 4.5-point increment in eADI-17 (2 SD) was associated with concentrations that were 12% lower for hsCRP, 6% lower for IL-6, 8% lower for TNF-R1, and 9% lower for TNF-R2, demonstrating robust predictive validity for low-grade chronic inflammation [20].

Table 2: Comparison of Dietary Inflammatory Assessment Indices

Index	Development Approach	Components	Key Associations with Biomarkers
DII	A priori literature-based	45 dietary parameters	Associated with CRP in men; effect modification by sex observed [3]
EDIP	A posteriori data-driven	Food groups from reduced rank regression	Positively associated with plasma CRP; explains higher variance in CRP than other indices [19] [3]
eADI-17	Empirical with multiple biomarkers	17 food groups (11 anti-inflammatory, 6 pro-inflammatory)	Each 4.5-point increase associated with 12% lower hsCRP, 6% lower IL-6 [20]
GDQS	Food-based diet quality	Healthy and unhealthy food groups	Healthy submetric inversely associated with CRP; unhealthy submetric positively associated with CRP [3]

Experimental Evidence for Nutritional Interventions

Anti-Inflammatory Diets and Cardiovascular Risk Factors

A comprehensive meta-analysis of 18 randomized controlled trials demonstrated that anti-inflammatory dietary patterns (Mediterranean, DASH, Nordic, Ketogenic, and Vegetarian diets) significantly reduced cardiovascular risk factors compared to omnivorous diets [14]. Specifically, these interventions were associated with reductions in systolic blood pressure (MD: -3.99, 95% CI: -6.01 to -1.97; p = 0.0001), diastolic blood pressure (MD: -1.81, 95% CI: -2.73 to -0.88; p = 0.0001), LDL cholesterol (SMD: -0.23, 95% CI: -0.39 to -0.07; p = 0.004), total cholesterol (SMD: -0.31, 95% CI: -0.43 to -0.18; p < 0.00001), and hs-CRP (SMD: -0.16, 95% CI: -0.31 to -0.00; p = 0.04) [14].

The Mediterranean diet, characterized by high consumption of extra-virgin olive oil (≥60 mL/day), fatty fish (≥2 servings/week), and polyphenol-rich plant foods, appears to suppress the nuclear factor-κB (NF-κB) signaling pathway, thereby diminishing secretion of pro-inflammatory cytokines including TNF-α and IL-6 [14]. The ketogenic diet, operating through strict carbohydrate restriction (≤50 g/day) and high fat intake (70-80% of calories), exerts anti-inflammatory effects primarily through β-hydroxybutyrate-mediated NLRP3 inflammasome suppression [14].

Probiotic and Synbiotic Supplementation

A systematic review and meta-analysis of 22 randomized controlled trials including 1,321 individuals with prediabetes and type 2 diabetes demonstrated that probiotic and synbiotic supplementation significantly reduced inflammatory markers [17]. The pooled analysis showed weighted mean differences of -0.46 mg/L (95% CI: [-0.77, -0.15], p=0.003) for CRP, -0.43 pg/ml (95% CI: [-0.76, -0.09], p=0.012) for IL-6, and -1.42 pg/ml (95% CI: [-2.15, -0.69], p<0.001) for TNF-α [17].

Subgroup analyses revealed that CRP reduction was most pronounced among participants with baseline CRP ≥3 mg/L, those undergoing longer interventions (≥12 weeks), individuals with T2DM, overweight participants, and when probiotics were administered [17]. IL-6 levels were significantly reduced in obese individuals, particularly with longer treatment durations and synbiotic interventions, while TNF-α reductions were most pronounced in long-term interventions (≥12 weeks), especially among T2DM patients with normal BMI and when probiotics were used [17].

Specific Nutrient Interventions

Omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids, particularly those found in fish, exhibit potent anti-inflammatory properties through modulation of eicosanoid and resolvin production [14]. These fatty acids influence inflammatory pathways via multiple mechanisms, including incorporation into cell membranes, alteration of lipid mediator profiles, and regulation of gene expression through nuclear receptors.

Glutamine, considered a conditionally essential amino acid during metabolic stress, attenuates inflammatory response via effects on heat shock protein, nuclear factor-κB signaling pathway, and attenuation of TNF-α, IL-6, and IL-18 expression following sepsis [16]. Studies in severe burn patients demonstrate that glutamine supplementation can reduce resting energy expenditure and catecholamine blood levels [16].

Methodological Protocols for Key Experiments

Protocol: Assessing Dietary Inflammatory Potential

The cross-sectional study by Ferreira et al. provides a robust methodological framework for investigating diet-inflammatory relationships [19] [3]. The study involved 501 participants from the 2015 Health Survey of São Paulo, with dietary data assessed through two non-consecutive 24-hour dietary recalls. Dietary indices (DII, EDIP-SP, and GDQS) were scored based on these recalls, and plasma concentrations of high-sensitive CRP, TNF-α, and adiponectin were determined. Multivariable-adjusted linear regression models examined associations between dietary indices and inflammatory biomarkers, with model fit compared using the coefficient of determination and Akaike Information Criterion [19] [3].

Protocol: Probiotic Intervention in Metabolic Disorders

The systematic review and meta-analysis on probiotic and synbiotic supplementation followed comprehensive methodology [17]. Researchers conducted extensive searches of online databases from inception to September 2025 to identify relevant randomized controlled trials. Data extraction included study characteristics, participant demographics, intervention details, and outcomes. The overall effect size was determined using weighted mean differences with 95% confidence intervals through a random-effects model. Heterogeneity was assessed using I² statistics, and subgroup analyses were conducted to explore sources of heterogeneity [17].

Protocol: Machine Learning Approaches

A recent study integrated machine learning with clinical data from 600 knee osteoarthritis patients to identify key predictors of disease severity and develop personalized dietary strategies [18]. Random Forest models were developed using Python's scikit-learn library to classify patients into high-pain and low-pain groups based on clinical and biochemical parameters. The dataset was split into training (70%) and testing (30%) subsets, with model performance evaluated based on accuracy, precision, recall, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC = 0.93) [18]. This approach identified BMI, CRP, and IL-6 as critical predictors of pain severity.

Signaling Pathways in Nutritional Modulation of Inflammation

The following diagram illustrates the key mechanisms through which dietary components modulate inflammatory signaling pathways:

Diagram 1: Nutritional Modulation of Inflammatory Signaling Pathways. This diagram illustrates key mechanisms through which dietary components influence inflammatory pathways, including NF-κB suppression by omega-3 fatty acids and glutamine, NLRP3 inflammasome inhibition by ketone bodies and short-chain fatty acids (SCFA), and cytokine regulation.

The Researcher's Toolkit: Essential Reagents and Materials

Table 3: Essential Research Reagents for Nutritional Inflammation Studies

Reagent/Material	Specifications	Research Application
High-Sensitivity CRP Immunoassay	Latex-enhanced immunonephelometric assay (e.g., Architect Ci8200)	Quantification of low-grade inflammation; endorsed by CDC/AHA for CVD risk assessment [20] [14]
Multiplex Cytokine Panels	MSD Multi-Spot Assay System U-PLEX (IL-6, TNF-α) or Olink Proteomics panels	Simultaneous measurement of multiple cytokines; Olink provides normalized protein expression in log2 scale [15] [20]
Food Frequency Questionnaire	145-item FFQ with 8 predefined frequency categories	Assessment of habitual dietary intake for calculating DII, EDIP, or eADI scores [20]
Dietary Analysis Software	BeBIS 8.2 or equivalent nutrient analysis programs	Conversion of dietary records to nutrient intake data for inflammatory index calculation [5]
ELISA Kits	High-sensitivity kits for IL-6, TNF-α, adiponectin	Quantification of specific inflammatory biomarkers in plasma/serum samples [18]
Standardized Probiotic Formulations	Defined strains with CFU quantification	Intervention studies on gut-inflammatory axis modulation [17]
Pirlimycin	Pirlimycin, CAS:79548-73-5, MF:C17H31ClN2O5S, MW:411.0 g/mol	Chemical Reagent
Pirodavir	Pirodavir, CAS:124436-59-5, MF:C21H27N3O3, MW:369.5 g/mol	Chemical Reagent

The nutritional modulation of inflammatory pathways represents a promising approach for preventing and managing chronic diseases. Evidence from clinical studies demonstrates that anti-inflammatory dietary patterns, specific nutrients, and probiotic supplementation can significantly reduce key inflammatory biomarkers including CRP, IL-6, and TNF-α. The differential effects observed based on baseline inflammation status, intervention duration, and individual metabolic profiles highlight the importance of personalized nutritional approaches.

For researchers and drug development professionals, validated dietary indices such as DII, EDIP, and eADI provide valuable tools for quantifying dietary inflammatory potential, while specific biomarkers offer sensitive measures of intervention efficacy. Future research should focus on refining these tools, elucidating precise molecular mechanisms, and developing targeted nutritional interventions for specific population subgroups based on their inflammatory status and genetic predispositions.

The Dietary Inflammatory Index (DII) was developed as a quantitative tool to assess the inflammatory potential of an individual's overall diet [21] [22]. Unlike approaches that focus on single nutrients or foods, the DII provides a comprehensive scoring system based on extensive literature review connecting 45 dietary parameters to inflammatory biomarkers [21]. Each food parameter receives a specific inflammatory effect score, with positive values indicating pro-inflammatory potential and negative values indicating anti-inflammatory properties [6]. The total DII score represents the cumulative inflammatory potential of the entire diet, with higher scores indicating more pro-inflammatory diets [23].

This review synthesizes epidemiological evidence connecting DII scores to measurable inflammatory biomarkers, particularly C-reactive protein (CRP) and interleukin-6 (IL-6), across diverse populations and study designs. We examine the methodological approaches for DII assessment, quantitative relationships between DII and inflammatory markers, underlying biological mechanisms, and clinical implications for chronic disease risk.

Methodological Approaches for DII Assessment in Population Studies

DII Calculation and Dietary Assessment Tools

The development of the DII was based on a systematic review of nearly 2,000 research articles published between 1950 and 2010 that investigated relationships between dietary components and inflammatory biomarkers [22] [24]. The original DII incorporates 45 food parameters, including nutrients, bioactive compounds, and spices such as turmeric, ginger, and garlic [21]. Calculation involves comparing an individual's intake of these parameters to a global reference database, converting intakes to percentile scores, and multiplying by the respective inflammatory effect scores [23] [12].

Population studies employ various dietary assessment methods to calculate DII scores:

• 24-Hour Dietary Recalls: Multiple 24-hour recalls (often 2-3) provide detailed short-term intake data [23] [12]
• Food Frequency Questionnaires (FFQ): Semi-quantitative FFQs assess habitual dietary intake over extended periods (typically 1 year) [2] [25]
• 7-Day Dietary Recalls: Structured instruments capturing weekly consumption patterns [24]

Different assessment methods can influence DII predictive capability. Studies comparing methods found that 24-hour recalls and 7-day recalls showed similar predictive ability for inflammation, while FFQ-derived DII also demonstrated robust associations with inflammatory biomarkers [24].

Inflammatory Biomarker Measurement

Studies validating DII scores typically measure established inflammatory biomarkers using standardized laboratory protocols:

• High-sensitivity CRP (hs-CRP): Measured using immunonephelometric assays with intra-assay coefficients of variation typically <5% [2]
• IL-6: Assessed using high-sensitivity ELISA or proteomic panels with intra-assay CV <10% [2]
• TNF-α receptors (TNF-R1, TNF-R2): Determined using proteomic platforms providing normalized protein expression values in log2 scale [2]
• Additional markers: Some studies also measure homocysteine, fibrinogen, and hematological inflammatory ratios [25] [6]

Quality control typically excludes participants with CRP >20 mg/L to avoid capturing acute inflammation from infections or other intensive inflammatory processes [2].

Table 1: Key Inflammatory Biomarkers in DII Validation Studies

Biomarker	Standard Detection Method	Common Cut-points	Biological Significance
hs-CRP	Latex-enhanced immunonephelometric assay	>3 mg/L [25]	Acute phase protein, cardiovascular risk predictor
IL-6	Olink Proteomics panels or ELISA	>1.6 pg/ml [25]	Pro-inflammatory cytokine, stimulates CRP production
TNF-R1/TNF-R2	Olink Proteomics panels	Varies by study	Receptors for TNF-α, inflammatory signaling
Homocysteine	Immunoassays	>15 μmol/L [25]	Cardiovascular risk factor, associated with inflammation

Quantitative Evidence Linking DII to Inflammatory Biomarkers

Cross-Sectional and Cohort Studies

Multiple large-scale epidemiological studies have demonstrated consistent associations between higher DII scores and elevated inflammatory biomarkers:

The Seasonal Variation of Blood Cholesterol Study (SEASONS) conducted in Worcester, MA, provided early validation for the DII [24]. Among 495-559 healthy participants followed for one year with quarterly dietary and biomarker assessments, each unit increase in DII was associated with 8-10% higher odds of elevated hs-CRP (>3 mg/L), after adjusting for age, sex, BMI, and other confounders [24]. This study demonstrated that DII derived from both 24-hour recalls and 7-day dietary recalls significantly predicted inflammatory status.

The Asklepios Study in Belgium (n=2,524) further confirmed these relationships [25]. After multivariable adjustment, each unit increase in DII was associated with 19% higher odds of elevated IL-6 (>1.6 pg/mL) and 56% higher odds of elevated homocysteine (>15 μmol/L). This study highlighted that women generally consumed more anti-inflammatory diets (mean DII: -1.01) than men (mean DII: 0.90) [25].

More recently, the Cohort of Swedish Men - Clinical (n=4,432) developed and validated an empirical Anti-inflammatory Diet Index (eADI) using multiple inflammatory biomarkers [2]. Each 4.5-point increase in eADI (approximately 2 SD) was associated with 12% lower hs-CRP, 6% lower IL-6, 8% lower TNF-R1, and 9% lower TNF-R2 concentrations, demonstrating robust inverse relationships between anti-inflammatory diet scores and inflammatory biomarkers [2].

Meta-Analytic Evidence

A 2023 systematic review and meta-analysis specifically investigated the association between DII and elevated CRP across 14 studies comprising 59,941 individuals [21]. The pooled analysis demonstrated that individuals in the highest DII category had 39% higher odds of elevated CRP compared to those in the lowest category. Furthermore, each unit increase in DII as a continuous variable was associated with 10% increased odds of elevated CRP [21].

Subgroup analyses revealed stronger associations in studies that used energy-adjusted DII, measured CRP (vs. hs-CRP), and utilized 24-hour recalls for dietary assessment [21]. This comprehensive meta-analysis provides the strongest level of epidemiological evidence connecting pro-inflammatory diets to systemic inflammation.

Table 2: Summary of Meta-Analyses Examining DII-Inflammation Relationships

Meta-Analysis Focus	Number of Studies	Pooled Sample Size	Main Findings	Heterogeneity
DII and elevated CRP [21]	14	59,941	OR: 1.39 (95% CI: 1.06-1.14) for highest vs. lowest DII; 10% increased odds per unit DII	I² = 0%
DII and cognitive impairment [26]	9	266,169	RR: 1.34 (95% CI: 1.15-1.55) for high DII and cognitive impairment risk	I² = 56%
DII and frailty [27]	15	42,130	OR: 1.47 (95% CI: 1.28-1.69) for frailty; OR: 1.54 (95% CI: 1.34-1.76) for pre-frailty	I² = 56%

DII and Inflammation-Related Health Outcomes

Cardiovascular Diseases

Large epidemiological studies have linked pro-inflammatory diets to increased cardiovascular disease risk. An analysis of 43,842 participants from NHANES (1999-2018) found that each unit increase in DII was associated with 4.9% higher odds of coronary heart disease after adjusting for multiple confounders [23]. Several metabolic and lipid indicators mediated this relationship, including triglyceride-glucose index, visceral adiposity index, BMI, and HDL cholesterol [23].

Similarly, in patients with diabetes, higher DII scores significantly increased stroke risk. Among 9,914 diabetic patients from NHANES (1999-2020), those in the highest DII quartile had 78% higher stroke risk compared to those in the lowest quartile, with each unit DII increase associated with 13% higher stroke odds [12]. Restricted cubic spline analyses revealed a linear dose-response relationship between DII and stroke risk in this vulnerable population [12].

Other Inflammation-Related Conditions

The pro-inflammatory effects of diet extend to various other health conditions:

• Cognitive Function: A meta-analysis of nine prospective cohort studies (n=266,169) found that higher DII scores increased cognitive impairment risk by 34%, including mild cognitive impairment and dementia [26]
• Frailty Syndrome: In middle-aged and older adults (15 studies, n=42,130), those with highest DII scores had 47% higher frailty odds and 54% higher pre-frailty odds compared to those with lowest DII scores [27]
• Depression: Emerging evidence suggests connections between pro-inflammatory diets and depression, though relationships with hematological inflammatory markers appear more complex [6]

Biological Mechanisms Connecting Diet to Inflammation

Pro-inflammatory diets influence systemic inflammation through multiple biological pathways. The following diagram illustrates key mechanisms through which dietary components modulate inflammatory processes:

The diagram above illustrates how pro-inflammatory diets activate multiple interconnected pathways leading to systemic inflammation. Key mechanisms include NF-κB pathway activation, NLRP3 inflammasome stimulation, oxidative stress generation, and gut barrier dysfunction [27]. These processes collectively increase production of pro-inflammatory cytokines including IL-6, TNF-α, and IL-1β, which in turn stimulate hepatic CRP production and establish chronic low-grade inflammation [21] [25].

Anti-inflammatory diets, rich in fiber, omega-3 fatty acids, polyphenols, and various vitamins, counteract these processes through multiple mechanisms including inhibition of inflammatory signaling pathways, reduction of oxidative stress, and preservation of intestinal barrier function [2] [27].

Research Reagent Solutions for DII and Inflammation Studies

Table 3: Essential Research Materials and Methods for DII-Inflammation Studies

Category	Specific Tools/Assays	Application in DII Research	Key Features
Dietary Assessment Tools	24-hour dietary recall protocols [24]	Collect individual dietary intake data	Multiple recalls improve accuracy
	Food Frequency Questionnaires [2] [25]	Assess habitual dietary patterns	Validated for specific populations
	USDA Food and Nutrient Database [12]	Convert food intake to nutrient data	Standardized nutrient composition
Inflammatory Biomarker Assays	High-sensitivity CRP assays [2] [24]	Measure systemic inflammation	High sensitivity (detection <0.1 mg/L)
	Multiplex cytokine panels (IL-6, TNF-α) [2]	Simultaneous measurement of multiple cytokines	High-throughput capability
	Olink Proteomics platforms [2]	Measure inflammatory proteins	High specificity and sensitivity
Laboratory Equipment	Architect Ci8200 analyzer [2]	Automated hs-CRP measurement	Standardized clinical measurements
	ELISA systems [25]	Cytokine quantification	Widely accessible technology
	-80°C freezers [2] [6]	Sample preservation	Maintain biomarker integrity

Epidemiological evidence consistently demonstrates that higher DII scores, indicating more pro-inflammatory dietary patterns, are associated with elevated levels of inflammatory biomarkers including CRP and IL-6. These relationships are observed across diverse populations and are maintained after adjustment for potential confounders. The association follows a dose-response pattern, with progressively higher DII scores correlating with increased inflammation.

