Mads J Skytte1, Amirsalar Samkani2, Amy D Petersen2, Mads N Thomsen2, Arne Astrup3, Elizaveta Chabanova4, Jan Frystyk5, Jens J Holst6, Henrik S Thomsen4, Sten Madsbad7, Thomas M Larsen3, Steen B Haugaard2,8, Thure Krarup2. 1. Department of Endocrinology, Copenhagen University Hospital Bispebjerg, Bispebjerg Bakke 23, 2400, Copenhagen, Denmark. mads.gustav.juul.skytte@regionh.dk. 2. Department of Endocrinology, Copenhagen University Hospital Bispebjerg, Bispebjerg Bakke 23, 2400, Copenhagen, Denmark. 3. Department of Nutrition, Exercise and Sports, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark. 4. Department of Radiology, Copenhagen University Hospital Herlev, Copenhagen, Denmark. 5. Department of Clinical Medicine, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark. 6. Novo Nordisk Foundation Center for Basic Metabolic Research, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark. 7. Department of Endocrinology, Copenhagen University Hospital Amager Hvidovre, Copenhagen, Denmark. 8. Department of Internal Medicine, Copenhagen University Hospital Amager Hvidovre, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Abstract
AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: Dietary recommendations for treating type 2 diabetes are unclear but a trend towards recommending a diet reduced in carbohydrate content is acknowledged. We compared a carbohydrate-reduced high-protein (CRHP) diet with an iso-energetic conventional diabetes (CD) diet to elucidate the effects on glycaemic control and selected cardiovascular risk markers during 6 weeks of full food provision of each diet. METHODS: The primary outcome of the study was change in HbA1c. Secondary outcomes reported in the present paper include glycaemic variables, ectopic fat content and 24 h blood pressure. Eligibility criteria were: men and women with type 2 diabetes, HbA1c 48-97 mmol/mol (6.5-11%), age >18 years, haemoglobin >6/>7 mmol/l (women/men) and eGFR >30 ml min-1 (1.73 m)-2. Participants were randomised by drawing blinded ballots to 6 + 6 weeks of an iso-energetic CRHP vs CD diet in an open label, crossover design aiming at body weight stability. The CRHP/CD diets contained carbohydrate 30/50 energy per cent (E%), protein 30/17E% and fat 40/33E%, respectively. Participants underwent a meal test at the end of each diet period and glycaemic variables, lipid profiles, 24 h blood pressure and ectopic fat including liver and pancreatic fat content were assessed at baseline and at the end of each diet period. Data were collected at Copenhagen University Hospital, Bispebjerg and Copenhagen University Hospital, Herlev. RESULTS:Twenty-eight participants completed the study. Fourteen participants carried out 6 weeks of the CRHP intervention followed by 6 weeks of the CD intervention, and 14 participants received the dietary interventions in the reverse order. Compared with a CD diet, a CRHP diet reduced the primary outcome of HbA1c (mean ± SEM: -6.2 ± 0.8 mmol/mol (-0.6 ± 0.1%) vs -0.75 ± 1.0 mmol/mol (-0.1 ± 0.1%); p < 0.001). Nine (out of 37) pre-specified secondary outcomes are reported in the present paper, of which five were significantly different between the diets, (p < 0.05); compared with a CD diet, a CRHP diet reduced the secondary outcomes (mean ± SEM or medians [interquartile range]) of fasting plasma glucose (-0.71 ± 0.20 mmol/l vs 0.03 ± 0.23 mmol/l; p < 0.05), postprandial plasma glucose AUC (9.58 ± 0.29 mmol/l × 240 min vs 11.89 ± 0.43 mmol/l × 240 min; p < 0.001) and net AUC (1.25 ± 0.20 mmol/l × 240 min vs 3.10 ± 0.25 mmol/l × 240 min; p < 0.001), hepatic fat content (-2.4% [-7.8% to -1.0%] vs 0.2% [-2.3% to 0.9%]; p < 0.01) and pancreatic fat content (-1.7% [-3.5% to 0.6%] vs 0.5% [-1.0% to 2.0%]; p < 0.05). Changes in other secondary outcomes, i.e. 24 h blood pressure and muscle-, visceral- or subcutaneous adipose tissue, did not differ between diets. CONCLUSIONS/ INTERPRETATION: A moderate macronutrient shift by substituting carbohydrates with protein and fat for 6 weeks reduced HbA1c and hepatic fat content in weight stable individuals with type 2 diabetes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02764021. FUNDING: The study was funded by grants from Arla Food for Health; the Novo Nordisk Foundation Center for Basic Metabolic Research, University of Copenhagen; the Department of Clinical Medicine, Aarhus University; the Department of Nutrition, Exercise and Sports, University of Copenhagen; and Copenhagen University Hospital, Bispebjerg.
