| Literature DB >> 25628521 |
Joseph N Sciberras1, Stuart Dr Galloway2, Anthony Fenech3, Godfrey Grech4, Claude Farrugia5, Deborah Duca5, Janet Mifsud3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Endurance exercise induces IL-6 production from myocytes that is thought to impair intracellular defence mechanisms. Curcumin inhibits NF-κB and activator protein 1, responsible for cytokine transcription, in cell lines. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of curcumin supplementation on the cytokine and stress responses following 2 h of cycling.Entities:
Keywords: Immunity; Interleukins; Natural polyphenols
Year: 2015 PMID: 25628521 PMCID: PMC4307740 DOI: 10.1186/s12970-014-0066-3
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Int Soc Sports Nutr ISSN: 1550-2783 Impact factor: 5.150
Figure 1Trial flow chart detailing sequence of events, supplementation days, and blood sampling. DALDA – daily analysis of life demands in athletes, HR – heart rate, RPE – rating of perceived exertion.
Ambient conditions, ergometer calibration setting and initial body mass on the day of each trial
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| 63 ± 6 (59–67) | 62 ± 7 (58–66) | 62 ± 6 (58–66) |
|
| 19.9 ± 0.6 (19.5-20.3) | 20.0 ± 0.4 (19.8-20.2) | 20.1 ± 0.5 (19.8-20.4) |
|
| 2.7 ± 0.1 (2.6-2.8) | 2.7 ± 0.1 (2.6-2.8) | 2.8 ± 0.1 (2.7-2.9) |
|
| 86.7 ± 10.5 (80.5-92.9) | 86.6 ± 10.4 (80.4-92.8) | 87.5 ± 11.0 (80.7-94.3) |
|
| 11 ± 10 (5–17) | 13 ± 9 (8–18) | 13 ± 6 (9–17) |
Habitual training load during the previous week was assessed using duration and intensity information. Training is reported in hours multiplied by intensity. Intensity was classified as low (1) medium (2) & high (3) Data are mean (± SD). Standard deviation and 95% confidence intervals are also reported following each value. No differences were noted between trials groups. Calibration value of the Computrainer is the value given to the ergometer as instructed by the manufacturer.
Physiological parameters means (± SD) measured during trial, grouped by trial type
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| 308 ± 200 (190–426) | 266 ± 200 (148–384) | 289 ± 228 (148–430) |
|
| 0.5 ± 0.3 (0.3-0.7) | 0.9 ± 0.9 (0.4-1.4) | 0.7 ± 0.6 (0.3-1.1) |
|
| 43 ± 2 (42–44) | 43 ± 3 (41–45) | 43 ± 2 (42–43) |
|
| 15.0 ± 0.7 (14.6-15.4) | 14.0 ± 0.9 (13.5-14.5) | 15.1 ± 0.8 (14.6-15.6) |
|
| 10.1 ± 2.7 (8.5-11.7) | 9.6 ± 2.5 (8.1-11.1) | 10.4 ± 2.6 (8.8-12.0) |
|
| 61.9 ± 9.8 (56.1-67.7) | 61.4 ± 9.2 (56.0-66.8) | 63.5 ± 9.5 (57.6-69.4) |
Confidence intervals 95% are also reported following each value.
Parameters show no significant difference between trials. These parameters were measured only at the end of exercise. Cortisol and C - reactive protein were measured to investigate any possible effects from the active compound curcumin. Haematocrit & Haemoglobin were measured to ensure that the athletes were in similar hydration status, while white blood cell and neutrophil percentage were needed to confirm that the athlete was not suffering from an infection at the time of the trial.
Figure 2Mean (±SEM) IL-6 concentration obtained before exercise, immediately after exercise, and one hour following exercise on each trial day. *indicates significant difference from pre-exercise on all trials. No statistical significant difference between interleukin 6 values was observed. Table shows mean cytokine levels, standard deviation, and 95% confidence intervals during trials. Median and interquartile range IQR are also shown for 1 hour post exercise.
Figure 3Mean (±SEM) IL1-RA concentration obtained before exercise, immediately after exercise, and one hour following exercise on each trial day. *indicates significant difference from pre-exercise. Table shows mean cytokine levels, standard deviation, and 95% confidence intervals during trials.
Figure 4Median IL-6 concentration and range one hour post exercise for curcumin, placebo and control trials. Note curcumin dataset still positively skewed (towards low values) despite removing an outlier.
DALDA (Daily Analysis of Life Demands on Athletes) questionnaire responses (median & range) for both training and trial days
|
|
| |||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| CURCUMIN (n = 11) | 0 (0–3) | 4 (4–9) | 3 (0–5)† | 1 (0–4) | 21(4–25) | 3 (0–19)† |
| PLACEBO (n = 11) | 1 (0–5) | 7 (2–9) | 1 (0–6) | 2 (0–7) | 20 (8–25) | 2 (0–15) |
| CONTROL (n = 10) | 2 (0–3) | 6 (2–9) | 0 (0–7) | 2 (0–9) | 22 (5–25) | 2 (0–18) |
|
|
| |||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| CURCUMIN (n = 11) | 2 (0–4) | 6 (2–9) | 1 (0–7) | 2 (0–5) | 22 (5–25) | 1 (0–20) |
| PLACEBO (n = 11) | 1 (0–5) | 8 (2–9) | 0 (0–6) | 1 (0–6) | 23 (5–25) | 0 (0–18) |
| CONTROL (n = 10) | 2 (0–3) | 7 (3–9) | 0 (0–6) | 3 (0–8) | 22 (4–25) | 1 (0–19) |
Data is grouped according to trial type. A – Worse than usual; B – Same as usual; C – Better than usual. †indicates statistical significant difference between curcumin and placebo trials, p-value in both parts between curcumin and placebo is 0.04 using Wilcoxon signed ranks.