The inflammatory potential of diet, as quantified by the DII, has important implications for chronic disease risk, including cardiovascular diseases, cognitive decline, and frailty syndrome. These findings underscore the importance of dietary patterns in modulating chronic inflammation and suggest that anti-inflammatory dietary approaches may help mitigate inflammation-related disease risk.

Future research should focus on refining DII assessment methods, elucidating molecular mechanisms linking diet to inflammation, and developing targeted anti-inflammatory dietary interventions for specific population subgroups. The consistent epidemiological evidence connecting DII to inflammatory biomarkers provides a strong foundation for incorporating dietary inflammation assessment into both public health strategies and clinical practice.

Measuring Dietary Inflammation: Methodological Approaches and Research Applications

In nutritional epidemiology, the Dietary Inflammatory Index (DII) has emerged as a valuable tool for quantifying the inflammatory potential of an individual's overall diet. Unlike approaches that focus on single nutrients or foods, the DII provides a comprehensive summary measure based on the synthesis of extensive scientific literature linking dietary components to inflammatory biomarkers [28]. The ability to translate data from standard nutritional assessment tools like Food Frequency Questionnaires (FFQs) into a validated inflammatory score has significant implications for research into chronic diseases, from cardiovascular conditions to cancer and neurodevelopmental disorders [4] [29]. This guide examines the methodological framework for calculating DII scores, compares its performance with alternative indices, and presents experimental data on its validation against established inflammatory markers, particularly C-reactive protein (CRP) and interleukin-6 (IL-6), providing researchers with practical protocols for implementation.

Core Methodology: Calculating the DII from FFQ Data

Theoretical Foundation and Dietary Components

The DII is derived from an extensive review of peer-reviewed literature published between 1950 and 2010, examining the relationship between dietary factors and specific inflammatory markers [30] [4]. The original DII was based on 45 dietary parameters, including nutrients, bioactive compounds, and spices, each classified according to their effect on established inflammatory biomarkers like CRP, IL-6, TNF-α, IL-1β, IL-4, and IL-10 [31] [32]. Of these parameters, 36 components exhibit anti-inflammatory properties, while 9 components demonstrate pro-inflammatory effects [31]. In practice, however, the number of components used in calculation often depends on the availability of dietary data in the FFQ being utilized [32] [29].

Step-by-Step Computational Algorithm

The transformation of raw FFQ data into a standardized DII score follows a systematic multi-step process [25] [32] [29]:

• Step 1: Dietary Intake Assessment - Researchers collect dietary data using a validated FFQ, which records the habitual consumption frequency and portion sizes of food items over a specific period (typically the past year).

• Step 2: Linkage to Global Reference Database - Individual intake data for each DII component is compared to a global reference database that provides robust population-based mean intake values and standard deviations for each parameter. This standardized reference framework enables comparative assessments across different populations [29].

• Step 3: Z-score Calculation - For each dietary parameter, a Z-score is computed using the formula: ( Z = \frac{\text{individual mean intake} - \text{global mean intake}}{\text{global standard deviation}} ). This represents the individual's exposure relative to the standard global mean.

• Step 4: Centering to Percentile Score - To minimize the effect of right-skewing common in dietary data, the Z-score is converted to a centered percentile score. The cumulative distribution function value is doubled and subtracted by 1 to achieve a symmetric distribution centered around zero.

• Step 5: Application of Inflammatory Effect Scores - Each centered percentile score is multiplied by the respective food parameter's "inflammatory effect score" (derived from the literature review), which indicates the strength and direction (pro- or anti-inflammatory) of its relationship with inflammatory biomarkers.

• Step 6: Energy Adjustment (for E-DII) - To account for variations in total energy intake, the Energy-adjusted DII (E-DII) can be calculated using the energy density method (dietary intake per 1000 calories) [32] [33].

• Step 7: Summation for Overall DII - All food parameter-specific DII scores are summed to create the overall DII score for each participant. A higher composite score indicates a more pro-inflammatory diet, while a lower (more negative) score indicates a more anti-inflammatory diet [28].

The following diagram illustrates this sequential computational workflow:

Diagram: DII Computational Workflow from FFQ data to final score

Comparative Analysis of Dietary Inflammatory Indices

Key Dietary Inflammatory Indexes and Their Characteristics

While the DII is widely used, several dietary indexes have been developed to assess the inflammatory potential of diet. A recent scoping review identified 43 food-based indexes categorized into four groups: dietary patterns, dietary guidelines, dietary inflammatory potential, and therapeutic diets [34]. The following table compares three prominent indexes specifically designed to assess dietary inflammatory potential:

Table 1: Comparison of Major Dietary Inflammatory Indexes

Feature	Dietary Inflammatory Index (DII)	Empirical Dietary Inflammatory Pattern (EDIP)	Energy-Adjusted DII (E-DII)
Derivation Approach	Literature-derived (a priori) [31]	Data-driven, hypothesis-oriented (a posteriori) [31]	Modified from DII [33]
Components Basis	Primarily nutrients (35 of 45 components) [31]	Exclusively food groups (18 components) [31] [34]	Nutrients and foods, adjusted for energy [33]
Component Count	45 total (9 pro-inflammatory, 36 anti-inflammatory) [31]	18 total (9 pro-inflammatory, 9 anti-inflammatory) [31]	Varies based on available FFQ data [32]
Scoring Method	Sum of literature-derived inflammatory effect scores [25] [29]	Weighted sum based on regression coefficients from RRR [31]	Standardized per 1000 calories intake [32] [33]
Influence of Supplements	Yes [31]	No [31]	Depends on underlying DII data
Key Applications	Chronic disease risk prediction across populations [4] [29]	Predicting plasma inflammatory markers [31]	Research requiring energy intake adjustment [33]

Predictive Performance Against Inflammatory Biomarkers

Multiple validation studies have tested the ability of these indexes to predict circulating levels of inflammatory biomarkers. The following table synthesizes key comparative findings from major studies:

Table 2: Index Performance in Predicting Inflammatory Biomarkers (% Difference Highest vs. Lowest Quintile)

Inflammatory Index	CRP	IL-6	TNFαR2	Adiponectin
EDIP (Women)	+60% [31]	+23% [31]	+7% [31]	-21% [31]
EDIP (Men)	+38% [31]	+14% [31]	+9% [31]	-16% [31]
DII (Women)	+49% [31]	+21% [31]	+4% [31]	-14% [31]
DII (Men)	+29% [31]	+24% [31]	+5% [31]	-4% (NS) [31]
E-DII (Older Adults)	+12% (OR for elevated CRP) [35]	+11% (OR for elevated IL-6) [35]	Not reported	Not reported

Note: CRP = C-reactive protein; IL-6 = Interleukin-6; TNFαR2 = Tumor Necrosis Factor Alpha Receptor 2; NS = Not Significant

A 2017 comparative study in the Nurses' Health Study and Health Professionals Follow-Up Study concluded that while both DII and EDIP assess dietary inflammatory potential, EDIP showed a greater ability to predict concentrations of plasma inflammatory markers, potentially because it was derived specifically based on circulating inflammatory markers [31]. The correlations between the scores were modest (r=0.29 for women, r=0.21 for men), suggesting they capture related but distinct aspects of dietary inflammatory potential [31].

A 2022 cross-sectional comparative analysis in a middle- to older-aged Irish population further found that while higher diet quality (assessed by DASH, MD, DII, and E-DII) was generally associated with lower concentrations of various inflammatory biomarkers including CRP, neutrophils, and IL-6, the DASH score demonstrated the most consistent relationships after correcting for multiple testing [33].

Experimental Validation Protocols and Data

Standardized Biomarker Validation Methodology

To validate the predictive capacity of DII scores, researchers employ rigorous experimental protocols measuring associations with established inflammatory biomarkers:

• Blood Collection and Handling: Participants typically fast for 10-12 hours before venous blood samples (e.g., 10mL) are collected in vacutainer tubes under sterile conditions between 8:30-10:30 am [29]. Serum is obtained through rapid centrifugation and stored at -70°C until analysis.

• Biomarker Assessment: Key inflammatory markers are quantified using standardized assays:

  • CRP: Measured using high-sensitivity immunoturbidimetric assays or biochip array systems [31] [33].
  • IL-6: Quantified using ELISA kits or biochip array systems [31] [28].
  • Additional markers: TNF-α, IL-1β, IL-10, fibrinogen, and white blood cell counts may also be assessed depending on the study [29] [33].

• Quality Control: Laboratories incorporate blinded quality-control samples with pre-established coefficients of variation (e.g., 2.9-12.8% for IL-6, 1.0-9.1% for CRP) randomly interspersed among participant samples, with batch correction to adjust for potential variability [31].

• Statistical Analysis: Multivariable-adjusted linear or logistic regression models test associations between DII scores and biomarker concentrations, typically adjusting for age, sex, BMI, smoking, physical activity, medication use, and total caloric intake [35] [29].

Key Validation Study Findings

The DII has been validated against inflammatory biomarkers across diverse global populations:

• Belgian Population (Asklepios Study): Significant positive associations were observed between DII scores and IL-6 (>1.6 pg/ml: OR 1.19, 95% CI 1.04-1.36) and homocysteine (>15 μmol/l: OR 1.56, 95% CI 1.25-1.94) after adjusting for confounders [25].

• Japanese Population (JPHC Study): IL-6 concentrations increased across DII quartiles in Japanese men, validating the DII in an Asian population for the first time [28].

• Older Scottish Adults (Lothian Birth Cohort): Higher E-DII scores predicted elevated CRP (>3mg/L) at age 70 (OR 1.12, 95% CI 1.02-1.24) and elevated IL-6 (>1.6pg/ml) at age 73 (OR 1.11, 95% CI 1.00-1.23) [35].

• Iranian GC Study: Each one-unit increase in DII corresponded with significant increases in hs-CRP (β=0.09), TNF-α (β=0.16), IL-6 (β=0.16), and IL-1β (β=0.10), while anti-inflammatory IL-10 decreased (β=-0.11) [29].

The Researcher's Toolkit: Essential Reagents and Materials

Table 3: Essential Research Materials for DII Studies

Item Category	Specific Examples	Research Function
Dietary Assessment	Validated FFQ (168-item or similar) [32] [29], Standardized portion size visuals, Nutritionist IV software or equivalent	Captures habitual dietary intake for DII calculation
Global Reference Database	World mean and standard deviation values for 45 food parameters [25] [29]	Provides standardized reference for Z-score calculation
Blood Collection	Vacutainer tubes, Centrifuge, -70°C freezer [29]	Obtains and preserves serum/plasma for biomarker analysis
Inflammatory Biomarker Assays	High-sensitivity CRP kits, IL-6 ELISA kits, TNF-α assays, Biochip array systems [29] [33]	Quantifies inflammatory markers for validation
Statistical Analysis	SAS, SPSS, R with appropriate regression modeling capabilities	Performs multivariable-adjusted association analyses
Pironetin	Pironetin	Pironetin is a potent microtubule polymerization inhibitor that covalently binds α-tubulin. For Research Use Only. Not for human, veterinary, or household use.
Parbendazole	Parbendazole - CAS 14255-87-9 - Research Compound	Parbendazole for research. Study its potential in AML differentiation therapy. This product is for Research Use Only. Not for human or veterinary use.

The DII provides a standardized, literature-based method for translating FFQ data into a quantitative measure of dietary inflammatory potential, with validated calculation methodologies that enable consistent application across diverse populations. While alternative indexes like EDIP may demonstrate stronger predictive capacity for certain inflammatory biomarkers, the DII and its energy-adjusted variant (E-DII) offer well-validated approaches for investigating diet-inflammation-disease relationships. The choice of index should be guided by research objectives, population characteristics, and available dietary data. As research continues to refine these tools, they offer powerful approaches for quantifying how dietary patterns modulate chronic inflammation—a fundamental pathway in many age-related diseases.

Empirical DII (EDII) Development and Validation Studies

The Empirical Dietary Inflammatory Index (EDII) represents a significant methodological advancement in nutritional epidemiology, shifting from literature-derived indices to data-driven approaches for quantifying diet's inflammatory potential. Unlike a priori indices based on existing scientific knowledge, empirical indices derive their structure from statistical relationships between food intake and inflammatory biomarkers in specific populations [36]. This approach captures the complex interactions between multiple dietary components and inflammation, potentially offering greater predictive power for disease risk assessment [36] [37].

The development of EDII addresses a critical need in nutritional science: the ability to assess whole-diet inflammatory potential in a standardized, reproducible manner across different populations [36]. Chronic inflammation mediates the development of numerous chronic diseases, and diet represents a modifiable factor that can either exacerbate or mitigate this inflammatory state [36] [4]. By empirically deriving dietary patterns linked to inflammatory biomarkers, researchers can create tools that more accurately reflect how diet influences inflammation pathways in human populations.

Comparative Analysis of Major Empirical Dietary Indices

Table 1: Overview of Major Empirical Dietary Inflammatory Indices

Index Name	Development Population	Biomarkers Used	Food Groups Included	Key Validation Findings
Original EDII [36]	Nurses' Health Study (NHS), n=5,230	IL-6, CRP, TNFαR2	18 food groups (9 pro-inflammatory, 9 anti-inflammatory)	Comparing extreme quintiles in NHS-II: CRP 1.52x higher (95% CI: 1.18-1.97), P-trend=0.002; Adiponectin 0.88x lower (95% CI: 0.80-0.96)
EDIP-A (Asian-adapted) [37]	Multi-Ethnic Cohort (Singapore), n=2,720	hsCRP, GlycA	40 predefined food groups (specific pro/anti breakdown not provided)	Significantly associated with hsCRP and IL-6 (p<0.05); 1-unit increase associated with 13% higher MetS odds (OR: 1.13, 95% CI: 1.02-1.26)
eADI-17 [2]	Cohort of Swedish Men, n=4,432	hsCRP, IL-6, TNF-R1, TNF-R2	17 food groups (11 anti-inflammatory, 6 pro-inflammatory)	Each 4.5-point increment associated with: 12% lower hsCRP, 6% lower IL-6, 8% lower TNF-R1, 9% lower TNF-R2

Table 2: Performance Comparison Across Validation Studies

Index	Population Characteristics	Inflammatory Biomarker Associations	Health Outcome Links
EDII [36]	NHS-II (women, n=1,002) and HPFS (men, n=2,632)	Significant prediction of IL-6, CRP, TNFαR2, adiponectin (all p<0.05)	Not specifically reported in source
EDIP-A [37]	Multi-ethnic Asian population (Chinese, Indian, Malay)	Significant association with hsCRP and IL-6 (p<0.05)	Higher incidence of metabolic syndrome (OR: 1.13, 95% CI: 1.02-1.26)
eADI-17 [2]	Older Swedish men (74±6 years)	Spearman correlations: hsCRP (-0.17), IL-6 (-0.23), TNF-R1 (-0.28), TNF-R2 (-0.26)	Not specifically reported in source

Methodological Framework for EDII Development

Core Statistical Approach: Reduced Rank Regression

The development of empirical dietary inflammatory indices predominantly utilizes Reduced Rank Regression (RRR), a hybrid statistical method that combines elements of both exploratory and hypothesis-driven approaches [36] [37]. RRR identifies linear functions of predictors (food groups) that maximize explained variation in response variables (inflammatory biomarkers) [36]. This methodology advantageously uses information on response variables to derive dietary patterns, unlike purely exploratory methods like principal components analysis that rely solely on the covariance structure of foods [36].

The RRR process begins with predefined food groups entered as predictors. For example, the original EDII development used 39 food groups [36], while the Asian-adapted EDIP-A utilized 40 food groups [37]. These food groups serve as inputs to identify dietary patterns most predictive of predetermined inflammatory markers. The first factor extracted from RRR represents the dietary pattern that explains the maximum possible variation in the specified inflammatory biomarkers [37].

Food Group Selection and Weighting

Following initial RRR, most methodologies apply stepwise linear regression to refine the food group selection. This secondary analysis identifies the most important component food groups contributing to the RRR dietary pattern, typically using a variance explanation threshold (e.g., >1%) for inclusion and retention in the final model [37]. The resulting regression coefficients serve as weights for the food groups in the final index score [37].

The original EDII development yielded a weighted sum of 18 food groups, with 9 exhibiting anti-inflammatory properties and 9 demonstrating pro-inflammatory effects [36]. Similarly, the more recent eADI-17 comprised 17 food groups (11 anti-inflammatory, 6 pro-inflammatory) derived through a 10-fold feature selection process with Lasso regression filtering [2]. This refinement process ensures that only the most relevant food groups contribute to the final index, enhancing predictive accuracy while minimizing overfitting.

Diagram 1: EDII Development Workflow (Title: EDII Development Methodology)

Validation Approaches

Robust validation represents a critical phase in EDII development. Most studies employ independent cohort validation to assess construct validity [36] [2] [37]. The original EDII was developed in the Nurses' Health Study but validated in two independent samples: NHS-II and the Health Professionals Follow-up Study [36]. Similarly, the eADI-17 used a split-sample approach, developing the index in a discovery group (n=2,216) and validating it in a replication group (n=2,216) [2].

Validation typically involves examining associations between the empirical dietary index and inflammatory biomarkers not used in the development phase, demonstrating the index's ability to predict broader inflammatory profiles [36]. Successful validation across diverse populations (e.g., different genders, ethnicities, age groups) strengthens evidence for the index's generalizability and utility in various research and clinical contexts.

