Sílvia Ribeiro Coutinho1, Eline Holli Halset2, Sigrid Gåsbakk2, Jens F Rehfeld3, Bård Kulseng4, Helen Truby5, Cátia Martins4. 1. Obesity Research Group, Department of Cancer Research and Molecular Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway. Electronic address: silvia.coutinho@ntnu.no. 2. Obesity Research Group, Department of Cancer Research and Molecular Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway. 3. Department of Clinical Biochemistry, Rigshospitalet, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark. 4. Obesity Research Group, Department of Cancer Research and Molecular Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway; Centre for Obesity, Department of Surgery, St. Olav Hospital, Trondheim University Hospital, Trondheim, Norway. 5. Department of Food, Nutrition and Dietetics, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
Abstract
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Strong compensatory responses, with reduced resting metabolic rate (RMR), increased exercise efficiency (ExEff) and appetite, are activated when weight loss (WL) is achieved with continuous energy restriction (CER), which try to restore energy balance. Intermittent energy restriction (IER), where short spells of energy restriction are interspaced by periods of habitual energy intake, may offer some protection in minimizing those responses. We aimed to compare the effect of IER versus CER on body composition and the compensatory responses induced by WL. METHODS:35 adults (age: 39 ± 9 y) with obesity (BMI: 36 ± 4 kg/m2) were randomized to lose a similar weight with an IER (N = 18) or a CER (N = 17) diet over a 12 week period. Macronutrient composition and overall energy restriction (33% reduction) were similar between groups. Body weight/composition, RMR, fasting respiratory quotient (RQ), ExEff (10, 25, and 50 W), subjective appetite ratings (hunger, fullness, desire to eat, and prospective food consumption (PFC)), and appetite-regulating hormones (active ghrelin (AG), cholecystokinin (CCK), total peptide YY (PYY), active glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1), and insulin) were measured before and after WL. RESULTS: Changes in body weight (≈12.5% WL) and composition were similar in both groups. Fasting RQ and ExEff at 10 W increased in both groups. Losing weight, either by IER or CER dieting, did not induce significant changes in subjective appetite ratings. RMR decreased and ExEff at 25 and 50 W increased (P < 0.001 for all) in IER group only. Basal and postprandial AG increased (P < 0.05) in IER group, whereas basal active GLP-1 decreased (P = 0.033) in CER group only. Postprandial CCK decreased in both groups (P = 0.0012 and P = 0.009 for IER and CER groups, respectively). No between group differences were apparent for any of the outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: The technique used to achieve energy restriction, whether it is continuous or intermittent, does not appear to modulate the compensatory mechanisms activated by weight loss. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02169778 (the study was registered in clinicaltrial.gov).
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Strong compensatory responses, with reduced resting metabolic rate (RMR), increased exercise efficiency (ExEff) and appetite, are activated when weight loss (WL) is achieved with continuous energy restriction (CER), which try to restore energy balance. Intermittent energy restriction (IER), where short spells of energy restriction are interspaced by periods of habitual energy intake, may offer some protection in minimizing those responses. We aimed to compare the effect of IER versus CER on body composition and the compensatory responses induced by WL. METHODS: 35 adults (age: 39 ± 9 y) with obesity (BMI: 36 ± 4 kg/m2) were randomized to lose a similar weight with an IER (N = 18) or a CER (N = 17) diet over a 12 week period. Macronutrient composition and overall energy restriction (33% reduction) were similar between groups. Body weight/composition, RMR, fasting respiratory quotient (RQ), ExEff (10, 25, and 50 W), subjective appetite ratings (hunger, fullness, desire to eat, and prospective food consumption (PFC)), and appetite-regulating hormones (active ghrelin (AG), cholecystokinin (CCK), total peptide YY (PYY), active glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1), and insulin) were measured before and after WL. RESULTS: Changes in body weight (≈12.5% WL) and composition were similar in both groups. Fasting RQ and ExEff at 10 W increased in both groups. Losing weight, either by IER or CER dieting, did not induce significant changes in subjective appetite ratings. RMR decreased and ExEff at 25 and 50 W increased (P < 0.001 for all) in IER group only. Basal and postprandial AG increased (P < 0.05) in IER group, whereas basal active GLP-1 decreased (P = 0.033) in CER group only. Postprandial CCK decreased in both groups (P = 0.0012 and P = 0.009 for IER and CER groups, respectively). No between group differences were apparent for any of the outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: The technique used to achieve energy restriction, whether it is continuous or intermittent, does not appear to modulate the compensatory mechanisms activated by weight loss. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02169778 (the study was registered in clinicaltrial.gov).
Authors: Amrendra Mishra; Hamed Mirzaei; Novella Guidi; Manlio Vinciguerra; Alice Mouton; Marina Linardic; Francesca Rappa; Rosario Barone; Gerardo Navarrete; Min Wei; Sebastian Brandhorst; Stefano Di Biase; Todd E Morgan; S Ram Kumar; Peter S Conti; Matteo Pellegrini; Michel Bernier; Rafael de Cabo; Valter D Longo Journal: Nat Metab Date: 2021-10-14
Authors: Debra K M Tacad; Ashley P Tovar; Christine E Richardson; William F Horn; Giri P Krishnan; Nancy L Keim; Sridevi Krishnan Journal: Adv Nutr Date: 2022-06-01 Impact factor: 11.567