| Literature DB >> 27781121 |
Mohsen Taghizadeh1, Mohammad Reza Memarzadeh2, Fatemeh Abedi1, Nasrin Sharifi1, Fatemeh Karamali3, Zohreh Fakhrieh Kashan1, Zatollah Asemi1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Limited data are available regarding the effects of combined administration of Cumin cyminum L. and lime on weight loss and metabolic profiles among subjects with overweight subjects.Entities:
Keywords: Cuminum cyminum L; Insulin Resistance; Lim; Overweight
Year: 2016 PMID: 27781121 PMCID: PMC5065707 DOI: 10.5812/ircmj.34212
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Iran Red Crescent Med J ISSN: 2074-1804 Impact factor: 0.611
Figure 1.A Summary of Patients’ Flow Diagram
Demographic Data of Study Participants[a]
| Value | Placebo Group, n = 24 | Low-Dose | High-Dose | P Value[ |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 1.00[ | |||
| Male | 2 (8.3) | 2 (8.3) | 2 (8.3) | |
| Female | 22 (91.7) | 22 (91.7) | 22 (91.7) | |
|
| 40.1±11.3 | 33.2 ± 11.8 | 34.5 ± 10.2 | 0.08 |
|
| 160.8 ± 7.0 | 164.2 ± 5.6 | 162.9 ± 6.1 | 0.18 |
|
| 83.4 ± 15.4 | 89.5 ± 16.1 | 82.3 ± 13.6 | 0.21 |
|
| 83.6 ± 15.8 | 88.3 ± 16.6 | 80.2 ± 13.5 | 0.20 |
|
| 0.2 ± 1.3 | -1.2 ± 1.5[ | -2.1 ± 1.7[ | < 0.001 |
|
| 32.4 ± 6.3 | 33.2 ± 5.6 | 31.1 ± 5.0 | 0.41 |
|
| 32.5 ± 6.5 | 32.7 ± 5.8 | 30.3 ± 5.0 | 0.27 |
|
| 0.1 ± 0.5 | -0.5 ± 0.5[ | -0.8 ± 0.6[ | < 0.001 |
|
| 28.5 ± 2.3 | 28.7 ± 2.1 | 28.9 ± 2.0 | 0.85 |
|
| 118.7 ± 4.5 | 119.1 ± 4.2 | 119.2 ± 4.1 | 0.90 |
|
| 79.5 ± 3.1 | 79.1 ± 2.8 | 79.4 ± 2.9 | 0.90 |
aValues are expressed as means ± SD or No. (%).
bObtained from ANOVA test.
cObtained from Pearson Chi-square test.
dSignificant difference with the placebo group.
Abbreviations: BMI, body mass index; DBP, diastolic blood pressure; METs, metabolic equivalents; SBP, systolic blood pressure.
Dietary Intakes of Participants Throughout the Study[a]
| Value | Placebo Group, n = 24 | Low-Dose | High-Dose | P Value[ |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 2497 ± 161 | 2518 ± 169 | 2529 ± 168 | 0.80 |
|
| 340.4 ± 42.1 | 344.1 ± 43.4 | 343.9 ± 33.8 | 0.93 |
|
| 89.5 ± 10.3 | 87.9 ± 14.1 | 92.5 ± 13.3 | 0.44 |
|
| 91.0 ± 12.0 | 91.8 ± 13.1 | 90.6 ± 12.4 | 0.94 |
|
| 26.3 ± 5.5 | 26.2 ± 5.6 | 27.4 ± 5.2 | 0.72 |
|
| 30.2 ± 8.3 | 27.8 ± 7.6 | 28.1 ± 6.5 | 0.46 |
|
| 24.4 ± 4.4 | 25.2 ± 6.6 | 26.5 ± 6.7 | 0.45 |
|
| 201.2 ± 101.2 | 211.6 ± 123.1 | 226.3 ± 127.3 | 0.76 |
|
| 20.2 ± 4.2 | 18.8 ± 5.4 | 20.2 ± 4.6 | 0.50 |
aValues are expressed as means ± SD.
bObtained from ANOVA test.
Abbreviations: MUFA, monounsaturated fatty acid; PUFA, polyunsaturated fatty acid; SFA, saturated fatty acid; TDF, total dietary fiber.