The Researcher's Toolkit: Essential Methodological Components

Table 3: Essential Research Reagents and Methodological Components

Component Category	Specific Elements	Research Function	Examples from Studies
Inflammatory Biomarkers	CRP, IL-6, TNFα receptors, adiponectin, GlycA	Serve as response variables in RRR; validate index performance	hsCRP, IL-6, TNFαR2 used in EDII [36]; GlycA added in EDIP-A [37]
Dietary Assessment Tools	Semi-quantitative Food Frequency Questionnaires (FFQ)	Capture habitual food intake for food group derivation	169-item FFQ in EDIP-A [37]; 145-item FFQ in eADI-17 [2]
Statistical Methodologies	Reduced Rank Regression (RRR), stepwise linear regression	Derive dietary patterns predictive of inflammation	RRR with stepwise regression used across EDII, EDIP-A, eADI-17 [36] [2] [37]
Food Grouping Systems	Predefined food groups (40 groups in EDIP-A, 39 in EDII)	Standardize dietary input for pattern derivation	Categorization of individual foods into meaningful groups [36] [37]
Validation Cohorts	Independent population samples	Test generalizability and construct validity	NHS-II and HPFS for EDII [36]; Singapore Health 2012 for EDIP-A [37]
Pargyline	Pargyline, CAS:306-07-0, MF:C11H13N, MW:159.23 g/mol	Chemical Reagent	Bench Chemicals
Paroxetine Mesylate	Paroxetine Mesylate|CAS 217797-14-3|High Purity	Paroxetine Mesylate is a potent SSRI for research. This product is for Research Use Only (RUO) and is strictly prohibited for personal use.	Bench Chemicals

Biomarker Correlations: Quantitative Evidence

The predictive validity of empirical dietary indices is established through their significant associations with inflammatory biomarkers. The consistently strong correlation between higher EDII scores and elevated CRP levels across multiple studies underscores the robustness of this relationship. The original EDII validation found a 1.52-fold higher CRP concentration when comparing extreme EDII quintiles in the NHS-II cohort [36]. Similarly, a 2025 study of adults with obesity found CRP significantly increased with higher DII scores (p=0.006) [5].

The eADI-17 demonstrated significant inverse correlations with multiple inflammatory markers, with Spearman correlation coefficients of -0.17 for hsCRP, -0.23 for IL-6, -0.28 for TNF-R1, and -0.26 for TNF-R2 [2]. Each 4.5-point increment in eADI-17 score was associated with significantly lower concentrations of all measured inflammatory markers: 12% lower for hsCRP, 6% lower for IL-6, 8% lower for TNF-R1, and 9% lower for TNF-R2 [2].

These consistent findings across diverse populations provide compelling evidence that empirically derived dietary indices effectively capture diet's influence on inflammatory pathways. The associations remain significant after adjustment for potential confounders including BMI, physical activity, smoking status, and medication use [36] [2] [5].

Implications for Research and Clinical Practice

The development of empirical dietary inflammatory indices represents a paradigm shift in nutritional epidemiology, enabling more precise assessment of diet's role in inflammation-mediated chronic diseases. These indices have demonstrated utility in predicting various health outcomes beyond inflammation itself. The EDIP-A score showed a significant association with metabolic syndrome incidence, with each unit increase corresponding to 13% higher odds of developing MetS [37]. This suggests potential applications for empirical dietary indices in chronic disease risk assessment and prevention strategies.

Future research directions include further adaptation and validation of empirical dietary indices across diverse ethnic and cultural contexts, investigation of their relationship with additional health outcomes, and potential integration into clinical tools for personalized nutrition recommendations. As evidence accumulates, these empirically-derived indices may inform more targeted dietary guidelines for inflammation reduction and chronic disease prevention across diverse populations [2] [4] [37].

In the evolving landscape of nutritional immunology and inflammatory disease management, the standardized measurement of C-reactive protein (CRP) and interleukin-6 (IL-6) has emerged as a critical methodological priority. These biomarkers serve as fundamental indicators of inflammatory status, with particular relevance in research exploring the relationship between dietary patterns and systemic inflammation. The dietary inflammatory index (DII), a quantitative measure of the inflammatory potential of diet, has demonstrated significant correlations with both CRP and IL-6 levels across multiple population studies [38] [23]. This establishes these biomarkers as essential objective endpoints in nutritional immunology research.

The complex biological relationship between IL-6 and CRP underpins their complementary value in research settings. IL-6, a pleiotropic 26-kDa cytokine, constitutes the primary inducer of hepatic production of CRP, an acute-phase protein [39]. This physiological connection creates a coordinated inflammatory response system, yet each biomarker offers distinct temporal and functional information. IL-6 concentrations peak rapidly within 90-120 minutes following an inflammatory trigger, while CRP levels rise more gradually, reaching peak concentrations 1-2 days after the initial stimulus [15]. This differential kinetics, combined with variations in their biological activities, necessitates careful consideration in both measurement protocols and clinical interpretation.

This comparison guide provides a comprehensive assessment of CRP and IL-6 as research and clinical biomarkers, focusing on their respective technical requirements, performance characteristics, and appropriate applications within the context of dietary intervention studies and inflammatory disease management.

Biomarker Characteristics and Physiological Context

Biological Roles and Signaling Pathways

CRP and IL-6 function within an integrated inflammatory signaling cascade. IL-6 operates as a primary signaling molecule in the NLRP3/IL-1β/IL-6/CRP pathway, which has been identified as central to inflammatory processes in conditions including coronary artery disease [40]. IL-6 signaling occurs through two distinct mechanisms: classic signaling (through membrane-bound IL-6 receptors on leukocytes and hepatocytes) and trans-signaling (through soluble IL-6 receptors acting on various cell types) [41] [42]. The complexity of IL-6 signaling has raised questions about whether therapeutic interventions should target IL-6 or its receptor, with genetic evidence suggesting that IL-6 inhibition reduces cardiovascular risk without major safety concerns [41].

CRP, in contrast, functions primarily as an effector molecule in the inflammatory cascade, produced by hepatocytes in response to IL-6 stimulation. It participates in the opsonization of pathogens and damaged cells and activates the classical complement pathway [39]. The differential roles within the inflammatory cascade contribute to their distinct performance characteristics as biomarkers.

Table 1: Fundamental Characteristics of CRP and IL-6

Characteristic	C-Reactive Protein (CRP)	Interleukin-6 (IL-6)
Molecular Weight	~115 kDa (pentameric)	26 kDa
Primary Origin	Hepatocytes	Immune cells (macrophages, T-cells), endothelial cells, adipocytes
Inducing Stimuli	IL-6-mediated signaling	Infection, tissue injury, chronic stress, oxidative stress
Kinetic Profile	Peak: 24-48 hours; Half-life: 19 hours	Peak: 90-120 minutes; Half-life: 1-4 hours
Primary Functions	Opsonization, complement activation, phagocytosis promotion	Fever induction, acute phase protein stimulation, immune cell differentiation

Measurement Methodologies and Standardization Challenges

Standardized measurement of CRP and IL-6 presents distinct technical challenges. CRP is typically quantified using immunonephelometric or immunoturbidimetric assays (e.g., Architect Ci8200 analyzer, Abbott Laboratories), with high-sensitivity CRP (hs-CRP) assays enabling detection of lower concentrations relevant for chronic inflammatory states [2] [39]. These assays demonstrate strong inter-assay precision, with coefficients of variation typically around 5% at clinically relevant concentrations [2].

IL-6 measurement employs more diverse methodologies, including electrochemiluminescent immunoassays (ECLIA, e.g., Roche Cobas e411 analyzer), multispot assay systems (e.g., MSD U-PLEX platform), and proximity extension assay technology (e.g., Olink Proteomics) [15] [43] [2]. These platforms show variable performance characteristics, with ECLIA assays demonstrating inter-assay precision ranging from 2.0% at high concentrations to 17.4% near the limit of quantitation [43]. The MSD platform offers enhanced sensitivity for detecting physiological concentrations in individuals with low-grade inflammation.

Table 2: Analytical Method Comparison for CRP and IL-6 Quantification

Parameter	CRP Measurement	IL-6 Measurement
Common Platforms	Immunoturbidimetric (Abbott Allinity), Latex-enhanced immunonephelometric (Architect Ci8200)	ECLIA (Roche Cobas e411), MSD Multi-Spot, Olink Proteomics
Sample Requirements	Serum, plasma	Serum, plasma (often EDTA-treated)
Typical Sensitivity	hs-CRP: ~0.1 mg/L	1.5 pg/mL (ECLIA), <1.0 pg/mL (MSD)
Dynamic Range	0.1-350 mg/L (varies by assay)	1.5-5000 pg/mL (ECLIA)
Inter-assay CV	4-5%	2-17% (concentration-dependent)
Standardization	WHO international reference standard available	No international standardization; platform-specific variation

The following diagram illustrates the integrated inflammatory signaling pathway and the relationship between IL-6 and CRP:

Figure 1: Inflammatory Signaling Pathway Showing IL-6 and CRP Relationship

Comparative Analytical Performance in Research Settings

Correlation with Clinical Outcomes

Substantial evidence demonstrates that IL-6 and CRP provide complementary but distinct prognostic information across various clinical contexts. In critical care settings, the FROG-ICU study demonstrated that elevated IL-6 levels were more strongly associated with 90-day mortality (adjusted HR 1.92, 95% CI 1.63-2.26) than CRP (adjusted HR 1.21, 95% CI 1.03-1.41) after adjustment for severity scores [39]. IL-6 also showed superior performance in predicting need for organ support therapies, including vasopressors/inotropes (OR 2.67, 95% CI 2.15-3.31) and renal replacement therapy (OR 1.55, 95% CI 1.26-1.91) [39].

In nutritional research, both biomarkers have demonstrated sensitivity to dietary interventions. The empirical Anti-inflammatory Diet Index (eADI) developed in the Cohort of Swedish Men showed significant inverse correlations with both IL-6 (Spearman r = -0.23) and hs-CRP (Spearman r = -0.17), suggesting responsiveness to dietary modification [2]. Each 4.5-point increment in eADI score was associated with 12% lower hs-CRP and 6% lower IL-6 concentrations [2].

In COVID-19, both biomarkers showed prognostic value but with different temporal patterns. While initial elevations in CRP, IL-6, and heparin-binding protein were all associated with disease severity, only IL-6 remained significantly elevated at 48 hours in patients who subsequently died [11]. This suggests IL-6 may have superior value for dynamic risk assessment in acute inflammatory conditions.

Assessment of Nutritional Interventions and Dietary Patterns

The responsiveness of CRP and IL-6 to dietary modifications establishes their utility as objective endpoints in nutritional studies. Research examining the Dietary Inflammatory Index (DII) has consistently demonstrated associations between pro-inflammatory dietary patterns and elevated levels of both biomarkers. In women with polycystic ovary syndrome, higher DII scores were significantly associated with elevated hs-CRP levels (β = +1.18, P < 0.001) after adjustment for confounders [38]. Similarly, in NHANES participants, DII was independently associated with coronary heart disease, with analyses suggesting this relationship may be mediated through inflammatory pathways [23].

A secondary analysis of the EFFORT trial provided insights into how inflammatory status might modify responses to nutritional interventions. Among medical inpatients at risk of malnutrition, those with high IL-6 levels (>11.2 pg/mL) showed a more than 3-fold increase in 30-day mortality (adjusted HR 3.5, 95% CI 1.95-6.28, p < 0.001) but derived less mortality benefit from individualized nutritional support compared to those with lower inflammation [15]. A similar pattern was observed for CRP >100 mg/L, suggesting that high inflammatory states may blunt the effectiveness of nutritional interventions [15].

Table 3: Performance in Predicting Intervention Outcomes and Disease Risk

Application Context	CRP Performance	IL-6 Performance
Mortality Prediction (90-day in critically ill)	Adjusted HR 1.21 (1.03-1.41) [39]	Adjusted HR 1.92 (1.63-2.26) [39]
Nutritional Intervention Response	Diminished mortality benefit when >100 mg/L [15]	Diminished mortality benefit when >11.2 pg/mL [15]
Dietary Pattern Correlation	Spearman r = -0.17 with eADI [2]	Spearman r = -0.23 with eADI [2]
Cardiovascular Risk Assessment	Meta-regression shows correlation with MACE (p<0.001) [40]	Genetic perturbation associated with lower CAD risk [41]
COVID-19 Severity Prediction	Elevated in severe cases, plateaus early [43] [11]	Better predictor of 48-hour deterioration and mortality [11]

Research Reagent Solutions and Methodological Protocols

Essential Research Materials and Assay Platforms

Selection of appropriate reagent systems and platforms is fundamental to generating reliable, reproducible data on inflammatory biomarkers. The following solutions represent well-validated approaches currently employed in research settings:

• MSD Multi-Spot Assay System: The MSD U-PLEX platform enables multiplexed quantification of IL-6 and related cytokines from minimal sample volumes (typically 1:1 diluted samples), offering broad dynamic range and high sensitivity appropriate for detecting physiological concentrations in nutritional studies [15].

• Roche Elecsys IL-6 ECLIA: This electrochemiluminescence immunoassay provides a standardized solution for IL-6 quantification with a measuring range of 1.5-5000 pg/mL, suitable for both clinical and research applications. The assay employs a sandwich principle with ruthenium-complex labeled antibodies, demonstrating precision with CVs of 2.0% at high concentrations [43].

• Abbott Architect hs-CRP Assay: This high-sensitivity immunonephelometric assay enables precise quantification of CRP across the clinically relevant range (0.1-350 mg/L), with intra-assay coefficients of variation of 5% at 1.4 mg/L, appropriate for detecting low-grade inflammation in outpatient populations [2] [39].

• Olink Proteomics Panels: These proximity extension assay platforms provide high-specificity, multiplexed protein quantification for inflammatory biomarkers, including IL-6, TNF receptors, and related analytes. Results are reported as Normalized Protein Expression (NPX) values in log2 scale, with inter-assay CVs of 8-12% for inflammatory markers [2].

Standardized Experimental Workflow for Biomarker Assessment

The following experimental workflow diagram illustrates a standardized approach for assessing inflammatory biomarkers in dietary intervention studies:

Figure 2: Experimental Workflow for Inflammatory Biomarker Assessment

Key Methodological Considerations for Reliable Results

Implementation of standardized protocols is essential for minimizing pre-analytical variability in biomarker assessment:

• Sample Collection Timing: Consistent timing relative to interventions or meals controls for diurnal variation; morning fasting collections are preferred for nutritional studies [2].

• Sample Processing Protocols: Immediate processing (within 2 hours) and plasma separation using centrifugation at 1600-2000 × g for 10-15 minutes at 4°C preserves analyte integrity [2] [39].

• Storage Conditions: Long-term storage at -80°C in multiple aliquots prevents freeze-thaw degradation; samples for cytokine analysis should be light-protected when appropriate [15] [2].

• Quality Control Procedures: Inclusion of internal controls, blinded duplicate samples, and standardized calibration across batches minimizes technical variability [15] [39].

CRP and IL-6 offer complementary value in research and clinical development, with distinct advantages depending on application context. CRP provides a stable, integrated measure of inflammatory burden with lower analytical requirements and cost, making it suitable for large-scale epidemiological studies and chronic disease monitoring. IL-6 delivers more dynamic, mechanistically relevant information with superior prognostic performance in acute settings and potentially greater sensitivity to nutritional interventions.

The emerging genetic evidence supporting IL-6 inhibition for cardiovascular risk reduction [41], combined with the demonstrated responsiveness of both biomarkers to dietary modifications [2] [38] [23], strengthens their position as key endpoints in clinical trials of nutritional and pharmacological interventions. Selection between these biomarkers should be guided by research objectives, population characteristics, and analytical resources, with combined assessment potentially offering the most comprehensive inflammatory profiling for mechanistic studies.

Standardization of measurement protocols remains essential for generating comparable data across studies. As research continues to elucidate the complex relationships between diet, inflammation, and disease, CRP and IL-6 measurements will continue to provide critical insights for developing targeted nutritional and therapeutic strategies.

The Dietary Inflammatory Index (DII) has emerged as a valuable tool for quantifying the inflammatory potential of an individual's diet. Based on a comprehensive review of the scientific literature, the DII scores dietary components on their effects on established inflammatory biomarkers, including C-reactive protein (CRP), interleukin-6 (IL-6), and tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) [44]. A higher DII score indicates a more pro-inflammatory diet, while a lower (negative) score suggests an anti-inflammatory effect [45]. This review systematically evaluates the application of the DII across three distinct population groups—pregnancy, metabolic disorders, and autoimmune conditions—within the context of a broader thesis on DII correlation with CRP and IL-6 levels. We objectively compare the DII's performance in predicting inflammatory status and health outcomes by synthesizing recent experimental data, detailed methodologies, and key findings from clinical and observational studies.

DII in Pregnancy: Maternal Inflammation and Perinatal Outcomes

Pregnancy involves complex immunological adaptations, and maternal diet has been identified as a modifiable factor that may influence this inflammatory milieu and subsequent perinatal outcomes [46] [47].

Key Findings from Pregnancy Cohorts

Table 1: DII Associations in Pregnancy Populations

Study & Population	Sample Size	DII Assessment	Key Findings on Inflammatory Markers	Key Clinical Outcomes
Tianjin Cohort (China) [44]	175 pregnant women	24-hour food records (2nd & 3rd trimester)	• U-shaped association with IL-1β & MCP-1 in 3rd trimester.• Decreasing DII score associated with higher IL-10.	Not assessed.
IMPACT BCN Trial [47]	970 high-risk pregnant women	Validated 151-item FFQ (mid-pregnancy)	Inflammatory markers not reported.	• Proinflammatory DII associated with higher pre-pregnancy BMI (adj. β=0.88).• Associated with lower birthweight percentile (adj. β=-9.84).
NorthPop Cohort [48]	4,709 mother-child pairs	FFQ at gestational week 34	Inflammatory markers not reported.	No association with allergic diseases (food allergy, eczema, asthma) or IgE sensitization in offspring at 18 months.

Experimental Protocols in Pregnancy Research

Standardized protocols are critical for ensuring the validity and comparability of findings across pregnancy studies.

• Dietary Assessment: The primary method for DII calculation in pregnancy cohorts is the Food Frequency Questionnaire (FFQ), typically administered during the second or third trimester [48] [47]. The FFQ captures habitual intake over the preceding months. Studies utilize validated FFQs specific to the population, such as the 151-item FFQ in the IMPACT BCN trial [47] or the 125-item FFQ in the NorthPop cohort [48]. Alternative methods include 24-hour food records collected over multiple days (including weekdays and a weekend) to estimate average daily intake [44].
• Biomarker Measurement: Blood samples are collected from pregnant women during clinical visits. Serum or plasma is isolated and frozen at -80°C for subsequent batch analysis [46] [44]. Inflammatory markers like CRP, IL-6, and IL-1β are commonly measured using multiplex immunoassays (e.g., MSD Multi-Spot Assay) or enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISA) [46] [44]. The Generation R study highlighted that cytokines are highly correlated with each other but not with CRP, suggesting differential regulatory mechanisms [46].
• Data Analysis: DII scores are calculated based on the intake of available food parameters (e.g., 30 out of 45 in the NorthPop study [48]). Associations are typically analyzed using multivariate regression models, adjusting for key confounders such as maternal age, pre-pregnancy BMI, education, smoking status, and energy intake [48] [47].

