Fernanda R Goltz1,2, Alice E Thackray1,2, Greg Atkinson3, Lorenzo Lolli3, James A King1,2, James L Dorling4, Monika Dowejko1, Sarabjit Mastana1, David J Stensel1,2. 1. National Centre for Sport and Exercise Medicine, School of Sport, Exercise, and Health Sciences, Loughborough University, Loughborough, United Kingdom. 2. University Hospitals of Leicester National Health Service Trust, Leicester, United Kingdom. 3. School of Health and Social Care, Teesside University, Middlesbrough, United Kingdom. 4. Ingestive Behavior Laboratory, Pennington Biomedical Research Center, Baton Rouge, LA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: After meal ingestion, a series of coordinated hormone responses occur concomitantly with changes in perceived appetite. It is not known whether interindividual variability in appetite exists in response to a meal. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to 1) assess the reproducibility of appetite responses to a meal; 2) quantify individual differences in responses; and 3) explore any moderating influence of the fat mass and obesity associated (FTO) gene. METHODS: Using a replicated crossover design, 18 healthy men (mean ± SD age: 28.5 ± 9.8 y; BMI: 27.0 ± 5.0 kg/m2) recruited according to FTO genotype (9 AA, 9 TT) completed 2 identical control and 2 identical standardized meal conditions (5025 kJ) in randomized sequences. Perceived appetite and plasma acylated ghrelin, total peptide YY (PYY), insulin, and glucose concentrations were measured before and after interventions as primary outcomes. Interindividual differences were explored using Pearson's product-moment correlations between the first and second replicates of the control-adjusted meal response. Within-participant covariate-adjusted linear mixed models were used to quantify participant-by-condition and genotype-by-condition interactions. RESULTS: The meal suppressed acylated ghrelin and appetite perceptions [standardized effect size (ES): 0.18-4.26] and elevated total PYY, insulin, and glucose (ES: 1.96-21.60). For all variables, SD of change scores was greater in the meal than in the control conditions. Moderate-to-large positive correlations were observed between the 2 replicates of control-adjusted meal responses for all variables (r = 0.44-0.86, P ≤ 0.070). Participant-by-condition interactions were present for all variables (P ≤ 0.056). FTO genotype-by-condition interactions were nonsignificant (P ≥ 0.19) and treatment effect differences between genotype groups were small (ES ≤ 0.27) for all appetite parameters. CONCLUSIONS:Reproducibility of postprandial appetite responses is generally good. True interindividual variability is present beyond any random within-subject variation in healthy men but we detected no moderation by the FTO genotype. These findings highlight the importance of exploring individual differences in appetite for the prevention and treatment of obesity. This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT03771690.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: After meal ingestion, a series of coordinated hormone responses occur concomitantly with changes in perceived appetite. It is not known whether interindividual variability in appetite exists in response to a meal. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to 1) assess the reproducibility of appetite responses to a meal; 2) quantify individual differences in responses; and 3) explore any moderating influence of the fat mass and obesity associated (FTO) gene. METHODS: Using a replicated crossover design, 18 healthy men (mean ± SD age: 28.5 ± 9.8 y; BMI: 27.0 ± 5.0 kg/m2) recruited according to FTO genotype (9 AA, 9 TT) completed 2 identical control and 2 identical standardized meal conditions (5025 kJ) in randomized sequences. Perceived appetite and plasma acylated ghrelin, total peptide YY (PYY), insulin, and glucose concentrations were measured before and after interventions as primary outcomes. Interindividual differences were explored using Pearson's product-moment correlations between the first and second replicates of the control-adjusted meal response. Within-participant covariate-adjusted linear mixed models were used to quantify participant-by-condition and genotype-by-condition interactions. RESULTS: The meal suppressed acylated ghrelin and appetite perceptions [standardized effect size (ES): 0.18-4.26] and elevated total PYY, insulin, and glucose (ES: 1.96-21.60). For all variables, SD of change scores was greater in the meal than in the control conditions. Moderate-to-large positive correlations were observed between the 2 replicates of control-adjusted meal responses for all variables (r = 0.44-0.86, P ≤ 0.070). Participant-by-condition interactions were present for all variables (P ≤ 0.056). FTO genotype-by-condition interactions were nonsignificant (P ≥ 0.19) and treatment effect differences between genotype groups were small (ES ≤ 0.27) for all appetite parameters. CONCLUSIONS: Reproducibility of postprandial appetite responses is generally good. True interindividual variability is present beyond any random within-subject variation in healthy men but we detected no moderation by the FTO genotype. These findings highlight the importance of exploring individual differences in appetite for the prevention and treatment of obesity. This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT03771690.
Authors: Cora L Craig; Alison L Marshall; Michael Sjöström; Adrian E Bauman; Michael L Booth; Barbara E Ainsworth; Michael Pratt; Ulf Ekelund; Agneta Yngve; James F Sallis; Pekka Oja Journal: Med Sci Sports Exerc Date: 2003-08 Impact factor: 5.411
Authors: Anne Flint; Nikolaj T Gregersen; Lise L Gluud; Bente K Møller; Anne Raben; Inge Tetens; Camilla Verdich; Arne Astrup Journal: Br J Nutr Date: 2007-05-25 Impact factor: 3.718
Authors: Timothy M Frayling; Nicholas J Timpson; Michael N Weedon; Eleftheria Zeggini; Rachel M Freathy; Cecilia M Lindgren; John R B Perry; Katherine S Elliott; Hana Lango; Nigel W Rayner; Beverley Shields; Lorna W Harries; Jeffrey C Barrett; Sian Ellard; Christopher J Groves; Bridget Knight; Ann-Marie Patch; Andrew R Ness; Shah Ebrahim; Debbie A Lawlor; Susan M Ring; Yoav Ben-Shlomo; Marjo-Riitta Jarvelin; Ulla Sovio; Amanda J Bennett; David Melzer; Luigi Ferrucci; Ruth J F Loos; Inês Barroso; Nicholas J Wareham; Fredrik Karpe; Katharine R Owen; Lon R Cardon; Mark Walker; Graham A Hitman; Colin N A Palmer; Alex S F Doney; Andrew D Morris; George Davey Smith; Andrew T Hattersley; Mark I McCarthy Journal: Science Date: 2007-04-12 Impact factor: 47.728
Authors: David R Broom; Rachel L Batterham; James A King; David J Stensel Journal: Am J Physiol Regul Integr Comp Physiol Date: 2008-11-05 Impact factor: 3.619
Authors: Rodrigo Fernandez-Gonzalo; Adam C McDonnell; Elizabeth J Simpson; Ian A Macdonald; Eric Rullman; Igor B Mekjavic Journal: Front Physiol Date: 2021-07-16 Impact factor: 4.566