RCT Entities:
AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: Dietary recommendations for treating type 2 diabetes are unclear but a trend towards recommending a diet reduced in carbohydrate content is acknowledged. We compared a carbohydrate-reduced high-protein (CRHP) diet with an iso-energetic conventional diabetes (CD) diet to elucidate the effects on glycaemic control and selected cardiovascular risk markers during 6 weeks of full food provision of each diet. METHODS: The primary outcome of the study was change in HbA1c. Secondary outcomes reported in the present paper include glycaemic variables, ectopic fat content and 24 h blood pressure. Eligibility criteria were: men and women with type 2 diabetes, HbA1c 48-97 mmol/mol (6.5-11%), age >18 years, haemoglobin >6/>7 mmol/l (women/men) and eGFR >30 ml min-1 (1.73 m)-2. Participants were randomised by drawing blinded ballots to 6 + 6 weeks of an iso-energetic CRHP vs CD diet in an open label, crossover design aiming at body weight stability. The CRHP/CD diets contained carbohydrate 30/50 energy per cent (E%), protein 30/17E% and fat 40/33E%, respectively. Participants underwent a meal test at the end of each diet period and glycaemic variables, lipid profiles, 24 h blood pressure and ectopic fat including liver and pancreatic fat content were assessed at baseline and at the end of each diet period. Data were collected at Copenhagen University Hospital, Bispebjerg and Copenhagen University Hospital, Herlev. RESULTS: Twenty-eight participants completed the study. Fourteen participants carried out 6 weeks of the CRHP intervention followed by 6 weeks of the CD intervention, and 14 participants received the dietary interventions in the reverse order. Compared with a CD diet, a CRHP diet reduced the primary outcome of HbA1c (mean ± SEM: -6.2 ± 0.8 mmol/mol (-0.6 ± 0.1%) vs -0.75 ± 1.0 mmol/mol (-0.1 ± 0.1%); p < 0.001). Nine (out of 37) pre-specified secondary outcomes are reported in the present paper, of which five were significantly different between the diets, (p < 0.05); compared with a CD diet, a CRHP diet reduced the secondary outcomes (mean ± SEM or medians [interquartile range]) of fasting plasma glucose (-0.71 ± 0.20 mmol/l vs 0.03 ± 0.23 mmol/l; p < 0.05), postprandial plasma glucose AUC (9.58 ± 0.29 mmol/l × 240 min vs 11.89 ± 0.43 mmol/l × 240 min; p < 0.001) and net AUC (1.25 ± 0.20 mmol/l × 240 min vs 3.10 ± 0.25 mmol/l × 240 min; p < 0.001), hepatic fat content (-2.4% [-7.8% to -1.0%] vs 0.2% [-2.3% to 0.9%]; p < 0.01) and pancreatic fat content (-1.7% [-3.5% to 0.6%] vs 0.5% [-1.0% to 2.0%]; p < 0.05). Changes in other secondary outcomes, i.e. 24 h blood pressure and muscle-, visceral- or subcutaneous adipose tissue, did not differ between diets. CONCLUSIONS/ INTERPRETATION: A moderate macronutrient shift by substituting carbohydrates with protein and fat for 6 weeks reduced HbA1c and hepatic fat content in weight stable individuals with type 2 diabetes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02764021. FUNDING: The study was funded by grants from Arla Food for Health; the Novo Nordisk Foundation Center for Basic Metabolic Research, University of Copenhagen; the Department of Clinical Medicine, Aarhus University; the Department of Nutrition, Exercise and Sports, University of Copenhagen; and Copenhagen University Hospital, Bispebjerg.
Authors: Paul Begovatz; Chrysi Koliaki; Katharina Weber; Klaus Strassburger; Bettina Nowotny; Peter Nowotny; Karsten Müssig; Jürgen Bunke; Giovanni Pacini; Julia Szendrödi; Michael Roden Journal: Diabetologia Date: 2015-03-05 Impact factor: 10.122
Authors: Cilius E Fonvig; Dorthe S Bille; Elizaveta Chabanova; Tenna R H Nielsen; Henrik S Thomsen; Jens-Christian Holm Journal: Pediatr Rep Date: 2012-01-09
Authors: Esther Winters-van Eekelen; Inge Verkouter; Harry P F Peters; Marjan Alssema; Babette G de Roos; Vera B Schrauwen-Hinderling; Kay H M Roumans; Jan W Schoones; Peter L Zock; Patrick Schrauwen; Frits R Rosendaal; Olaf M Dekkers; Renée de Mutsert Journal: Eur J Clin Nutr Date: 2020-10-22 Impact factor: 4.016
Authors: Stephan C Bischoff; Rocco Barazzoni; Luca Busetto; Marjo Campmans-Kuijpers; Vincenzo Cardinale; Irit Chermesh; Ahad Eshraghian; Haluk Tarik Kani; Wafaa Khannoussi; Laurence Lacaze; Miguel Léon-Sanz; Juan M Mendive; Michael W Müller; Johann Ockenga; Frank Tacke; Anders Thorell; Darija Vranesic Bender; Arved Weimann; Cristina Cuerda Journal: United European Gastroenterol J Date: 2022-08-12 Impact factor: 6.866
Authors: Ahmad H Alzahrani; Mads J Skytte; Amirsalar Samkani; Mads N Thomsen; Arne Astrup; Christian Ritz; Elizaveta Chabanova; Jan Frystyk; Jens J Holst; Henrik S Thomsen; Sten Madsbad; Steen B Haugaard; Thure Krarup; Thomas Meinert Larsen; Faidon Magkos Journal: Eur J Nutr Date: 2021-06-08 Impact factor: 5.614
Authors: Cara B Ebbeling; Amy Knapp; Ann Johnson; Julia M W Wong; Kimberly F Greco; Clement Ma; Samia Mora; David S Ludwig Journal: Am J Clin Nutr Date: 2022-01-11 Impact factor: 7.045
Authors: Ahmad H Alzahrani; Mads J Skytte; Amirsalar Samkani; Mads N Thomsen; Arne Astrup; Christian Ritz; Jan Frystyk; Jens J Holst; Sten Madsbad; Steen B Haugaard; Thure Krarup; Thomas M Larsen; Faidon Magkos Journal: Nutrients Date: 2021-05-17 Impact factor: 5.717
Authors: Anouk Gijbels; Inez Trouwborst; Kelly M Jardon; Gabby B Hul; Els Siebelink; Suzanne M Bowser; Dilemin Yildiz; Lisa Wanders; Balázs Erdos; Dick H J Thijssen; Edith J M Feskens; Gijs H Goossens; Lydia A Afman; Ellen E Blaak Journal: Front Nutr Date: 2021-06-30