Diagram 1: DII and Inflammation in Pregnancy. This pathway illustrates how maternal diet, quantified by the DII score, influences the inflammatory milieu, which is also modulated by genetic and other factors. This milieu, reflected by biomarkers like CRP and cytokines, is associated with key pregnancy outcomes such as birthweight.

DII in Metabolic Disorders: PCOS and Prediabetes

Metabolic disorders like Polycystic Ovary Syndrome (PCOS) and prediabetes are characterized by chronic low-grade inflammation, making the DII particularly relevant for investigating dietary contributions to disease pathophysiology and management.

Key Findings in Metabolic Populations

Table 2: DII Associations in Metabolic Disorder Populations

Study & Population	Sample Size	DII Assessment	Key Findings on Inflammatory Markers	Key Metabolic Outcomes
PCOS Women [49]	200 women with PCOS	168-item FFQ	• Higher DII associated with elevated hs-CRP (β=+1.18, p<0.001) and ESR (β=+3.39, p<0.001).	• Higher DII associated with elevated FBG (β=+13.34, p<0.001), prolactin, FSH, and LH.• No association with lipid profile or testosterone after adjustment.
Prediabetic Women [45]	60 women (30 prediabetic)	Food Frequency Questionnaire	• Higher DII associated with higher CRP (p<0.001), IL-6 (p=0.005), and TNF-α (p<0.001).• CRP increase associated with DII score in controls (β=0.472).	• DII positively correlated with insulin, HOMA-IR, and Glycemic Index (r=0.440, p=0.015).• Serum asprosin increase associated with DII score (β=0.421).
Adults with Obesity [5]	124 adults with obesity	3-day dietary record	• CRP significantly higher in high-DII groups (p=0.006).• Positive correlation between DII and CRP (r=0.258, p=0.004).	• Positive correlation between DII and BMI (p=0.009).• No significant correlation with sleep quality.

Experimental Protocols in Metabolic Research

Research in metabolic populations often involves detailed biochemical profiling to link dietary inflammation to metabolic dysregulation.

• Participant Recruitment: Studies typically involve case-control designs, recruiting diagnosed patients (e.g., using Rotterdam criteria for PCOS [49]) alongside healthy controls matched for age and BMI [45]. Strict exclusion criteria are applied to rule out confounding conditions like diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and other inflammatory illnesses [5] [45].
• Comprehensive Biochemical Analysis: Beyond standard inflammatory markers (hs-CRP, IL-6, TNF-α), studies routinely measure:
  • Glycemic Control: Fasting blood glucose (FBG), insulin, Homeostatic Model Assessment of Insulin Resistance (HOMA-IR), and HbA1c [49] [45].
  • Lipid Profile: Total cholesterol, triglycerides, LDL-C, and HDL-C [49] [5].
  • Hormones and Adipokines: Testosterone, gonadotropins (LH, FSH) in PCOS [49], and novel adipokines like asprosin and omentin in prediabetes [45].
• Statistical Analysis: Multivariate linear regression is the primary analytical tool, adjusting for age, BMI, physical activity, smoking, and energy intake to isolate the independent effect of DII [49] [5]. Correlation analyses (e.g., Pearson's correlation) are used to explore relationships between continuous variables like DII, HOMA-IR, and adipokines [45].

Diagram 2: DII in Metabolic Disorder Pathogenesis. This diagram shows the proposed mechanism by which a pro-inflammatory diet (high DII) contributes to metabolic disorders. It triggers an inflammatory cascade, elevating cytokines and CRP, which promotes insulin resistance, a key driver of conditions like prediabetes and PCOS.

Cross-Population Analysis and Research Toolkit

Synthesizing evidence across populations reveals both consistent patterns and unique insights regarding the DII's application.

Consolidated Data on DII and Key Inflammatory Markers

Table 3: Summary of DII Associations with CRP and IL-6 Across Populations

Population	Association with CRP	Association with IL-6	Noteworthy Context
General/Obese Adults [5] [50]	Consistent positive association. DII positively correlated with CRP (r=0.258, p=0.004) in obesity [5]. HEI-2015 (inversely related to DII) shows inverse association [50].	Consistent positive association. DII exhibits significant positive associations with inflammatory markers [50].	In malnutrition, IL-6 was a superior prognostic marker for mortality vs. CRP [15].
Pregnancy [46] [44]	Under distinct genetic regulation (PGS explains 14.1% of variance) and less influenced by pregnancy-specific factors [46].	Cytokines (including IL-6) are highly correlated with each other, show high individual stability, and are less driven by BMI vs. CRP [46].	U-shaped relationships with some cytokines (IL-1β, MCP-1) observed [44].
Metabolic Disorders [49] [45]	Strong positive association. Higher DII linked to elevated hs-CRP in PCOS (β=+1.18) [49] and prediabetes (p<0.001) [45].	Strong positive association. Higher DII linked to elevated IL-6 in prediabetes (p=0.005) [45].	DII also correlates with worse glycemic control (FBG, HOMA-IR) and hormonal profiles [49] [45].
Parthenolide	Parthenolide|NF-κB Inhibitor|For Research	Parthenolide is a sesquiterpene lactone that inhibits NF-κB, used in cancer and inflammation research. This product is For Research Use Only. Not for human or veterinary use.	Bench Chemicals
Pasiniazid	Pasiniazid, CAS:2066-89-9, MF:C13H14N4O4, MW:290.27 g/mol	Chemical Reagent	Bench Chemicals

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagents and Materials

Table 4: Key Reagent Solutions for DII and Inflammation Research

Item Category	Specific Examples	Function in Research
Dietary Assessment Tools	Food Frequency Questionnaires (FFQ) [49] [48] [47], 24-hour dietary recalls [44] [50], 3-day food records [5].	To quantitatively assess habitual food and nutrient intake for subsequent DII calculation. Must be validated for the target population.
Biomarker Assay Kits	ELISA Kits (for CRP, IL-6, TNF-α, adipokines) [49] [45], Multiplex Immunoassay Systems (e.g., MSD U-PLEX [15] [51]).	To measure concentrations of inflammatory biomarkers in serum or plasma samples with high sensitivity and specificity.
Biobank Storage	-80°C Freezers [15] [44].	For long-term preservation of blood samples (serum/plasma) before batch analysis, ensuring biomarker integrity.
Laboratory Analyzers	Automated Chemistry Analyzers (e.g., Beckman Coulter AU640 [5]), Hematology Analyzers (e.g., Beckman Coulter DxH-800 [50]).	For routine analysis of clinical biochemistry (glucose, lipids) and complete blood count (WBC, neutrophils, lymphocytes).
Data Analysis Software	Statistical Packages (SPSS, STATA, R).	For performing complex statistical analyses, including multivariate regression and calculation of DII scores (e.g., using the "Dietaryindex" package in R [50]).
Pitofenone hydrochloride	Pitofenone hydrochloride, CAS:1248-42-6, MF:C22H26ClNO4, MW:403.9 g/mol	Chemical Reagent
Pleconaril	Pleconaril, CAS:153168-05-9, MF:C18H18F3N3O3, MW:381.3 g/mol	Chemical Reagent

The collective evidence firmly supports the DII as a robust tool for evaluating the inflammatory potential of diet across diverse populations, with significant correlations to CRP and IL-6 levels. However, its predictive value and associated health outcomes are highly population-specific.

In pregnancy, the relationship between DII and inflammatory markers is complex. CRP and cytokines appear to be under different regulatory mechanisms, with genetics and pre-pregnancy BMI playing substantial roles [46]. While a pro-inflammatory diet is consistently linked to adverse outcomes like reduced fetal growth [47], its effect on maternal inflammation may not be straightforward, exhibiting non-linear patterns [44].

In contrast, for metabolic disorders such as PCOS and prediabetes, the DII demonstrates a strong and consistent positive association with both CRP and IL-6 [49] [45]. This suggests that diet-driven inflammation is a significant contributor to the chronic low-grade inflammation inherent to these conditions, directly correlating with worsened glycemic control and insulin resistance.

A critical insight for researchers and clinicians is that an anti-inflammatory diet alone may not be sufficient to overcome the detrimental effects of poor overall diet quality. As demonstrated in the NHANES study, high dietary quality (HEI-2015) can counteract the adverse effects of a pro-inflammatory diet, but the converse is not true [50]. Therefore, future research and clinical interventions should focus on promoting overall high-quality, anti-inflammatory dietary patterns tailored to the specific physiological context of the target population.

Analytical Challenges and Contextual Factors in DII-Biomarker Correlations

The Dietary Inflammatory Index (DII) was developed as a tool to quantify the inflammatory potential of an individual's diet, based on its effects on established inflammatory biomarkers including C-reactive protein (CRP) and interleukin-6 (IL-6) [52]. Higher DII scores indicate a pro-inflammatory diet, while lower scores suggest an anti-inflammatory diet [12]. In theory, this scoring should correlate directly with circulating levels of inflammatory biomarkers, and numerous large-scale epidemiological studies have demonstrated exactly this relationship. For instance, multiple studies using National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) data have shown that higher DII scores are significantly associated with increased risk of cardiovascular-kidney-metabolic syndrome, stroke in diabetic patients, and accelerated biological aging of organs [52] [12] [53].

However, a more nuanced examination of the literature reveals that the relationship between DII and biomarker levels is not always consistent or predictable. This article explores the conditions and populations in which DII fails to reliably predict CRP and IL-6 levels, examining the methodological and biological factors that may explain these discrepancies. Understanding these inconsistencies is crucial for researchers, scientists, and drug development professionals who rely on accurate inflammatory profiling in their work.

Contradictory Evidence: When DII and Biomarkers Diverge

Hematological Marker Disconnect in Healthy Populations

A recent cross-sectional analysis of 4,567 participants provides compelling evidence for the DII-biomarker disconnect [6]. This study investigated the relationship between DII and hematological inflammatory markers in both healthy and depressed individuals, with surprising results in the healthy cohort.

Table 1: DII Correlation with Hematological Markers in Healthy Individuals

Marker	Direction of Change	Magnitude of Effect	Statistical Significance
Monocyte count	Decreased with pro-inflammatory diet	25.1% decrease	OR: 0.749 (0.578–0.972)
Lymphocyte-to-HDL ratio (LHR)	Decreased with pro-inflammatory diet	11% decrease	OR: 0.89 (0.012–0.684)
Monocyte-to-HDL ratio (MHR)	Increased with pro-inflammatory diet	12.9% increase	OR: 1.129 (1.000–1.275)

Contrary to theoretical expectations, when healthy individuals moved from an anti-inflammatory diet (tertile 1) to a pro-inflammatory one (tertile 3), their monocyte counts and LHR decreased significantly rather than increased [6]. Only MHR showed the expected positive association with pro-inflammatory dietary patterns. This finding challenges the fundamental assumption that DII consistently correlates with all inflammatory biomarkers across populations.

Null Findings in Depressed Populations

The same study revealed an even more striking discrepancy in the depressed population [6]. Despite adequate statistical power, no significant correlation was observed between DII and any hematological inflammatory markers in individuals with depression. This suggests that the presence of mental health conditions may fundamentally alter the relationship between dietary patterns and inflammatory responses.

The authors hypothesize that this null finding may reflect the complex neuroimmune interactions in depression, where the condition itself may dominate the inflammatory landscape, potentially overshadowing dietary influences [6]. This has important implications for research focusing on populations with pre-existing inflammatory conditions.

Comparative Analysis: When DII Does Predict Biomarkers

To fully contextualize these inconsistent findings, it is important to acknowledge the substantial body of research where DII does correlate with inflammatory biomarkers as theoretically expected.

Table 2: Established DII-Biomarker Correlations in the Literature

Study Population	DII-Biomarker Relationship	Statistical Significance	Source
General population (CKMS risk)	Positive correlation with inflammatory biomarkers	OR: 1.76 (1.42–2.18) for highest vs. lowest DII quartile	[52]
Diabetic patients (stroke risk)	Positive correlation with inflammatory burden	OR: 1.78 (1.35–2.36) for highest vs. lowest DII quartile	[12]
Organ aging assessment	DII associated with heart and liver Δ age	β = 0.87 (heart), β = 2.86 (liver); p ≤ 0.01	[53]
Depression risk (meta-analysis)	Higher DII increases depression risk	OR: 1.53 (1.42–1.66)	[54]

These consistent findings across large, well-powered studies confirm that DIBI can be a valuable research tool for predicting inflammatory outcomes at a population level. The discrepancy arises when we examine specific biomarkers in particular subpopulations.

Methodological Protocols: Assessing DII-Biomarker Relationships

DII Calculation Methodology

The standard approach for calculating DII involves:

• Dietary Assessment: Most studies use either 24-hour dietary recalls or Food Frequency Questionnaires (FFQs). The NHANES studies typically employ 24-hour dietary recall interviews [52] [12], while the PERSIAN cohort study used a 118-item semi-quantitative FFQ [6].

• Nutrient Parameterization: DII calculation incorporates multiple food parameters with known inflammatory effects. Studies vary in the number of parameters used, ranging from 25-29 nutrients in NHANES-based studies [12] [55] to 37 dietary components in the original DII formulation [6].

• Scoring Algorithm: Each dietary parameter is assigned an inflammatory effect score based on the literature. Individual intake is standardized against a global reference database, converted to percentiles, and multiplied by the respective inflammatory effect score before summing all components [12] [6].

• Energy Adjustment: Some studies adjust DII for total energy intake (E-DII) by using nutrient densities (nutrient intake/total energy intake × 100) to account for variations in total caloric consumption [55].

Biomarker Measurement Techniques

IL-6 Measurement Protocol

The chemiluminescent immunoassay "sandwich" method represents the gold standard for IL-6 measurement [56]:

• Sample Preparation: Serum samples are obtained intravenously and centrifuged, then stored at 2-8°C until analysis.
• Binding Phase: The sample is mixed with paramagnetic particles coated with mouse monoclonal anti-human IL-6, blocking reagent, and alkaline phosphatase conjugate.
• Incubation and Washing: After incubation, materials attached to the solid phase are retained using a magnetic field while unbound materials are washed away.
• Detection: Chemiluminescent substrate Lumi-Phos*530 is added, and light production is measured via luminometer.
• Quantification: IL-6 concentration is determined based on a stored multi-point calibration curve, with the reference range typically <6.4 pg/mL [56].

CRP Measurement Approaches

Studies employ different CRP measurement techniques:

• Standard CRP: Immunoturbidimetric technique using commercial CRP kits, with reference range typically <5 mg/L [56].
• High-Sensitivity CRP (hs-CRP): ELISA-based methods for enhanced sensitivity in detecting low-grade inflammation [57].
• CRP Conformational Specific Assays: Specialized ELISA protocols that distinguish between pentameric (pCRP) and monomeric (mCRP) forms using conformation-specific antibodies [57].

Biological Mechanisms Explaining Inconsistent Correlations

Several biological mechanisms may explain why DII does not always predict biomarker levels:

Temporal Disconnect in Biomarker Kinetics

Different inflammatory biomarkers have distinct kinetic profiles that affect their detectability:

• IL-6 Dynamics: Rises within 1-2 hours post-inflammatory stimulus and peaks at approximately 6 hours, making it an early but transient marker [58].
• CRP Dynamics: Shows delayed response, typically rising 6-8 hours after stimulus and peaking at 24-48 hours, with a longer half-life than IL-6 [56] [57].
• Hematological Markers: Cellular inflammatory markers (monocytes, lymphocytes) may reflect more chronic, sustained inflammation rather than acute dietary influences [6].

This kinetic mismatch means that single-timepoint biomarker measurements may not capture the inflammatory impact of dietary patterns assessed over longer periods (typically via FFQ covering the past year).

CRP Conformational Complexity

Emerging research reveals that CRP exists in multiple conformational states with different biological activities:

• Pentameric CRP (pCRP): The classic circulating marker produced by the liver under IL-6 control [57].
• Monomeric CRP (mCRP): The tissue-associated form with different biological properties and antigenicity [57].

Recent studies show that mCRP may be a more specific marker for certain localized inflammatory conditions than pCRP [57]. Standard CRP assays that don't distinguish between these conformations may miss important biological signals, potentially contributing to inconsistent DII correlations.

Population-Specific Modifying Factors

The relationship between DII and biomarkers appears modified by population characteristics:

• Health Status: Healthy individuals may show different DII-biomarker relationships than those with chronic conditions, as demonstrated by the null findings in depression [6].
• Medication Use: Anti-inflammatory medications, including corticosteroids and biologics, can disrupt expected DII-biomarker correlations [57].
• Genetic Factors: Polymorphisms in genes related to inflammatory pathways may alter individual responsiveness to dietary inflammation [55].

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagents

Table 3: Essential Reagents for DII-Biomarker Correlation Research

Reagent/Category	Specific Examples	Research Application	Key Considerations
IL-6 Detection	Chemiluminescent immunoassay kits; ELISA DuoSet Human IL-6	Quantifying IL-6 in serum/plasma	Consider kinetics: early peak (6h) vs. CRP delay [56] [58]
CRP Detection	High-sensitivity CRP ELISA; Immunoturbidimetric kits; Conformation-specific assays	Standard CRP vs. pentameric/monomeric distinction	mCRP may better reflect tissue inflammation [57]
Dietary Assessment	24-hour recall protocols; FFQs (118-item semi-quantitative)	Standardized DII calculation	Number of food parameters affects DII precision [52] [6]
Hematological Analyzers	Automated CBC systems with differential capability	Calculating ratios (MHR, LHR, PLR, GLR)	Affected by non-dietary factors; context-dependent [6]
Specialized Antibodies	CRP-8 monoclonal antibody (mCRP-specific); polyclonal anti-CRP	Conformational CRP analysis	mCRP-specific antibodies enable conformation-specific research [57]

The relationship between Dietary Inflammatory Index and inflammatory biomarkers is far more complex than initially theorized. While DIBI serves as a valuable tool for predicting inflammatory disease risk at a population level, its correlation with specific biomarkers varies significantly across populations and biological contexts.

