| Literature DB >> 32707917 |
Fiona S Atkinson1, Gabriella A Heruc1, Verena M H Tan1, Peter Petocz2, Jennie C Brand-Miller1.
Abstract
Fasting for over 24 h is associated with worsening glucose tolerance, but the effect of extending the overnight fast period (a form of time-restricted feeding) on acute metabolic responses and insulin sensitivity is unclear. The aim of this pilot study was to determine the acute impact of an increased fasting period on postprandial glycaemia, insulinemia, and acute insulin sensitivity responses to a standard meal. Twenty-four lean, young, healthy adults (12 males, 12 females) consumed a standard breakfast after an overnight fast of 12, 14, and 16 h. Each fast duration was repeated on three separate occasions (3 × 3) in random order. Postprandial glucose and insulin responses were measured at regular intervals over 2 h and quantified as incremental area under the curve (iAUC). Insulin sensitivity was determined by homeostatic modelling assessment (HOMA). After 2 h, ad libitum food intake at a buffet meal was recorded. In females, but not males, insulin sensitivity improved (HOMA%S +35%, p = 0.016, marginally significant) with longer fast duration (16 h vs. 12 h), but paradoxically, postprandial glycaemia was higher (glucose iAUC +37%, p = 0.002). Overall, males showed no differences in glucose or insulin homeostasis. Both sexes consumed more energy (+28%) at the subsequent meal (16 h vs. 12 h). Delaying the first meal of the day by 4 h by extending the fasting period may have adverse metabolic effects in young, healthy, adult females, but not males.Entities:
Keywords: glucose tolerance; insulin sensitivity; overnight fasting; postprandial glycaemia; time-restricted feeding
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32707917 PMCID: PMC7469038 DOI: 10.3390/nu12082173
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nutrients ISSN: 2072-6643 Impact factor: 5.717
Plasma glucose and insulin responses for the three overnight fasting periods in females. 1.
| Variables | 12 h | 14 h | 16 h | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fasting glucose (mmol/L) | 5.2 ± 0.06 | 5.2 ± 0.06 | 5.0 ± 0.06 | 0.058 | - |
| 2-h glucose (mmol/L) | 5.4 ± 0.10 | 5.5 ± 0.10 | 5.8 ± 0.10 | 0.021 * | - |
| Glucose iAUC (mmol/L·120 min) | 162.9 ± 11.3 | 143.0 ± 11.3 | 225.5 ± 11.3 | <0.001 ** | - |
| Fasting insulin (pmol/L) | 28.0 ± 2.0 | 24.1 ± 2.0 | 18.6 ± 2.0 | 0.056 | 0.069 |
| 2-h insulin (pmol/L) | 94.2 ± 11.9 | 107.8 ± 11.9 | 118.2 ± 11.9 | 0.255 | 0.217 |
| Insulin iAUC (pmol/L·120 min) | 26,582 ± 2283 | 24,176 ± 2283 | 25,574 ± 2283 | 0.294 | - |
| Log insulin iAUC (pmol/L·120 min) 4 | 21,456 | 19,570 | 21,955 | 0.342 | - |
| HOMA-IR | 0.53 ± 0.03 | 0.46 ± 0.03 | 0.35 ± 0.03 | 0.052 | 0.064 |
| Log of HOMA-IR 4 | 0.44 | 0.42 | 0.32 | 0.024 * | 0.031 * |
| HOMA (%S) | 265.5 ± 19.6 | 269.9 ± 19.6 | 359.9 ± 19.6 | 0.016 * | - |
| Log of HOMA %S 4 | 226.1 | 239.8 | 317.3 | 0.023 * | 0.030 * |
| HOMA (%B) | 55.0 ± 2.2 | 51.2 ± 2.2 | 46.3 ± 2.2 | 0.181 | 0.205 |
| Log of HOMA %B 4 | 50.4 | 48.9 | 44.0 | 0.254 | 0.267 |
1 All values are mean ± SEM; n = 36 (12 females x 3 repeated tests for each fasting period). iAUC, incremental area under the curve; HOMA-IR, homeostasis modelling assessment of fasting insulin resistance; HOMA (%S), homeostasis modelling assessment of fasting insulin sensitivity; HOMA (%B), homeostasis modelling assessment of fasting β-cell function. 2 p-values based on two-way ANOVA using a simple model. 3 Reanalysed due to significant subject–time interaction in simple model. New p-values based on two-way ANOVA using a full factorial model controlling for ethnicity. There was no subject–time interaction in simple model. 4 Residual plots of insulin iAUC, HOMA-IR, HOMA %S and HOMA %B suggested logarithmic transformations would yield more accurate results. Log of insulin iAUC, HOMA-IR, HOMA %S and HOMA %B reported as geometric means. SEM is not reported for calculated geometric means. * p < 0.05 is marginally significant; ** p < 0.01 is statistically significant.