The Effects of Cumin Plus Lime Intake on Markers of Insulin Resistance, Lipid Profiles and Biomarkers of Oxidative Stress (n = 24)[a]
| Value | Placebo Group | Low-Dose | High-Dose | P Value[ | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wk 0 | Wk 8 | Change | Wk 0 | Wk 8 | Change | Wk 0 | Wk 8 | Change | Time | Group | Time x Group | |
|
| 87.0 (22.2) | 90.0 (25.2) | 0 (12.3) | 97.5 (12.2) | 87.0 (17.5) | -9.0 (16.0) | 101.5 (12.0) | 82.5 (20.2) | -22.0 (9.0) | - | - | < 0.001[ |
|
| 8.0 ± 3.2 | 7.6 ± 3.0 | -0.4 ± 2.0 | 8.4 ± 2.7 | 7.8 ± 3.1 | -0.6 ± 3.2 | 8.7 ± 4.2 | 7.4 ± 3.3 | -1.3 ± 3.5 | 0.03 | 0.92 | 0.57 |
|
| 1.8 ± 0.9 | 1.8 ± 0.7 | -0.04 ± 0.6 | 2.1 ± 0.7 | 1.9 ± 0.9 | -0.2 ± 1.0 | 2.4 ± 1.1 | 1.8 ± 1.2 | -0.6 ± 1.0 | 0.004 | 0.57 | 0.06 |
|
| 29.0 ± 15.1 | 26.6 ± 15.5 | -2.4 ± 9.5 | 27.1 ± 12.1 | 27.7 ± 15.9 | 0.6 ± 13.8 | 25.9 ± 17.9 | 27.1 ± 15.6 | 1.2 ± 12.9 | 0.87 | 0.94 | 0.53 |
|
| 0.35 ± 0.02 | 0.34 ± 0.02 | -0.01 ± 0.01 | 0.34 ± 0.01 | 0.35 ± 0.02 | 0.01 ± 0.02 | 0.34 ± 0.02 | 0.36 ± 0.03 | 0.02 ± 0.02[ | < 0.001 | 0.70 | 0.01 |
|
| 124.5 ± 51.4 | 135.1 ± 56.2 | 10.6 ± 25.1 | 116.7 ± 57.1 | 130.5 ± 54.9 | 13.9 ± 36.8 | 138.7 ± 81.3 | 123.6 ± 52.8 | -14.1 ± 56.2[ | 0.52 | 0.88 | 0.03 |
|
| 187.3 ± 30.1 | 186.3 ± 37.4 | -1.0 ± 24.8 | 174.8 ± 37.0 | 183.4 ± 43.2 | 8.6 ± 28.5 | 176.2 ± 34.7 | 157.8 ± 34.0 | -18.4 ± 28.6[ | 0.26 | 0.12 | 0.004 |
|
| 108.0 ± 23.3 | 105.1 ± 32.3 | -2.9 ± 20.4 | 96.5 ± 30.1 | 103.0 ± 35.5 | 6.5 ± 23.2 | 93.7 ± 25.4 | 81.9 ± 27.6 | -11.8 ± 20.7[ | 0.29 | 0.06 | 0.01 |
|
| 54.4 ± 14.2 | 54.1 ± 15.2 | -0.3 ± 7.7 | 55.0 ± 9.5 | 54.3 ± 10.8 | -0.7 ± 5.4 | 54.8 ± 5.6 | 51.2 ± 6.4 | -3.6 ± 6.3 | 0.05 | 0.84 | 0.16 |
|
| 748.6 ± 155.4 | 777.6 ± 156.5 | 29.0 ± 107.0 | 789.9 ± 186.3 | 844.9 ± 118.1 | 54.9 ± 162.0 | 741.3 ± 89.4 | 783.1 ± 74.3 | 41.7 ± 53.3 | 0.003 | 0.21 | 0.74 |
|
| 593.9 ± 229.0 | 570.1 ± 194.8 | -23.8 ± 204.7 | 579.6 ± 112.2 | 555.9 ± 90.1 | -23.8 ± 98.0 | 501.6 ± 113.5 | 489.0 ± 132.9 | -12.6 ± 148.1 | 0.28 | 0.05 | 0.96 |
aValues are expressed as means ± SD or No. (%) for normally distributed variables and median (IQR) for non-normally distributed variables.
bObtained from repeated measures ANOVA test.
cObtained from Kruskal-Wallis test.
dSignificant difference with the placebo group.
eSignificant difference with low-dose Cuminum cyminum L. plus lime group.
Abbreviations: FPG, fasting plasma glucose; HOMA-IR, homeostasis model of assessment-insulin resistance; HOMA-B, homeostatic model assessment-Beta cell function; QUICKI, quantitative insulin sensitivity check index; LDL-C, low density lipoprotein-cholesterol; HDL-C, high density lipoprotein-cholesterol; TC, total cholesterol; TG, triglycerides; TAC, total antioxidant capacity; GSH, total glutathione.
Adjusted Changes in Metabolic Variables of Patients With Overweight[a]
| Value | Placebo, n = 24 | Low-Dose | High-Dose | P Value[ |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 1.8 ± 4.3 | -6.6 ± 4.1 | -19.2 ± 4.1 | 0.004 |
|
| -0.4 ± 0.5 | -0.7 ± 0.5 | -1.0 ± 0.5 | 0.75 |
|
| -0.2 ± 0.2 | -0.2 ± 0.2 | -0.5 ± 0.2 | 0.47 |
|
| -0.7 ± 2.4 | -0.6 ± 2.3 | 0.6 ± 2.3 | 0.89 |
|
| 0.003 ± 0.005 | 0.009 ± 0.005 | 0.02 ± 0.005 | 0.06 |
|
| 9.3 ± 7.4 | 9.3 ± 7.3 | -9.2 ± 7.3 | 0.13 |
|
| 0.4 ± 5.7 | 8.1 ± 5.7 | -19.3 ± 5.6 | 0.003 |
|
| -2.1 ± 4.6 | 6.9 ± 4.5 | -12.8 ± 4.5 | 0.01 |
|
| -0.4 ± 1.4 | -0.8 ± 1.4 | -3.4 ± 1.3 | 0.22 |
|
| 21.2 ± 19.7 | 69.7 ± 19.7 | 34.7 ± 19.3 | 0.21 |
|
| 3.9 ± 26.9 | -20.9 ± 26.8 | -43.0 ± 26.8 | 0.48 |
aAll values are expressed as means± SE. Adjusted for baseline values, age and baseline BMI.
bObtained from ANCOVA.
Abbreviations: FPG, fasting plasma glucose; HOMA-IR, homeostasis model of assessment-insulin resistance; HOMA-B, homeostatic model assessment-Beta cell function; QUICKI, quantitative insulin sensitivity check index; LDL-C, low density lipoprotein-cholesterol; HDL-C, high density lipoprotein-cholesterol; TC, total cholesterol; TG, triglycerides; TAC, total antioxidant capacity; GSH, total glutathione.