Researchers and drug development professionals should consider several critical factors when designing studies and interpreting results involving DII and inflammatory biomarkers:

• Biomarker Selection: Include multiple biomarkers with different kinetic profiles to capture the full inflammatory picture.
• Population Stratification: Account for health status, medication use, and potential genetic modifiers that may alter DII-biomarker relationships.
• Methodological Refinement: Consider advanced assays that distinguish between conformational forms of biomarkers like CRP.
• Temporal Considerations: Align biomarker measurement timing with dietary assessment periods and biological half-lives.

These inconsistencies do not invalidate the DII as a research tool but rather highlight the complexity of human inflammatory biology and the need for sophisticated approaches to nutritional immunology research.

In the investigation of the relationship between the Dietary Inflammatory Index (DII) and inflammatory biomarkers such as C-reactive protein (CRP) and interleukin-6 (IL-6), accounting for confounding variables is paramount for deriving valid conclusions. The DII is a quantitative tool that assesses the inflammatory potential of an individual's diet based on 45 dietary parameters and their established effects on specific inflammatory markers, including IL-1β, IL-4, IL-6, IL-10, TNF-α, and CRP [21]. A higher DII score indicates a more pro-inflammatory diet. Research has consistently demonstrated that individuals with higher DII scores have 1.39 times higher odds of elevated CRP (E-CRP) compared to those with the lowest DII scores, with each unit increase in DII associated with a 10% increase in the odds of E-CRP [21].

However, this relationship does not exist in isolation. The association between pro-inflammatory diets and elevated inflammatory biomarkers is profoundly influenced by non-dietary factors, primarily Body Mass Index (BMI) and body composition, underlying health status, and medication use. These confounders can alter inflammatory pathways, modify the body's response to dietary components, and potentially bias observed associations if not properly measured and controlled for in statistical analyses. For researchers and drug development professionals, a sophisticated understanding of these variables is essential for designing robust studies, accurately interpreting data on diet-inflammation relationships, and developing targeted anti-inflammatory therapies.

The tables below synthesize empirical data on how BMI, health status, and medications influence inflammatory markers and interact with dietary factors.

Table 1: Impact of BMI and Adiposity on Inflammatory Biomarkers

Factor	Study Design	Key Findings on Inflammation	Magnitude of Effect
General Obesity (BMI ≥30)	Cross-sectional (NHANES analysis, n=18,500) [59]	Strong positive association with elevated systemic immune-inflammation index (SII) and systemic inflammatory response index (SIRI).	OR = 1.41 (95% CI: 1.27-1.56) for high SII/SIRI [59]
Total Fat Mass Loss	18-month RCT in obese older adults with OA (n=450) [60]	Intentional reduction was associated with significant decreases in CRP and IL-6.	β=0.06 for log-CRP; β=0.02 for IL-6 per unit fat mass loss [60]
5% Total Body Weight/Fat Loss	18-month RCT in obese older adults with OA [60]	Increased odds of achieving clinically desirable levels of CRP (<3.0 mg/L) and IL-6 (<2.5 pg/mL).	OR = 3.8 for desirable CRP; OR = 2.2 for desirable IL-6 [60]
Childhood Obesity	Cross-sectional study of 6-year-olds (n=185) [61]	Significant association between higher BMI-for-age and elevated Hs-CRP and IL-6.	P-values < 0.05 for association with insulin resistance and inflammatory markers [61]

Table 2: Impact of Health Status and Medications on Inflammation and Treatment Response

Factor	Context	Key Findings	Implication for DII Research
Underlying Health Status (PASC)	Cross-sectional study of Long COVID patients [13]	Elevated IL-6 and CRP were significantly associated with neuropsychiatric symptoms like fatigue and depression.	Pre-existing inflammatory conditions can confound the diet-inflammation relationship.
High Inflammation State	Secondary analysis of EFFORT trial (n=996 malnourished inpatients) [62]	Patients with high inflammation (IL-6 >11.2 pg/mL) had a blunted mortality benefit from nutritional therapy.	High baseline inflammation can mask or alter the effect of dietary interventions.
Biological Therapy	Prospective cohort of CID patients (n=228) [63]	No significant difference in treatment response to biologics was found between obese and non-obese patients after 14-16 weeks.	OR = 0.82 (95% CI: 0.43-1.60) for response in obese vs. non-obese [63]

Experimental Protocols for Controlling Confounders

Protocol for Assessing and Controlling for BMI and Body Composition

The intricate relationship between adipose tissue and systemic inflammation necessitates precise measurement protocols beyond simple BMI calculation.

• Dual-energy X-ray Absorptiometry (DXA): This is the gold standard for measuring total body fat mass. In the IDEA trial, baseline whole body fat mass (kg) was measured by DXA (Hologic Delphi A) following manufacturer's protocols for patient position and scan analysis, with a coefficient of variation of 1.2% [60]. This measurement should be conducted at baseline and at the end of the intervention period.
• Computed Tomography (CT) for Regional Fat Depots: To assess region-specific fat loss, the IDEA trial used CT scans (GE 16-slice Light Speed Pro) on a subset of participants. Abdominal scans quantified intramuscular, subcutaneous, and visceral fat volume, while thigh scans measured intermuscular and subcutaneous fat. Technicians segmented volumes based on established anatomical boundaries [60]. This level of detail is crucial as ectopic fat stores may have differential effects on inflammation.
• Statistical Control: In analysis, models should first include total adiposity measures before examining the contribution of regional fat depots. The IDEA trial found that models containing total body fat mass were superior predictors of changes in CRP and IL-6 compared to models focusing solely on regional fat [60].

Protocol for Stratifying by Health Status and Medication Use

Accurate classification of health status and medication use is fundamental for minimizing confounding.

• Health Status Assessment: For conditions like PASC (Long COVID), a systematic assessment is required. The protocol by Ferrando et al. involved a comprehensive evaluation including the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-5 (SCID-5), the PTSD Checklist for DSM-5 (PCL-5), the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9), and the Chalder Fatigue Scale (CFQ) to categorize participants based on specific neuropsychiatric symptoms [13].
• Medication Use Documentation: In the BELIEVE cohort study, which investigated biological therapy response, data on concurrent medication was collected by attending doctors. This included recording the specific biologic agent, dosage, and any concomitant immunosuppressive or anti-inflammatory drugs [63].
• Inflammatory Status Stratification: The EFFORT trial secondary analysis used specific biomarker cut-points to stratify patients by inflammatory status. Blood samples were collected at study inclusion, processed immediately, and frozen at -80°C. Cytokines (IL-6, TNF-α) were later analyzed using a MSD Multi-Spot Assay System. Patients were then stratified into high and low inflammation groups using a pre-defined IL-6 cut-point of 11.2 pg/mL [62].

Signaling Pathways and Conceptual Framework

The following diagram illustrates the complex interrelationships between diet, key confounding variables, and systemic inflammation.

Diagram 1: Confounder Interactions in Diet-Inflammation Pathways. This diagram illustrates how key confounding variables directly influence the core biological pathway linking pro-inflammatory diets to elevated CRP.

Diagram 2: Experimental Workflow for Confounder Control. This workflow integrates the critical steps for identifying, measuring, and controlling for key confounding variables in DII research.

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagent Solutions

Table 3: Key Reagents and Materials for Investigating Diet-Inflammation Relationships

Tool/Reagent	Specific Function	Application Example & Notes
High-Sensitivity CRP Assay	Quantifies low-grade systemic inflammation via CRP levels.	Used in automated immunoanalyzers (e.g., IMMULITE; Diagnostics Products Corporation). The most common biomarker in DII studies [21] [60].
IL-6 & TNF-α ELISA Kits	Measures specific pro-inflammatory cytokines in serum/plasma.	Quantikine ELISA kits (R&D Systems) are widely used. IL-6 may be a more sensitive prognostic marker than CRP in high-inflammation states [62].
MSD Multi-Spot U-PLEX Assay	Multiplexed quantification of multiple cytokines from a single sample.	Allows simultaneous measurement of IL-6, TNF-α, and other cytokines from a 1:1 diluted plasma sample, conserving valuable patient samples [62].
Dual-Energy X-ray Absorptiometry (DXA)	Precisely measures total body fat mass, lean mass, and bone density.	Hologic Delphi A systems provide high-precision body composition data (CV: 1.2%). Essential for moving beyond BMI [60].
Computed Tomography (CT) Scanner	Quantifies regional fat depots (visceral, subcutaneous, intermuscular).	GE 16-slice Light Speed Pro with standardized protocols allows for volumetric analysis of ectopic fat, a key inflammatory source [60].
Validated Food Frequency Questionnaire (FFQ)	Assesses habitual dietary intake to calculate DII scores.	A 118-item semi-quantitative FFQ, validated for the target population, is used to capture intake of 45 dietary parameters for DII calculation [6] [64].
Automated Hematology Analyzer	Provides complete blood count (CBC) for calculating novel inflammatory indices.	Beckman Coulter DxH-800 or MAXM analyzers provide neutrophil, lymphocyte, monocyte, and platelet counts for SII and SIRI calculation [65] [59].

Within nutritional science and clinical pharmacology, understanding how specific inflammatory biomarkers respond to dietary interventions is critical for developing targeted nutritional strategies and anti-inflammatory therapies. The inflammatory response is a complex cascade wherein cytokines like Interleukin-6 (IL-6) stimulate the production of acute-phase proteins such as C-reactive protein (CRP) [62]. Despite this physiological relationship, growing evidence suggests that IL-6 and CRP exhibit distinct and sometimes divergent responses to nutritional interventions. This differential responsiveness may arise from their unique positions in the inflammatory cascade, their kinetics, and their specific physiological roles [62] [66]. Framed within the broader context of dietary inflammatory index (DII) research, this guide objectively compares the performance of IL-6 and CRP as biomarkers for monitoring dietary interventions, providing researchers and drug development professionals with synthesized experimental data and methodological protocols to inform study design and interpretation.

Comparative Biomarker Responses to Dietary Interventions

The following table synthesizes key findings from recent clinical studies and meta-analyses, directly comparing the responses of IL-6 and CRP to various dietary interventions.

Table 1: Differential Responses of IL-6 and CRP to Dietary Interventions

Dietary Intervention / Context	IL-6 Response	CRP Response	Study Details (Design, Population)
Individualized Nutritional Therapy (Medical Inpatients)	Mortality benefit from nutrition reduced in high-inflammation state (adjusted HR 3.5 for high IL-6) [51].	Patients with CRP >100 mg/dL showed diminished response to nutrition [51].	Secondary analysis of EFFORT RCT; 996 malnourished medical inpatients [51] [62].
Multifunctional Diets (Metabolic Syndrome)	Significant reduction with dietary intervention (SMD = -0.30, p=0.02) [67] [68].	No significant change compared to control (SMD = 0.03, p=NS) [67] [68].	Meta-analysis of 13 RCTs; 1,101 participants with Metabolic Syndrome [67] [68].
Vegetarian Diets	Significantly lower concentrations among vegetarians; effect mediated by BMI [69].	Significantly lower concentrations among vegetarians; effect mediated by BMI [69].	Analysis of Adventist Health Study-2 sub-studies; 893-1,371 participants [69].
Pro-Inflammatory Diet (DII)	A core component used to define the DII [21].	A core component used to define the DII; higher DII linked to elevated CRP [21].	Meta-analysis of 14 studies; 59,941 individuals [21].
Polycystic Ovary Syndrome (PCOS)	Serum levels significantly higher in PCOS vs. control (4.94 vs. 3.48 pg/mL, p<0.001) [70].	No significant difference observed between PCOS and control groups [70].	Case-control study; 85 women (45 PCOS, 40 controls) [70].

Detailed Experimental Protocols

To ensure the reproducibility of key findings cited in this guide, detailed methodologies from the most pivotal studies are outlined below.

Protocol 1: EFFORT Trial Biomarker Analysis

This protocol is a secondary analysis investigating IL-6, TNF-α, and CRP as predictors of nutritional therapy outcome [51] [62].

• Study Design: Secondary analysis of a pragmatic, multicenter, randomized controlled trial (RCT).
• Patient Population: 996 medical inpatients at risk of malnutrition from six Swiss hospitals. Key inclusion criteria: nutritional risk score (NRS 2002) ≥3 points and expected length of stay ≥5 days.
• Intervention: Patients were randomized to receive either:
  • Intervention Group: Individualized nutritional support initiated within 48 hours of admission, with therapy escalated (enteral/parenteral) if >75% of energy/protein targets were not met orally.
  • Control Group: Usual care nutrition without specific energy/protein targets or dietitian counseling.
• Biomarker Measurement:
  • IL-6 and TNF-α: Analyzed from frozen blood samples (-80°C) using a self-assembled MSD Multi-Spot Assay System (U-PLEX assays). Personnel were blinded to randomization.
  • CRP: Values were obtained from the hospitals' routine laboratory analyses.
• Primary Endpoint: All-cause mortality at 30 days.
• Statistical Analysis: Multivariate Cox regression models were used, adjusting for confounding factors. A p-value <0.05 was considered significant.

Protocol 2: Meta-Analysis on Dietary Interventions in Metabolic Syndrome

This protocol summarizes the methodology used to evaluate the effect of dietary interventions on inflammatory markers [67] [68].

• Search Strategy: A systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and Google Scholar for articles published between June 2011 and June 2021.
• Study Selection:
  • Inclusion Criteria: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs); dietary interventions of >4 weeks duration; participants with Metabolic Syndrome; studies reporting means and standard deviations for IL-1β, IL-6, TNF-α, or CRP.
  • Exclusion Criteria: Reviews, in vitro/animal studies, studies with comorbidities or medications affecting cytokines.
• Data Extraction and Quality Assessment: Two independent investigators extracted data and assessed study quality using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool.
• Data Synthesis: The meta-analysis calculated the standardized mean difference (SMD) as the effect size using a random-effects model. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I² statistic.

Signaling Pathways and Biomarker Dynamics

The diagram below illustrates the hierarchical relationship and differential dynamics between IL-6 and CRP in the inflammatory response to dietary factors, explaining their divergent behavior as biomarkers.

Inflammatory Cascade & Kinetics

The Scientist's Toolkit: Research Reagent Solutions

The table below details essential materials and methodologies used in the featured research for reliably measuring and analyzing IL-6 and CRP in dietary studies.

Table 2: Key Research Reagents and Methodologies

Item / Assay	Function / Role	Example from Search Results
MSD Multi-Spot Assay System	Multiplex immunoassay for precise, simultaneous quantification of multiple cytokines (e.g., IL-6, TNF-α) from patient serum/plasma.	Used with U-PLEX Human IL-6 and TNF-α Assays in the EFFORT analysis [62].
ELISA Kits	Standard immunoassay for quantifying specific proteins (e.g., IL-6, CRP) in serum/plasma. Used for single-analyte measurements.	Human IL-6 ELISA kit (Zell Bio, Germany) used in PCOS study; various kits (R&D, Thermo Fisher) in Adventist studies [70] [69].
Latex-Enhanced Immunoturbidimetric Assay	High-throughput, automated clinical chemistry method for quantifying CRP, often as high-sensitivity CRP (hs-CRP).	Used for CRP measurement in the Adventist Health Study-2 Calibration sub-study [69].
Food Frequency Questionnaire (FFQ)	Validated tool to assess habitual dietary intake over a specific period, enabling calculation of dietary indices like DII.	A 118-item FFQ used in DII-CRP meta-analysis; a 147-item FFQ used in the PCOS study [21] [70].
Dietary Inflammatory Index (DII)	A computational tool that scores an individual's diet on a continuum from anti- to pro-inflammatory based on intake of specific food parameters.	Used to calculate overall inflammatory potential of diet in relation to CRP/IL-6 levels [21] [6].

The Dietary Inflammatory Index (DII) has emerged as a valuable tool for quantifying the inflammatory potential of an individual's diet. Developed through comprehensive literature review, the DII scores diets based on their effects on specific inflammatory biomarkers, particularly C-reactive protein (CRP) and interleukin-6 (IL-6) [21]. A higher DII score indicates a pro-inflammatory diet, while a lower (more negative) score suggests an anti-inflammatory diet [65]. While overall associations between higher DII scores and elevated inflammatory markers are well-established in general populations, a growing body of evidence indicates that these relationships exhibit significant variation across distinct clinical contexts and population subgroups. Understanding these population-specific considerations is crucial for researchers aiming to optimize the application of DII in clinical studies, drug development, and personalized nutrition strategies. This guide systematically compares the performance of DII as a predictor of inflammatory status across different clinical contexts, supported by experimental data and methodological protocols.

Core Methodologies for DII Assessment and Inflammatory Biomarker Measurement

Dietary Assessment Protocols

The calculation of DII relies on robust dietary data collection, primarily obtained through:

• Food Frequency Questionnaires (FFQ): The most commonly employed method, using validated instruments with 118-168 food items to assess habitual intake over the past year [32] [6]. For example, studies in Iranian populations utilized a 147-item FFQ [70], while research on U.S. adults relied on NHANES dietary recall data [65].
• 24-Hour Dietary Recalls: Multiple recalls (typically 2-3) provide more precise recent intake data. Some studies employ a seven-day 24-hour recall protocol for enhanced accuracy [71].
• Data Processing: Collected dietary data are processed using nutritional analysis software (e.g., Nutritionist IV) to derive intake values for DII components. The DII calculation involves standardizing individual intake amounts to global reference values, converting these to percentiles, and multiplying by overall inflammatory effect scores for each food parameter [70] [6].

Inflammatory Biomarker Measurement Techniques

Consistent laboratory protocols are critical for reliable correlation analysis between DII and inflammatory markers:

• CRP Measurement: Typically measured using:
  • High-sensitivity CRP (hs-CRP) assays: Latex particle-enhanced immunoturbidimetric assays [69] or immunoturbidimetric methods on automated analyzers [71].
  • Standard ELISA kits: Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays with specific minimum detectable limits and inter-assay coefficients of variation [70] [69].
• IL-6 Measurement: Primarily quantified using:
  • ELISA kits: Commercial kits with specific detection limits (e.g., 2 pg/mL) and controlled precision metrics [70] [71].
  • Standardized protocols: Duplicate measurements, blinded sample testing, and reference to standard curves ensure reproducibility [71].
• Blood Processing: Standardized protocols include fasting blood collection, centrifugation within 2 hours (2300× g, 15 min at 4°C), aliquoting, and storage at -80°C until analysis [71].