Plasma glucose and insulin responses for the three overnight fasting periods in males. 1.
| Variables | 12 h | 14 h | 16 h | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fasting glucose (mmol/L) | 5.4 ± 0.05 | 5.3 ± 0.05 | 5.2 ± 0.05 | 0.024 | - |
| 2-h glucose (mmol/L) | 5.8 ± 0.11 | 5.6 ± 0.11 | 5.6 ± 0.11 | 0.394 | 0.410 |
| Glucose iAUC (mmol/L·120 min) | 168.8 ± 6.4 | 149.9 ± 6.4 | 165.6 ± 6.4 | 0.326 | 0.362 |
| Fasting insulin (pmol/L) | 24.2 ± 2.1 | 24.3 ± 2.1 | 21.2 ± 2.1 | 0.577 | 0.450 |
| 2-h insulin (pmol/L) | 95.2 ± 8.0 | 78.0 ± 8.0 | 71.8 ± 8.0 | 0.239 | - |
| Insulin iAUC (pmol/L·120 min) | 21,739 ± 2481 | 20,255 ± 2481 | 16,303 ± 2481 | 0.053 | 0.080 |
| Log insulin iAUC (pmol/L·120 min) 4 | 15,408 | 15,287 | 12,642 | 0.025 | - |
| HOMA-IR | 0.47 ± 0.029 | 0.46 ± 0.029 | 0.40 ± 0.029 | 0.529 | 0.390 |
| Log of HOMA-IR 4 | 0.40 | 0.39 | 0.33 | 0.232 | 0.107 |
| HOMA (%S) | 289.5 ± 30.0 | 320.8 ± 30.0 | 375.8 ± 30.0 | 0.100 | - |
| Log of HOMA %S 4 | 250.1 | 258.5 | 307.0 | 0.231 | 0.107 |
| HOMA (%B) | 46.7 ± 2.0 | 47.9 ± 2.0 | 46.3 ± 2.0 | 0.941 | 0.951 |
| Log of HOMA %B 4 | 43.7 | 43.6 | 41.4 | 0.759 | 0.670 |
1 Values are mean ± SEM; n = 36 (12 males x 3 repeated tests for each fasting period). iAUC, incremental area under the curve; HOMA-IR, homeostasis modelling assessment of fasting insulin resistance; HOMA (%S), homeostasis modelling assessment of fasting insulin sensitivity; HOMA (%B), homeostasis modelling assessment of fasting β-cell function. 2 p-value based on two-way ANOVA using a simple model. 3 Two-way ANOVA using a full factorial model controlling for ethnicity. There was no subject–time interaction in simple model. 4 Residual plots of insulin iAUC, HOMA-IR, HOMA %S, and HOMA %B indicated a skewed distribution. Log of incremental insulin iAUC, HOMA-IR, HOMA %S, and HOMA %B reported as geometric means. SEM is not reported for calculated geometric means.
Figure 1Mean (± SEM) changes in postprandial plasma glucose in (a) males (n = 12) and (b) females (n = 12) and postprandial plasma insulin responses in (c) males (n = 12) and (d) females (n = 12) to 75 g available carbohydrate standard breakfast at 12, 14, and 16 h fasting periods.
Figure 2Incremental glucose response (iAUC) after 75 g carbohydrate standard breakfast at 12, 14, and 16 h fasting periods (n = 24, p < 0.01, two-way ANOVA). There was also an overall significant difference in glucose iAUC between males and females over time (p < 0.01, two-way ANOVA).
Figure 3Energy intake at an ad libitum meal consumed 2 h after the standard breakfast meal (12 h: n = 59, 14 h: n = 64, 16 h: n = 67; p < 0.01, two-way ANOVA).
Dietary analysis of ad libitum food intake 2 h after the standard breakfast meal. 1.
| Variables | 12 h | 14 h | 16 h | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Energy intake (kJ) | 2293 ± 96 | 2700 ± 91 | 2936 ± 88 | <0.001 ** |
| Protein (g) | 18.1 ± 1.3 | 24.4 ± 1.3 | 27.9 ± 1.2 | 0.002 ** |
| Total fat (g) | 17.8 ± 1.2 | 24.8 ± 1.2 | 27.1 ± 1.2 | <0.001 ** |
| Saturated fat (g) | 7.1 ± 0.7 | 9.9 ± 0.6 | 11.5 ± 0.6 | 0.001 ** |
| Carbohydrates—total (g) | 74.4 ± 3.4 | 78.4 ± 3.2 | 83.8 ± 3.1 | 0.038 * |
| Carbohydrates—sugars (g) | 34.3 ± 2.3 | 34.9 ± 2.2 | 36.7 ± 2.2 | 0.41 |
1 Values are mean ± SEM, only participants who consumed food at the subsequent meal are shown above: n = 59 for 12 h, n = 64 for 14 h, n = 67 for 16 h. 2 p-values based on two-way ANOVA using a simple model; * p < 0.05 is marginally significant; ** p < 0.01 is statistically significant.