Table 1: Key Research Reagent Solutions for DII and Inflammation Studies

Reagent/Resource	Primary Function	Specification Examples
Food Frequency Questionnaire (FFQ)	Assess habitual dietary intake	118-168 validated food items; culturally adapted
Nutritional Analysis Software	Convert food intake to nutrient data	Nutritionist IV (N-Squared Computing); USDA food database
CRP Assay Kits	Quantify serum CRP levels	ELISA (e.g., Assaypro); hs-CRP immunoturbidimetric (e.g., Pointe Scientific)
Cytokine ELISA Kits	Measure IL-6, IL-10, TNF-α	R&D Systems; Thermo Fisher Scientific; specific detection limits
Blood Collection Tubes	Serum separation for biomarker analysis	Serum separator tubes (SST)
Global Food Database	Reference for DII calculation	World mean intake values for 45 food parameters

Population-Specific Performance of DII

General Adult Populations

In general adult populations, meta-analyses of observational studies demonstrate a consistent positive association between DII and inflammatory biomarkers.

• Magnitude of Effect: A systematic review and meta-analysis of 14 studies (n=59,941) found that individuals in the highest DII category had a 39% increased odds of elevated CRP (pooled OR: 1.39, 95% CI: 1.06-1.14) compared to those in the lowest category [21]. Each unit increase in DII as a continuous variable was associated with a 10% increase in elevated CRP odds (OR: 1.10, 95% CI: 1.06-1.14) [21].
• Geographic Variations: A separate meta-analysis of 13 cross-sectional studies (n=54,813) confirmed this association (OR: 1.25, 95% CI: 1.18-1.32) but identified geographic region as a significant source of heterogeneity, with varying effect sizes across Asian, European, and U.S. populations [72].
• NHANES Evidence: Analysis of 19,110 U.S. adults from NHANES (2009-2018) showed DII exhibited significant positive associations with multiple inflammatory markers, including white blood cell count, neutrophils, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, and systemic immune-inflammation index [65].

Women with Polycystic Ovary Syndrome (PCOS)

The relationship between DII and inflammation in PCOS populations presents a more complex picture, influenced by methodological considerations and disease-specific factors.

• Inconsistent Associations: A case-control study of 85 Iranian women (45 PCOS, 40 controls) found no significant difference in DII values between PCOS and non-PCOS women (P=0.68), and no significant correlation between DII and IL-6 (P>0.05) despite IL-6 being significantly higher in the PCOS group [70].
• Significant Associations in Larger Studies: In contrast, a larger cross-sectional study of 200 Iranian women with PCOS found significant associations between higher DII scores and elevated inflammatory markers after full adjustment for confounders. Each unit increase in DII was associated with:
  • hs-CRP increase of β=+1.18 (P<0.001)
  • ESR increase of β=+3.39 (P<0.001) [38]
• Methodological Considerations: The larger study also demonstrated associations with metabolic and hormonal parameters, including fasting blood glucose (β=+13.34, P<0.001), suggesting DII may reflect broader metabolic dysfunction in PCOS beyond pure inflammation [38].

Pregnancy Populations

Pregnancy represents a unique immunological state, and DII performance in this context shows distinct patterns across trimesters.

• Longitudinal Changes: A study of 45 Polish pregnant women found the DII score slightly decreased (became more anti-inflammatory) across pregnancy trimesters: -1.78 (first), -2.43 (second), -2.71 (third), though this trend was not statistically significant (p=0.092) [71].
• Trimester-Specific Correlations: The DII score showed weak but significant positive correlations with CRP in the first and third trimesters, but not consistently across all trimesters [71].
• Complicated vs. Normal Pregnancy: In women with complicated pregnancies, those with DII below the median had significantly lower CRP levels in the second trimester compared to those with DII above the median [71].
• Overall Association Strength: The study concluded that despite slight improvements in dietary inflammatory potential during pregnancy, DII values showed "no permanent significant association" with CRP, IL-6, and IL-10 levels across gestation [71].

Pediatric and Neurodevelopmental Populations

Emerging evidence suggests DII may have relevance in pediatric populations with neurodevelopmental conditions.

• ADHD Association: A case-control study of 500 Iranian children (200 ADHD, 300 controls) found the energy-adjusted DII (E-DII) was directly associated with ADHD risk after adjustment for confounders (OR=1.133, 95% CI: 1.021-1.258) [32].
• Inflammatory Mechanism: The proposed mechanism involves pro-inflammatory diets disrupting neurodevelopment through chronic inflammation, impairing BDNF synthesis, altering neuronal migration, and modifying synaptic plasticity [32].
• Methodological Note: In pediatric studies, FFQs are typically completed by parents, and DII calculations may be adapted to include available food parameters (29 of 45 in the Iranian study) [32].

Mental Health Populations

The diet-inflammation relationship appears modulated in populations with mental health conditions, suggesting potential pathway alterations.

• Differential Associations in Depression: A cross-sectional analysis of 4,567 Iranian adults (429 with depression) found distinct patterns of association between DII and hematological inflammatory markers in depressed versus healthy individuals [6].
• Healthy Individuals: When moving from an anti-inflammatory to pro-inflammatory diet, healthy individuals showed:
  • 25.1% decrease in monocyte counts [OR: 0.749 (0.578-0.972)]
  • 12.9% increase in monocyte-to-HDL ratio [OR: 1.129 (1.000-1.275)] [6]
• Depressed Individuals: No significant correlations between DII and hematological inflammatory markers were observed, suggesting "the mediating role of inflammation in the association between DII and depression may involve more complex pathways" [6].

Table 2: Comparative Performance of DII Across Clinical Contexts

Population	Sample Size	DII-Biomarker Correlation	Key Findings	Methodological Considerations
General Adults	59,941 (14 studies)	CRP: OR 1.39 (Highest vs. Lowest DII)	Strong, consistent association	Geographic region influences effect size
PCOS	200	hs-CRP: β=+1.18 per unit DII (P<0.001)	Significant in large studies; inconsistent in smaller studies	Associated with both inflammatory and metabolic parameters
Pregnancy	45	CRP: Weak correlation in 1st/3rd trimester	Variable across trimesters	Longitudinal design needed to capture changes
Pediatric (ADHD)	500	ADHD Risk: OR=1.13 (E-DII)	Significant despite fewer food parameters	Parent-reported FFQ; adapted DII calculation
Depression	429 depressed	Hematological markers: No significant correlation	Different from healthy controls	Potential pathway alterations in mental health

Biological Pathways Linking Dietary Inflammation to Systemic Biomarkers

The mechanistic relationship between pro-inflammatory diets and elevated inflammatory biomarkers involves multiple interconnected biological pathways. The following diagram illustrates key molecular and cellular processes through which dietary components influence systemic inflammation, particularly CRP and IL-6 production.

Diagram 1: Biological Pathways Linking Pro-inflammatory Diet to Systemic Inflammation. This illustrates key mechanisms through which dietary patterns influence CRP and IL-6 production, including NF-κB activation, insulin resistance, adipokine dysregulation, and oxidative stress.

The diagram above summarizes complex molecular interactions confirmed through multiple studies. In PCOS populations, pro-inflammatory dietary patterns activate NF-κB signaling, increasing production of inflammatory cytokines including IL-6 [38]. Concurrently, insulin resistance triggered by high-glycemic foods exacerbates hyperandrogenism and inflammation through insulin receptor substrate-mediated upregulation of steroidogenic enzymes [38]. Adipose tissue dysfunction contributes to inflammation through adipokine dysregulation, where hypertrophic adipocytes release IL-6 and TNF-α, particularly in obese individuals [69]. These processes collectively stimulate hepatic production of CRP and maintain a state of chronic low-grade inflammation that manifests in elevated measurable biomarkers [38] [69].

Implications for Research and Clinical Practice

Optimizing DII Application in Research Protocols

Based on population-specific variations in DII performance, researchers should consider the following recommendations:

• Context-Specific Interpretation: DII cut-points and effect sizes should be interpreted within specific clinical contexts, as the same DII score may have different implications across populations.
• Standardized Biomarker Panels: Include both CRP and IL-6 in analytical plans, as they may capture different aspects of inflammatory response and show varying associations with DII across populations.
• Covariate Management: Consistently adjust for key confounders including BMI, age, physical activity, smoking status, and energy intake, as these significantly modify diet-inflammation relationships [21] [72].
• Longitudinal Designs: For conditions like pregnancy or progressive diseases, employ repeated DII and biomarker measurements to capture dynamic relationships.
• Cultural Adaptation: When applying DII in diverse populations, ensure FFQs capture culturally relevant foods while maintaining comparability to standard DII calculations.

The evidence reviewed indicates that while DII consistently predicts inflammatory status in general adult populations, its performance varies significantly across specific clinical contexts. These population-specific considerations must inform research design, interpretation of findings, and potential clinical applications aimed at modulating inflammation through dietary interventions.

Validation Evidence and Comparative Utility of Inflammatory Indices

Within nutritional epidemiology and clinical research, the Dietary Inflammatory Index (DII) has emerged as a valuable tool for quantifying the inflammatory potential of an individual's diet. Unlike dietary assessments based on adherence to predetermined eating patterns, the DII was specifically developed through a comprehensive review of scientific literature examining relationships between dietary components and established inflammatory biomarkers. Originally validated against high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) in the SEASONS study, the DII has since been applied across diverse populations and health conditions. However, comprehensive criterion validation against multiple inflammatory markers remains essential to establish its utility across different research and clinical contexts. This guide systematically evaluates the criterion validity of the DII by examining its correlations with a broad spectrum of inflammatory biomarkers, providing researchers with a comparative analysis of its performance characteristics.

Methodological Approaches in DII Validation Studies

Core Principles of DII Development

The DII was constructed based on an extensive literature review of 1,943 research articles published through 2010 that examined associations between dietary parameters and six specific inflammatory biomarkers: IL-1β, IL-4, IL-6, IL-10, TNF-α, and CRP [73]. Each food parameter received an "inflammatory effect score" based on its consistency in modulating these biomarkers, with scores ranging from pro-inflammatory (+1) to anti-inflammatory (-1). To calculate an individual's DII score, their dietary intake data—obtained through food frequency questionnaires (FFQs), 24-hour recalls, or food records—is first linked to a global reference database that provides standardized means and deviations for each parameter [25] [29]. The individual's intake for each component is then converted to a z-score and subsequently to a percentile score to minimize right-skewing. The final DII is derived by multiplying these percentile scores by their respective inflammatory effect scores and summing across all parameters [29] [74]. Higher positive DII scores indicate a more pro-inflammatory diet, while negative scores suggest an anti-inflammatory dietary pattern.

Common Experimental Protocols in DII Validation

Validation studies typically employ cross-sectional or longitudinal observational designs comparing DII scores against circulating inflammatory biomarkers. Blood collection follows standardized protocols, typically after a 10-12 hour fast, with serum or plasma separated by centrifugation and stored at -80°C until analysis [29] [6]. Inflammatory biomarkers are commonly measured using:

• Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay (ELISA) for cytokines including IL-6, IL-1β, TNF-α, and IL-10 [70] [29]
• Latex agglutination or high-sensitivity ELISA for CRP measurement [70] [29]
• Automated hematology analyzers for complete blood count-derived inflammatory ratios [6]

Statistical analyses typically employ multivariable regression models adjusting for potential confounders including age, sex, BMI, smoking status, physical activity, medication use, and total energy intake [25] [75]. The consistency of these methodologies across studies enables meaningful comparison of DII validation results.

Comprehensive Analysis of DII-Biomarker Correlations

DII Associations with Primary Inflammatory Cytokines

Table 1: DII Correlations with Cytokine Biomarkers Across Populations

Study Population	Sample Size	IL-6	TNF-α	IL-1β	IL-10	CRP	Reference
Postmenopausal Women (WHI)	2,567	β=1.26 (Q5 vs Q1) P<0.0001	β=81.43 (Q5 vs Q1) P=0.004	-	-	OR=1.30 P=0.34	[73]
Belgian Adults (Asklepios)	2,487	OR=1.19 (95% CI:1.04,1.36)	-	-	-	Non-significant	[25]
Gastric Cancer Study	177	β=+0.16 per 1-unit DII	β=+0.16 per 1-unit DII	β=+0.10 per 1-unit DII	β=-0.11 per 1-unit DII	β=+0.09 per 1-unit DII	[29]
College-Aged Women (UMVDS)	267	Non-significant	Non-significant	Non-significant	β=0.62 (Q4 vs Q1) P=0.04	Non-significant	[76]
European Adults (EPIC)	17,637	Significant positive association	Significant positive association (DII, E-DIIr only)	-	-	Significant positive association	[75]

The data reveal important patterns in DII-biomarker relationships across populations. In studies of older adults, the DII consistently demonstrates significant associations with pro-inflammatory cytokines. The Women's Health Initiative (WHI) study of postmenopausal women found strong positive associations between DII scores and IL-6 (β=1.26 comparing highest to lowest DII quintiles, P<0.0001) and TNF-α-R2 (β=81.43, P=0.004) [73]. Similarly, the Asklepios Study of Belgian adults (age 35-55) reported a significant association between higher DII scores and elevated IL-6 (OR=1.19, 95% CI: 1.04, 1.36) [25].

The gastric cancer validation study demonstrated particularly comprehensive biomarker correlations, showing that for each one-unit increase in DII score, there were corresponding increases in hs-CRP (β=0.09), TNF-α (β=0.16), IL-6 (β=0.16), and IL-1β (β=0.10), alongside a decrease in the anti-inflammatory cytokine IL-10 (β=-0.11) [29]. This pattern suggests the DII effectively captures broad inflammatory activity in this clinical population.

In contrast, the UMVDS study of young college-aged women found significant associations only for IL-10, with higher DII scores predicting lower levels of this anti-inflammatory cytokine (Q4 vs Q1 β=0.62; 95% CI: 0.42, 0.93; p-trend=0.04), while correlations with pro-inflammatory markers were non-significant [76]. This indicates that DII performance may vary substantially across age groups, with potentially stronger criterion validity in older populations where underlying inflammation is more established.

DII Correlations with Acute Phase Proteins and Hematological Markers

Table 2: DII Associations with Acute Phase Proteins and Hematological Inflammatory Indicators

Biomarker Category	Specific Marker	Study Population	Association with DII	Reference
Acute Phase Proteins	CRP	PCOS Women (Iran)	β=+1.18, P<0.001	[38]
	hs-CRP	Postmenopausal Women	OR=1.30 (0.97-1.67) P=0.34	[73]
	ESR	PCOS Women (Iran)	β=+3.39, P<0.001	[38]
Hematological Ratios	MHR	Healthy Iranian Adults	OR=1.129 (T3 vs T1)	[6]
	LHR	Healthy Iranian Adults	OR=0.89 (T3 vs T1)	[6]
	GLR	Depressed Italian Adults	Positive association	[6]

C-reactive protein represents the most extensively studied inflammatory biomarker in relation to the DII. A recent study of women with Polycystic Ovary Syndrome (PCOS) found strong positive associations between DII scores and both CRP (β=+1.18, P<0.001) and erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) (β=+3.39, P<0.001) [38]. However, other studies report inconsistent findings, with the WHI Observational Study finding no significant association between DII and hs-CRP after multivariable adjustment (OR=1.30, 95% CI: 0.97-1.67, P=0.34) [73], and the Asklepios Study similarly reporting non-significant associations with CRP [25].

Emerging research has investigated relationships between DII and hematological inflammatory indices. The PERSIAN Cohort Study found that among healthy individuals, pro-inflammatory diets were associated with a 12.9% increase in monocyte-to-HDL ratio (MHR) (OR: 1.129, 95% CI: 1.000, 1.275) and an 11% decrease in lymphocyte-to-HDL ratio (LHR) when comparing extreme DII tertiles [6]. Interestingly, these associations were not observed in depressed individuals, suggesting that underlying health conditions may modify diet-inflammation relationships.

Comparative Performance of DII Variants

Energy-Adjusted DII Derivatives

Recent methodological advancements have led to the development of energy-adjusted DII variants, including the energy-adjusted DII (E-DII) and the residual-adjusted E-DII (E-DIIr). The large EPIC cohort study directly compared four dietary inflammatory scores (DII, E-DII, E-DIIr, and the Inflammatory Score of the Diet [ISD]) in relation to multiple inflammatory biomarkers [75]. All scores showed consistent positive associations with CRP, IL-6, sTNFR1, sTNFR2, and leptin. However, important differences emerged: only the original DII and ISD were positively associated with IL-1RA levels, while only DII and E-DIIr were associated with TNF-α [75]. This suggests that different DII variants may capture distinct aspects of inflammatory activity.

Notably, the proportion of variance in inflammatory biomarkers explained by any dietary inflammatory score was relatively low (<2%), which was equivalent to the variance explained by smoking status but much lower than that explained by body mass index [75]. This highlights that while diet contributes significantly to inflammatory status, it represents just one component within a complex network of inflammatory determinants.

Molecular Pathways Linking Dietary Patterns to Inflammation

The biological plausibility of DII-biomarker correlations is supported by well-established pathways through which dietary components modulate inflammatory processes. Pro-inflammatory dietary patterns typically activate nuclear factor kappa B (NF-κB) signaling, increasing production of inflammatory cytokines including IL-6, TNF-α, and IL-1β [38]. These diets also promote oxidative stress and activate the c-Jun N-terminal kinase (JNK) pathway, contributing to insulin resistance [38]. Additionally, high-glycemic-index foods promote advanced glycation end product (AGE)-receptor for AGE (RAGE) axis activation, worsening inflammatory responses [38].

In contrast, anti-inflammatory dietary components such as omega-3 fatty acids and polyphenols inhibit NF-κB signaling and upregulate peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma (PPAR-γ), thereby improving insulin sensitivity and reducing inflammation [38]. These molecular mechanisms provide a pathological basis for the observed correlations between DII scores and inflammatory biomarkers.

Diagram 1: Molecular pathways through which pro-inflammatory and anti-inflammatory diets modulate inflammatory responses and insulin sensitivity. Pro-inflammatory diets (high DII scores) activate multiple pathways including NF-κB, JNK, and AGE-RAGE that increase production of inflammatory cytokines and promote insulin resistance. Anti-inflammatory diets (low DII scores) upregulate PPAR-γ and inhibit NF-κB signaling, reducing inflammation and improving insulin sensitivity [38].

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagents and Methodologies

Table 3: Essential Research Materials and Methods for DII Validation Studies

Category	Specific Tool/Reagent	Application in DII Research	Representative Examples
Dietary Assessment	118-168 item FFQ	DII calculation from habitual dietary intake	Validated 168-item FFQ [38], 118-item FFQ [6]
	Nutrition Analysis Software	Nutrient intake quantification	Nutritionist IV [6] [74], USDA Food Database [6]
Biomarker Analysis	ELISA Kits	Cytokine quantification (IL-6, TNF-α, IL-1β, IL-10)	Shanghai Crystal Day Biotech [29], Zell Bio [70]
	Latex Agglutination Tests	CRP measurement	Standard clinical methods [70]
	Hematology Analyzers	Complete blood count & inflammatory ratios	Standard laboratory systems [6]
Statistical Analysis	Multivariable Regression	Adjusting for confounders (age, BMI, smoking, etc.)	SAS [25], SPSS [38] [6]
	Logistic Regression	Odds ratios for inflammatory marker elevation	Multiple studies [25] [29]

The collective evidence from validation studies indicates that the Dietary Inflammatory Index demonstrates variable criterion validity depending on population characteristics and specific inflammatory biomarkers. The DII shows strongest consistent associations with IL-6 across multiple studies, along with promising correlations with TNF-α and IL-1β in specific populations [73] [29]. Associations with CRP are less consistent, possibly due to its status as a downstream inflammatory marker influenced by numerous non-dietary factors. The DII appears to perform more robustly in older populations and those with specific health conditions, while its utility in younger, healthier populations requires further investigation [76].

For researchers selecting inflammatory biomarkers for DII studies, a panel including IL-6, TNF-α, and hematological indices such as MHR may provide the most comprehensive assessment of diet-associated inflammation. Additionally, energy-adjusted DII variants may capture distinct aspects of inflammatory activity worthy of parallel assessment [75]. While the DII provides a valuable tool for quantifying the inflammatory potential of diet, it explains relatively modest proportions of variance in inflammatory biomarkers, highlighting the multifactorial nature of inflammatory regulation and the importance of considering dietary patterns within a broader physiological context.

The Dietary Inflammatory Index (DII) and its energy-adjusted variant (E-DII) are tools designed to quantify the inflammatory potential of an individual's diet. Within the broader context of research on the correlation between dietary inflammatory indices and inflammatory biomarkers, this guide provides an objective comparison of the performance of DII and E-DII in predicting levels of C-reactive protein (CRP) and interleukin-6 (IL-6). We summarize experimental data, detail methodological protocols, and evaluate the relative strengths of each index to inform their application in nutritional epidemiology and clinical research.

The Dietary Inflammatory Index (DII) was developed to assess the overall inflammatory potential of an individual's diet based on the intake of specific nutrients and food components known to modulate inflammation [77]. It was created through an extensive review of scientific literature examining the effects of dietary parameters on established inflammatory biomarkers, including CRP, IL-6, tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α), interleukin-1 beta (IL-1β), interleukin-4 (IL-4), and interleukin-10 (IL-10) [6] [78]. A positive DII score indicates a pro-inflammatory diet, while a negative score indicates an anti-inflammatory diet [6].

The Energy-Adjusted Dietary Inflammatory Index (E-DII) is a refinement of the original DII, calculated to account for inter-individual differences in total energy intake [79] [80]. This adjustment enhances comparability across individuals with varying caloric requirements and improves the general applicability of the index for predicting disease outcomes [81]. The primary distinction lies in the standardization approach: the E-DII expresses the inflammatory potential per 1000 kcal consumed, whereas the standard DII does not adjust for total energy intake [80].

Methodological Protocols

Core Calculation Protocol for DII and E-DII

The foundational methodology for calculating both indices is consistent, derived from the protocol established by Shivappa et al. [77] [78]. The following workflow outlines the standard calculation process, with the key differentiator for E-DII being the energy adjustment applied to dietary intake data prior to the calculation steps.

Diagram 1: DII and E-DII Calculation Workflow. This diagram illustrates the standard calculation process for both indices. The primary divergence for E-DII is the initial energy adjustment of dietary intake data before linking to the global database.

The calculation involves several standardized steps [79] [77] [78]:

• Dietary Assessment: Dietary intake data is collected, typically using a Food Frequency Questionnaire (FFQ) or 24-hour dietary recalls.
• Global Standardization: Each dietary parameter (e.g., nutrients, flavonoids) is compared to a global reference database representing mean intakes across diverse populations. A Z-score is calculated: (Reported Intake - Global Mean) / Global Standard Deviation.
• Percentile Conversion: The Z-score is converted to a centered percentile value to minimize skewness, resulting in a value between 0 and 1.
• Inflammatory Effect Scoring: This percentile is multiplied by the respective food parameter's inflammatory effect score, which is derived from the literature review. These scores indicate the pro-inflammatory (+1), anti-inflammatory (-1), or neutral (0) effect of each parameter on specific inflammatory biomarkers.
• Index Generation: The scores for all evaluated parameters are summed to create the overall DII or E-DII score.

For the E-DII, the nutrient intakes are first adjusted per 1000 calories before this calculation process begins, ensuring the final score reflects the inflammatory density of the diet [80].

Biomarker Measurement Protocols

The validation of both DII and E-DII relies on correlating the dietary scores with concentrations of systemic inflammatory biomarkers.

• C-Reactive Protein (CRP): Often measured in serum or plasma using immunoturbidimetry on automated biochemistry analyzers (e.g., Olympus AU2700) [77]. High-sensitivity CRP (hs-CRP) assays are preferred for detecting low-grade systemic inflammation.
• Interleukin-6 (IL-6): Typically quantified using multiplex immunoassay kits (e.g., Milliplex MAP kit) and analyzed by flow cytometry systems such as Luminex [77]. These assays allow for the simultaneous measurement of multiple cytokines with high sensitivity and precision.

Comparative Performance Data

The following tables synthesize quantitative data from studies that have investigated the association of DII and E-DII with CRP and IL-6 levels.

Table 1: Association between DII/E-DII and CRP Levels

Study Population	Index Type	Association with CRP	Effect Size / Correlation	Key Findings
European Adolescents [77]	DII	Positive	( b_{DIIt3vs1} = 0.13 ) (95% CI: 0.001, 0.25)*	Pro-inflammatory diet (higher DII) associated with increased CRP.
Adults with Obesity [5]	DII	Positive	( r = 0.258 ); ( p = 0.004 )	Significant positive correlation between DII score and serum CRP levels.
UK Biobank (Adults) [80]	E-DII	Positive	N/R	E-DII scores were correlated with CRP levels in a large prospective cohort.

Note: (b) represents the regression coefficient; (r) represents the correlation coefficient; N/R = Not Reported in detail in the provided excerpt.

Table 2: Association between DII/E-DII and IL-6 Levels

Study Population	Index Type	Association with IL-6	Effect Size / Correlation	Key Findings
European Adolescents [77]	DII	Not Significant	N/S	DII was not significantly associated with IL-6 in this adolescent cohort.
UK Biobank (Adults) [80]	E-DII	Positive (Implied)	N/R	The E-DII calculation is based on a literature-derived inflammatory effect score for IL-6, implying a designed predictive relationship.

Note: N/S = Not Statistically Significant; N/R = Not Reported in detail in the provided excerpt.

The relationship between dietary inflammatory potential and health outcomes extends beyond CRP and IL-6. The following diagram synthesizes the broader mechanistic pathways and health impacts linked to pro-inflammatory diets, as identified in the research [79] [80] [82].

Diagram 2: Pathways from Diet to Inflammation and Health Outcomes. This diagram outlines the key biological pathways linking a pro-inflammatory diet to systemic inflammation and associated disorders, including effects mediated through the microbiome.

The Scientist's Toolkit: Research Reagent Solutions

Table 3: Essential Materials and Tools for DII/E-DII and Biomarker Research

Item	Function / Application
Validated FFQ or 24-Hour Recall Software	To collect standardized dietary intake data. Examples include the HELENA-DIAT [77] or tools used in NHANES [78].
Global Nutrient Database	A standardized reference for mean and SD of dietary parameters globally, essential for Z-score calculation [79] [77].
Literature-Derived Inflammatory Effect Scores	The set of scores for ~45 dietary parameters, defining their inflammatory effect, as established by Shivappa et al.
Multiplex Immunoassay Kits	For simultaneous, high-sensitivity measurement of cytokine panels (e.g., IL-6, TNF-α, IL-1β). Example: Milliplex MAP kits [77].
Luminex Analysis System	Flow cytometry-based platform for analyzing multiplex immunoassays [77].
Automated Clinical Chemistry Analyzer	For quantifying CRP levels in serum/plasma via immunoturbidimetry [77] [5].

Both the DII and E-DII are valid tools designed to predict levels of inflammatory biomarkers, including CRP and IL-6. The current body of research, including studies on adolescents and adults, consistently shows a significant positive association between a higher DII score (pro-inflammatory diet) and elevated CRP levels [77] [5]. Data specifically comparing the predictive performance of DII versus E-DII for IL-6 is less conclusive in the provided results.

The primary consideration for researchers choosing between these indices is methodological. The standard DII is a well-validated tool suitable for assessing the overall inflammatory potential of a diet. The E-DII, with its adjustment for total energy intake, may offer enhanced comparability across populations with vastly different energy requirements and is increasingly used in recent epidemiological studies to account for this key confounding factor [79] [80] [81]. The choice of index should align with the specific research question and study design, particularly regarding the importance of energy intake adjustment in the cohort under investigation.

In the evolving landscape of nutritional science and clinical medicine, the Dietary Inflammatory Index (DII) has emerged as a significant tool for quantifying the inflammatory potential of an individual's diet. Developed through systematic evaluation of scientific literature, the DII scores diets based on their capacity to influence systemic inflammation, with higher scores indicating pro-inflammatory properties and lower scores suggesting anti-inflammatory effects [6] [21]. This review examines the clinical utility of the DII in predicting responses to nutritional interventions and forecasting disease outcomes, with particular focus on its correlation with established inflammatory biomarkers including C-reactive protein (CRP) and interleukin-6 (IL-6). Understanding these relationships provides critical insights for researchers, clinicians, and drug development professionals seeking to integrate dietary strategies into therapeutic interventions and clinical trial designs.

DII and Biomarker Correlations: The Evidential Foundation

Mechanistic Pathways Linking Diet to Inflammation

Dietary components influence inflammatory processes through multiple biological pathways. Pro-inflammatory diets typically rich in refined carbohydrates, saturated fats, and processed meats can activate innate immune responses, leading to increased production of inflammatory cytokines including IL-6 and TNF-α [21]. These cytokines in turn stimulate hepatic production of acute-phase proteins such as CRP, creating a state of chronic low-grade inflammation [62]. Conversely, anti-inflammatory diets abundant in fruits, vegetables, whole grains, and omega-3 fatty acids contain bioactive compounds that can suppress activation of the NF-κB pathway and other inflammatory signaling cascades [83] [70].

The relationship between dietary patterns and inflammation forms the foundation for the DII's clinical application. A systematic review and meta-analysis of 14 studies encompassing 59,941 individuals confirmed that those consuming pro-inflammatory diets (highest DII category) had a 39% higher odds of elevated CRP compared to those with anti-inflammatory diets (lowest DII category) [21]. Each unit increase in DII was associated with a 10% increase in the odds of elevated CRP, establishing a clear dose-response relationship [21].

Figure 1: Biological pathways linking dietary patterns to inflammatory states and disease risk. Pro-inflammatory diets activate immune responses leading to chronic inflammation, while anti-inflammatory diets promote reduced inflammatory states.

Comparative Performance of Inflammatory Biomarkers in Predicting Intervention Outcomes

Different inflammatory biomarkers offer varying predictive capabilities for clinical outcomes and intervention responses. Research directly comparing IL-6, TNF-α, and CRP reveals important distinctions in their prognostic utility. A secondary analysis of the Effect of early nutritional therapy on Frailty, Functional Outcomes, and Recovery of malnourished medical inpatients Trial (EFFORT) demonstrated that elevated IL-6 levels (>11.2 pg/mL) were associated with a 3.5-fold increase in 30-day mortality among medical inpatients, whereas CRP and TNF-α showed no significant association with mortality [62].

Crucially, this study also revealed that high inflammatory burden, particularly elevated IL-6, predicted diminished response to nutritional interventions. Patients with high IL-6 levels showed substantially less mortality benefit from individualized nutritional support compared to those with lower inflammation (HR 0.82 vs. 0.32) [62]. Similarly, patients with CRP levels >100 mg/dL showed a trend toward reduced intervention benefit [62]. These findings highlight the critical importance of assessing inflammatory status when designing nutritional interventions, particularly in hospitalized populations.

Table 1: Biomarker Performance in Predicting Mortality and Nutritional Intervention Response

Biomarker	Association with 30-Day Mortality	Prediction of Nutritional Intervention Response	Clinical Implications
IL-6	Strong association: 3.5-fold increased risk with levels >11.2 pg/mL [62]	Significantly diminished benefit in high-IL-6 patients (HR 0.82 vs. 0.32) [62]	Optimal for risk stratification; identifies patients less likely to respond to nutritional support
CRP	No significant association with mortality [62]	Trend toward diminished benefit with levels >100 mg/dL [62]	Moderate utility for predicting intervention response but limited prognostic value for mortality
TNF-α	No significant association with mortality [62]	Data not specifically reported	Limited prognostic utility in this context

DII as a Predictor of Disease Outcomes

Cardiovascular and Metabolic Disorders

The DII demonstrates significant utility in predicting incidence and progression of cardiovascular and metabolic diseases. A recent analysis of 9,914 diabetic patients from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) revealed a striking association between DII and stroke risk [12]. After comprehensive adjustment for confounders, individuals in the highest DII quartile had a 78% increased risk of stroke compared to those in the lowest quartile (OR: 1.78, 95% CI: 1.35-2.36) [12]. Each unit increase in DII was associated with a 13% increase in stroke risk, demonstrating a clear linear dose-response relationship [12].

This relationship between pro-inflammatory diets and adverse health outcomes extends beyond stroke risk. A 2024 study investigating the impact of a senior-friendly diet on older adults (mean age 82.5 years) found that participants with the highest baseline DII scores (most pro-inflammatory diets) showed the most substantial improvements in triglycerides and blood glucose following dietary intervention [83]. This suggests that individuals with the most inflammatory dietary patterns may derive the greatest metabolic benefit from targeted nutritional interventions.

Population-Specific Variations in DII Utility

The predictive utility of DII appears to vary across different population subgroups and health conditions. A 2025 cross-sectional analysis of 4,567 participants from the PERSIAN Organizational Cohort Study found that while healthy individuals showed significant correlations between DII and various hematological inflammatory markers, including monocyte-to-HDL ratio (MHR) and lymphocyte-to-HDL ratio (LHR), these associations were absent in individuals with depression [6]. This suggests that the underlying inflammatory state associated with depression may obscure or alter the relationship between diet and hematological inflammatory markers [6].

Similarly, a case-control study of women with polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCOS) found no significant difference in DII values between PCOS and non-PCOS women, despite significantly higher IL-6 levels in the PCOS group (4.94 ± 1.97 vs. 3.48 ± 1.77, P < 0.001) [70]. The authors suggested that factors such as education level, overall health status, physical activity, and total caloric intake might influence these relationships [70].

Methodological Considerations in DII Research

Key Experimental Protocols and Assessment Methods

DII research employs standardized methodologies to ensure consistency and comparability across studies. The foundational approach to DII calculation involves assessment of dietary intake typically through Food Frequency Questionnaires (FFQ), 24-hour dietary recalls, or dietary records [6] [12] [70]. The intake of predefined food parameters known to influence inflammation is then compared to a global reference database and converted to percentiles [6]. These percentiles are transformed using a centered percentile score, multiplied by the respective inflammatory effect score for each parameter, and summed to create the overall DII score [12] [70].

Recent methodological advances include the development of the empirical Anti-inflammatory Diet Index (eADI), which was constructed using a 10-fold feature selection process with Lasso regression to identify food groups most strongly correlated with multiple inflammatory biomarkers (hsCRP, IL-6, TNF-R1, TNF-R2) [2]. This approach identified 17 key food groups (11 anti-inflammatory, 6 pro-inflammatory) that collectively provide a robust prediction of inflammatory status [2].

Table 2: Standardized Methodologies for Dietary Inflammation Assessment

Assessment Method	Data Collection Approach	Key Parameters Assessed	Advantages	Limitations
Dietary Inflammatory Index (DII)	FFQ, 24-hour recall, or dietary records [6] [12]	45 dietary components including nutrients, flavonoids, spices [83] [21]	Comprehensive; validated across populations [21] [84]	Requires substantial dietary data collection
Empirical Anti-inflammatory Diet Index (eADI)	145-item FFQ [2]	17 food groups identified through statistical feature selection [2]	Data-driven; optimized for biomarker prediction [2]	Less comprehensive than DII; newer with limited validation
Energy-Adjusted DII (E-DII)	FFQ or 24-hour recall with energy adjustment [21] [12]	Same parameters as DII, normalized per 1000 calories [12]	Controls for total energy intake; reduces confounding [21]	May not fully capture dietary patterns

Research Reagent Solutions for Inflammatory Biomarker Assessment

Conducting robust DII research requires specific laboratory reagents and assessment tools. The following table details essential research reagents and their applications in this field.

Table 3: Essential Research Reagents for DII and Inflammation Studies

Reagent/Assessment Tool	Primary Function	Application Context	Examples from Literature
High-Sensitivity CRP Assay	Quantification of low-grade inflammation	Cardiovascular risk assessment; intervention response monitoring [62] [2]	Architect Ci8200 analyzer with high-sensitivity immunonephelometric assay [2]
Multiplex Cytokine Panels	Simultaneous measurement of multiple cytokines	Comprehensive inflammatory profiling; pathway analysis [62] [2]	Olink Proteomics panels for IL-6, TNF-R1, TNF-R2 [2]; MSD Multi-Spot Assay System [62]
Food Frequency Questionnaires	Standardized dietary assessment	DII calculation; nutritional epidemiology [6] [2]	118-item FFQ in PERSIAN study [6]; 145-item FFQ in COSM study [2]
ELISA Kits for Specific Cytokines	Targeted quantification of individual inflammatory mediators	Focused studies on specific pathways; validation [70]	Human IL-6 ELISA kit (Zell Bio Company) [70]
Automated Hematology Analyzers	Complete blood count with differential	Calculation of hematological inflammatory indices [6]	Assessment of PLR, MHR, LHR, RLR, RPR, GLR [6]

Figure 2: Standard experimental workflow for DII research, from dietary assessment through statistical analysis to clinical interpretation.

The Dietary Inflammatory Index demonstrates significant clinical utility for predicting both intervention responses and disease outcomes across diverse populations. The robust association between higher DII scores and increased levels of inflammatory biomarkers, particularly CRP and IL-6, provides a mechanistic basis for its predictive capacity. Importantly, the DII and related indices show particular value in identifying individuals most likely to benefit from nutritional interventions, with those consuming the most pro-inflammatory diets often demonstrating the greatest improvement. The emerging evidence that high inflammatory burden, as reflected by elevated IL-6, may diminish response to nutritional therapy highlights the importance of assessing inflammatory status in clinical nutrition practice. Future research should focus on expanding validation in diverse populations, refining assessment methodologies, and developing targeted anti-inflammatory dietary interventions for specific clinical contexts.

Multimorbidity, defined as the co-occurrence of two or more chronic diseases in the same individual, presents a substantial challenge in clinical management, particularly for aging populations. This condition affects approximately one in five adults and two-thirds of the elderly, with higher prevalence in groups from lower socioeconomic status [85]. Multimorbidity leads to decreased quality of life, functional decline, and increased mortality risk, creating an urgent need for early detection strategies [85].

One promising approach involves using physiological markers to identify multimorbidity at an early stage. Research indicates that chronic, low-grade inflammation serves as a common pathway connecting multiple age-related diseases. A 2018 systematic review identified several key physiological markers associated with multimorbidity, including dehydroepiandrosterone sulfate (DHEAS), interleukin-6 (IL-6), C-reactive protein (CRP), lipoprotein (Lp), and cystatin C (Cyst-C) [85]. More recently, attention has shifted toward hematological inflammatory markers—easily measurable from routine complete blood count (CBC) tests—as accessible and cost-effective tools for multi-morbidity assessment and risk stratification [86] [6] [87].

Simultaneously, evidence linking dietary patterns to inflammatory status provides a potential avenue for intervention. The Dietary Inflammatory Index (DII) has emerged as a validated tool to quantify the inflammatory potential of an individual's diet, with numerous studies demonstrating correlations between pro-inflammatory diets and elevated levels of inflammatory markers, including CRP and IL-6 [2] [88] [5]. This article examines the emerging integration of hematological markers in multi-morbidity assessment frameworks and explores their relationship with dietary influences on inflammation.

Comparative Analysis of Inflammatory Markers in Multimorbidity

Traditional Serum Inflammatory Markers

Traditional biomarkers like CRP and IL-6 have established roles in inflammation assessment and multimorbidity prediction. Their measurement, however, often requires specialized assays beyond routine blood tests.

Table 1: Traditional Serum Inflammatory Markers in Multimorbidity and Nutrition Research

Marker	Role in Inflammation	Association with Multimorbidity	Response to Dietary Intervention
IL-6	Pro-inflammatory cytokine; stimulates CRP production	Higher levels associated with higher number of diseases [85]	Anti-inflammatory diets reduce levels [2]
CRP	Acute-phase protein; general marker of inflammation	Positively associated with having ≥2 chronic conditions [85]	12% reduction with anti-inflammatory diet [2]
TNF-α	Pro-inflammatory cytokine; regulates immune cells	Limited direct evidence in multimorbidity	Inconsistent response to dietary changes [88]
DHEAS	Neurosteroid with anti-aging effects	Lower levels associated with higher disease count [85]	Not well-studied in dietary interventions

Emerging Hematological Inflammatory Markers and Ratios

Hematological markers derived from routine complete blood count (CBC) tests offer practical advantages for clinical application. These ratios integrate information from multiple cell lineages to provide a more comprehensive inflammation profile.

Table 2: Hematological Inflammatory Markers: Applications and Performance

Marker	Calculation	Clinical Utility	Association with Disease States
NLR (Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio)	Neutrophils ÷ Lymphocytes	Predicts prognosis in cardiac disease [86]	Elevated in acute heart failure [86]
PLR (Platelet-to-Lymphocyte Ratio)	Platelets ÷ Lymphocytes	Risk stratification in cardiovascular disease [86] [6]	Associated with mortality in heart failure [86]
MHR (Monocyte-to-HDL Ratio)	Monocytes ÷ HDL Cholesterol	Links inflammation with lipid metabolism [6]	Increased with pro-inflammatory diet [6]
MLR (Monocyte-to-Lymphocyte Ratio)	Monocytes ÷ Lymphocytes	Indicator of immune dysregulation	Predictive in rheumatoid arthritis-ILD [87]
SII (Systemic Immune-Inflammation Index)	Platelets × Neutrophils ÷ Lymphocytes	Comprehensive inflammation index	Emerging research in multimorbidity

Methodological Approaches in Inflammation and Multimorbidity Research

Dietary Inflammatory Index (DII) Assessment

The DII quantifies the inflammatory potential of diet based on extensive literature review of 45 dietary components and their effects on inflammatory markers [5]. The computation involves:

• Dietary Assessment: Using validated food frequency questionnaires (FFQs) with 118-145 items to capture habitual intake [2] [6].
• Standardization: Dietary intakes are standardized to global reference values using z-scores.
• Inflammatory Scoring: Each food parameter receives an inflammatory effect score based on published literature (+1 for pro-inflammatory, -1 for anti-inflammatory).
• Index Calculation: The overall DII represents the sum of these adjusted values, with positive scores indicating pro-inflammatory diets and negative scores indicating anti-inflammatory diets [6] [5].

Recent advancements include the empirical Anti-inflammatory Diet Index (eADI), which uses machine learning approaches on multiple inflammatory biomarkers (hsCRP, IL-6, TNF-R1, TNF-R2) to identify food groups with anti-inflammatory potential [2].

Hematological Marker Measurement Protocols

Standardized protocols for blood collection and analysis ensure reliability in hematological marker assessment:

• Blood Collection: Fasting venous blood samples collected in EDTA tubes for CBC analysis and serum separator tubes for biochemical assays [6] [87].
• Sample Processing: Analysis within 4 hours of collection using automated hematology analyzers [87].
• Quality Control: Regular calibration and participation in external quality assessment programs following ISO 15189 standards [87].
• Ratio Calculation: Derived parameters computed from absolute cell counts obtained from CBC with differential [6].

Machine Learning Approaches in Biomarker Research

Advanced computational methods enhance biomarker discovery and multi-morbidity prediction:

• Feature Selection: Morris Sensitivity Analysis identifies variables with highest predictive influence on outcomes [86].
• Model Development: Algorithms including XGBoost, Random Forest, and Explainable Boosting Machines (EBM) developed and compared using repeated holdout validation [86] [87].
• Performance Evaluation: Models assessed using AUC-ROC, accuracy, precision, recall, and Brier score with 10-fold cross-validation [86] [87].

Integrated Pathway: From Diet to Inflammation to Multimorbidity

The relationship between dietary patterns, inflammation, and multimorbidity development follows a sequential pathway that integrates molecular, physiological, and clinical factors.

Figure 1: Integrated Pathway from Diet to Multi-Morbidity. This diagram illustrates the sequential relationship between dietary patterns, immune activation, inflammatory marker release, and the development of multiple chronic conditions.

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagents and Materials

Table 3: Essential Research Reagents for Inflammation and Multi-Morbidity Studies

Reagent/Equipment	Specific Example	Research Application
High-Sensitivity CRP Assay	Architect Ci8200 analyzer with immunonephelometric assay	Quantifying low-grade inflammation [2]
Multiplex Cytokine Panels	Olink Proteomics panels (CVD II, CVD III)	Simultaneous measurement of IL-6, TNF-α, TNF-R1, TNF-R2 [2]
Automated Hematology Analyzer	Sysmex XN-series, Beckman Coulter DxH	Complete blood count with differential for ratio calculation [6] [87]
Dietary Assessment Software	Nutritionist IV, BeBIS	DII calculation from food frequency questionnaires [6] [5]
Biomarker Immunoassays	Chemiluminescent enzyme immunoassay (LUMIPULSE)	Specific biomarker quantification (KL-6, CYFRA21-1) [87]
Machine Learning Frameworks	Scikit-learn, XGBoost	Predictive model development for multi-morbidity risk [86] [87]

Comparative Performance of Marker Classes in Prediction Models

Machine learning approaches provide objective comparisons of different marker classes in multi-morbidity prediction.

Table 4: Predictive Performance of Different Marker Classes in Disease Detection

Marker Category	Specific Example	AUC	Key Predictive Features	Clinical Application
Hematologic Ratios	NLR, PLR, RDW-CV	0.879 [86]	PDW, RDW-CV, NEU, NEU/LY ratio [86]	Acute heart failure detection [86]
Specific Protein Biomarkers	KL-6, IL-6, CYFRA21-1	0.891 [87]	KL-6 (importance score: 0.285) [87]	Rheumatoid arthritis-ILD prediction [87]
Combined Traditional Markers	IL-6, CRP, DHEAS	N/A	IL-6, DHEAS most consistent [85]	General multimorbidity assessment [85]
Dietary Indices	DII, eADI	N/A	17 food groups (11 anti-inflammatory) [2]	Inflammation risk stratification [2]

The integration of hematological inflammatory markers with traditional serum biomarkers and dietary inflammatory indices provides a powerful multidimensional approach to multi-morbidity assessment. These tools enable researchers and clinicians to identify at-risk individuals earlier, monitor disease progression more effectively, and evaluate interventions more precisely. The emerging application of machine learning further enhances our ability to extract meaningful patterns from complex biomarker data, moving toward personalized risk assessment and targeted interventions. Future research should focus on validating these approaches in diverse populations and establishing standardized cut-off values for clinical implementation.

Conclusion

The relationship between Dietary Inflammatory Index and inflammatory biomarkers CRP and IL-6 presents both consistent patterns and important complexities for researchers and drug development professionals. While substantial evidence validates DII as a tool for assessing diet-induced inflammation, with pro-inflammatory diets consistently associating with elevated CRP and IL-6 in many populations, critical nuances emerge across different clinical contexts and methodological approaches. The differential performance of IL-6 and CRP as outcome measures, the impact of health status on DII-biomarker correlations, and the development of enhanced indices like EDII represent key advances. Future research should focus on standardizing assessment methodologies, elucidating context-specific variations, and exploring how dietary inflammation modulates responses to pharmacological interventions. For drug development, incorporating DII assessment may help identify patients whose inflammatory status is modifiable through dietary interventions, potentially enhancing therapeutic efficacy and enabling personalized treatment approaches that integrate nutritional and pharmaceutical strategies.

References

• 1. Dietary inflammatory index mediation lifestyle patterns and ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12259418/]
• 2. Development of empirical anti-inflammatory diet index [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12183828/]
• 3. Dietary inflammatory potential estimated by three metrics ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0899900725003119]
• 4. Scientific basis of dietary inflammatory index (DII) [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2667268525000415]
• 5. Exploring the link between dietary inflammatory index, ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41366-025-01728-2]
• 6. Dietary inflammatory index and its association ... - BMC Nutrition [https://bmcnutr.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s40795-025-01118-x]
• 7. Relationship Between Dietary Inflammatory Index, Diets ... [https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6643/17/9/1570]
• 8. Beyond the Biomarker: Monomeric CRP as a Driver of ... [https://www.mdpi.com/1422-0067/26/17/8227]
• 9. C-reactive protein: the nexus between inflammation and ... [https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/immunology/articles/10.3389/fimmu.2025.1612703/full]
• 10. IL-6 antibody in $1.4 billion sale [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41587-025-02885-5]
• 11. Longitudinal Analysis of Traditional Inflammatory Markers (IL ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12228567/]
• 12. Association of the dietary inflammation index with ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-025-02169-7]
• 13. Associations of elevated pro-inflammatory cytokines ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0022395625004637]
• 14. Impact of anti-inflammatory diets on cardiovascular disease ... [https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/nutrition/articles/10.3389/fnut.2025.1549831/full]
• 15. Comparison of the inflammatory biomarkers IL - 6 , TNF-α, and CRP to... [https://journal-inflammation.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12950-025-00442-0]
• 16. and metabolic Nutritional of modulation in critically ill... inflammation [https://annalsofintensivecare.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/s13613-024-01350-x]
• 17. Probiotics and Synbiotics Supplementation Reduce ... [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41022286/]
• 18. Frontiers | Machine learning-driven insights into lipid metabolism and... [https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/nutrition/articles/10.3389/fnut.2025.1552047/full]
• 19. Dietary inflammatory potential estimated by three metrics ... [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41259882/]
• 20. Development of empirical anti-inflammatory diet index: a cross ... [https://nutritionj.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12937-025-01165-x]
• 21. Dietary inflammatory index and elevated serum C‐reactive ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10563751/]
• 22. "DIETARY INFLAMMATORY INDEX AND ITS RELATIONSHIP ... [https://scholarcommons.sc.edu/etd/2882/]
• 23. The relationship between dietary inflammatory index in ... [https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/nutrition/articles/10.3389/fnut.2025.1564580/full]
• 24. A population-based dietary inflammatory index predicts levels ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3983179/]
• 25. Associations between dietary inflammatory index and ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4355619/]
• 26. Dietary inflammatory potential and the risk of cognitive ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1279770724005165]
• 27. Association of the dietary inflammation index with frailty in ... [https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/nutrition/articles/10.3389/fnut.2025.1607110/full]
• 28. Validating the dietary inflammatory index using ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0899900718307895]
• 29. Validation of a Dietary Inflammatory Index (DII) and ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6103570/]
• 30. Investigating the dietary inflammatory index and pro ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12232817/]
• 31. An Empirical Dietary Inflammatory Pattern Score Enhances ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5525108/]
• 32. Associations between dietary inflammatory index (DII) ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-025-08919-x]
• 33. Dietary score associations with markers of chronic low ... [https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00394-022-02892-1]
• 34. Food-based indexes and their association with dietary ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2161831325000365]
• 35. Associations between Dietary Inflammatory Index Scores ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1279770723011867]
• 36. Development and Validation of an Empirical Dietary ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4958288/]
• 37. An empirical dietary inflammatory pattern increases the ... [https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00394-025-03770-2]
• 38. Cross-sectional study of the relationship between dietary ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-025-24046-z]
• 39. Systemic Inflammation Evaluated by Interleukin-6 or C- ... [https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/immunology/articles/10.3389/fimmu.2022.868348/full]
• 40. Clinical outcomes of anti-inflammatory therapies inhibiting the ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12206679/]
• 41. IL6 genetic perturbation mimicking IL-6 inhibition is ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s44161-025-00700-7]
• 42. A novel biomarker of interleukin 6 activity and clinical and ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306453024000520]
• 43. The Diagnostic Value of Inflammatory Markers (CRP, IL6 ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10216858/]
• 44. Relationship between the Dietary Inflammatory Index ... [https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6643/15/1/194]
• 45. Association of dietary inflammatory index with serum asprosin ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12398284/]
• 46. Inflammatory markers in pregnancy – identifying drivers ... [https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/immunology/articles/10.3389/fimmu.2025.1561798/full]
• 47. Maternal Dietary Inflammatory Index during Pregnancy Is ... [https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6643/14/11/2284]
• 48. Maternal dietary inflammatory index during pregnancy and ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12268808/]
• 49. Cross-sectional study of the relationship between dietary ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12623732/]
• 50. Association of dietary quality and dietary inflammatory ... [https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/immunology/articles/10.3389/fimmu.2025.1596806/full]
• 51. 6, TNF-α, and CRP to predict the effect of nutritional ... [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40275239/]
• 52. Association between dietary inflammatory index and ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11992876/]
• 53. Association of the dietary inflammatory index with multi-organ ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12487331/]
• 54. Nonlinear dose–response relationship between dietary ... [https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/nutrition/articles/10.3389/fnut.2025.1645789/full]
• 55. Evaluating the triglyceride-glucose index as a biomarker ... [https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/immunology/articles/10.3389/fimmu.2025.1548444/full]
• 56. Decoding the Correlation Between Inflammatory Response Marker... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11265957/]
• 57. Frontiers | C-reactive protein conformations and their association with... [https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/immunology/articles/10.3389/fimmu.2025.1601145/full]
• 58. ESCMID Global 2025 : IL - 6 Outperforms Traditional Tests for Early... [https://www.emjreviews.com/microbiology-infectious-diseases/news/escmid-global-2025-il-6-outperforms-traditional-tests-for-early-sepsis-detection/]
• 59. Cumulative behavioral and metabolic determinants of ... [https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/public-health/articles/10.3389/fpubh.2025.1602629/full]
• 60. Effects of total and regional fat loss on plasma CRP and IL ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4304884/]
• 61. Uncovering the inflammatory profile of obese children [https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/pediatrics/articles/10.3389/fped.2025.1570803/full]
• 62. 6, TNF-α, and CRP to predict the effect of nutritional therapy ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12023447/]
• 63. Impact of Obesity on Treatment Response in Patients ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12183491/]
• 64. A cohort study on the association of dietary inflammatory ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-025-15970-1]
• 65. Association of dietary quality and dietary inflammatory ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12176585/]
• 66. Multifunctional dietary interventions, low-grade ... [https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/immunology/articles/10.3389/fimmu.2024.1304686/full]
• 67. Effects of Dietary Intervention on Inflammatory Markers in ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9008568/]
• 68. Effects of Dietary Intervention on Inflammatory Markers in ... [https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/nutrition/articles/10.3389/fnut.2022.846591/full]
• 69. Lower C-reactive protein and IL-6 associated with vegetarian ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6818966/]
• 70. Association of dietary inflammatory index with C-reactive ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-024-53958-5]
• 71. Association of Dietary Inflammatory Index with Serum IL-6 ... [https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6643/12/9/2789]
• 72. Meta-analysis of the association between dietary ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11081557/]
• 73. Construct Validation of the Dietary Inflammatory Index among ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4433562/]
• 74. Associations of dietary inflammatory indices (DII and E ... [https://www.ecerm.org/DOIx.php?id=10.5653/cerm.2024.06982]
• 75. Associations between dietary inflammatory scores and ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0261561423001541]
• 76. Construct Validation of the Dietary Inflammatory Index (DII) ... [https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6643/15/21/4553]
• 77. Association between dietary inflammatory index and ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5517083/]
• 78. The association between the dietary inflammatory index ... [https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/nutrition/articles/10.3389/fnut.2024.1442710/full]
• 79. Association between energy-adjusted dietary inflammatory ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12228316/]
• 80. Dietary inflammatory index and brain disorders [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11950238/]
• 81. Stratified dietary inflammatory potential identifies oral and ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-025-02292-5]
• 82. Predictive role of the dietary inflammatory index on stroke ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-025-96908-5]
• 83. Health Outcome Comparison Based on Dietary ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11121642/]
• 84. The Dietary Inflammatory Index and Human Health [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S216183132200463X]
• 85. Physiological markers and multimorbidity: A systematic review [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6201184/]
• 86. HearteXplain: explainable prediction of acute heart failure ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-025-23668-7]
• 87. A multi-biomarker machine learning approach for early ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12355783/]
• 88. Inflammation Diet and the Association with Inflammatory ... [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40232587/]