| Literature DB >> 33745460 |
Youngmin Han1, A Ram Kim2, Jong Ho Lee1, Minjoo Kim3.
Abstract
Legumes are rich sources of essential nutrients, and their potential health benefits were reported in many studies. Several studies showed a positive effect of legumes on obesity, but randomised clinical trials are limited in the Korean population. The present intervention study investigated the impact of legumes on body weight in obese Korean subjects. A total of 400 participants (BMI ≥ 25 kg/m2) were randomised into two groups. The legume-enriched diet (LD) group replaced one-third of their refined rice consumption with legumes three times per day as a carbohydrate source. In contrast, the usual diet (UD) group consumed their UD. The mean weight loss at 12 weeks was 2·87 (sem 0·21) kg and 0·17 (sem 0·11) kg in the LD and UD, respectively, which was significantly different between the groups (P < 0·001). HDL-cholesterol and adiponectin levels were increased, and levels of glucose, insulin, TAG, and 8-epi-PGF2α and the homoeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance (IR) index value decreased at 12 weeks compared with baseline in the LD. The consumption of legumes may accelerate weight loss accompanied by regulation of adiponectin and 8-epi-PGF2α in obese subjects. In particular, legumes seemed to induce significant changes in BMI by increasing adiponectin in females. Additionally, increases in plasma adiponectin due to greater substantial weight loss may be related to the improvement in IR.Entities:
Keywords: 8-epi-PGF2α; Adiponectin; Body weight; Insulin resistance; Legumes
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2021 PMID: 33745460 PMCID: PMC8756098 DOI: 10.1017/S0007114521000970
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Br J Nutr ISSN: 0007-1145 Impact factor: 3.718
Clinical characteristics and macronutrient indices at baseline and after the 12-week dietary intervention period of the participants
(Mean values with their standard errors of the mean)
| Legume-enriched diet ( | Usual diet ( |
| |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean |
| Mean |
| ||
| Male/female (%) | 42·5/57·5 | 41·7/58·3 | 0·876 | ||
| Age (year) | 49·4 | 1·12 | 48·5 | 0·85 | 0·530 |
| Weight (kg) | |||||
| Before | 74·5 | 0·85 | 74·1 | 0·69 | 0·758 |
| After | 71·6 | 0·85*** | 74·0 | 0·68 | 0·029 |
| Change | –2·87 | 0·21 | –0·17 | 0·11 | <0·001 |
| BMI (kg/m2) | |||||
| Before | 27·6 | 0·21 | 27·4 | 0·16 | 0·329 |
| After | 26·5 | 0·21*** | 27·3 | 0·16 | 0·003 |
| Change | –1·09 | 0·08 | –0·06 | 0·04 | <0·001 |
| Systolic blood pressure (mmHg) | |||||
| Before | 125·2 | 1·30 | 128·6 | 1·21 | 0·067 |
| After | 122·8 | 1·23* | 128·3 | 1·05 | 0·001 |
| Change | –2·41 | 1·14 | –0·21 | 0·98 | 0·145 |
| Diastolic blood pressure (mmHg) | |||||
| Before | 79·5 | 0·85 | 79·9 | 0·77 | 0·720 |
| After | 76·8 | 0·80** | 78·6 | 0·77 | 0·096 |
| Change | –2·63 | 0·77 | –1·29 | 0·66 | 0·187 |
| Total energy expenditure (kcal/d) | |||||
| Before | 2218·5 | 29·6 | 2192·1 | 23·4 | 0·479 |
| After | 2308·1 | 31·2*** | 2265·3 | 24·2*** | 0·273 |
| Change | 89·6 | 12·8 | 73·3 | 12·3 | 0·366 |
| Estimates of daily nutrient intake | |||||
| Energy intake (kcal) | |||||
| Before | 2389·5 | 27·9 | 2380·0 | 29·8 | 0·824 |
| After | 2147·1 | 39·1*** | 2333·2 | 30·7 | <0·001 |
| Change | –242·4 | 42·5 | –52·1 | 34·6 | 0·001 |
| Carbohydrate (%) | |||||
| Before | 60·1 | 0·47 | 60·6 | 0·32 | 0·363 |
| After | 57·7 | 0·41*** | 59·9 | 0·40 | <0·001 |
| Change | –2·35 | 0·52 | –0·69 | 0·51 | 0·027 |
| Protein (%) | |||||
| Before | 20·5 | 0·39 | 20·3 | 0·25 | 0·699 |
| After | 21·5 | 0·38* | 21·3 | 0·51 | 0·820 |
| Change | 0·99 | 0·44 | 1·03 | 0·56 | 0·968 |
| Fat (%) | |||||
| Before | 19·5 | 0·41 | 19·7 | 0·27 | 0·729 |
| After | 22·0 | 0·29*** | 19·7 | 0·21 | <0·001 |
| Change | 2·47 | 0·43 | –0·04 | 0·32 | <0·001 |
| Fibre (g) | |||||
| Before | 11·8 | 0·52 | 12·1 | 0·60 | 0·176 |
| After | 14·5 | 0·69** | 14·1 | 0·65* | 0·120 |
| Change | 2·77 | 0·72 | 2·05 | 0·58 | 0·431 |
*P < 0·05, **P < 0·01, ***P < 0·001 compared with baseline values in each diet group as tested using paired t test. P-values derived from independent t test.
Tested using logarithmic transformation.
Effects of dietary intervention on lipid profiles and levels of glucose, insulin, hs-CRP and 8-epi-PGF2α at baseline and 12-week follow-up
(Mean values with their standard errors of the mean)
| Legume-enriched diet ( | Usual diet ( |
| |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean |
| Mean |
| ||
| LDL-cholesterol (mg/dl) | |||||
| Before | 111·0 | 2·44 | 114·6 | 2·60 | 0·918 |
| After | 108·0 | 2·61 | 113·1 | 2·50 | 0·196 |
| Change | –2·99 | 2·03 | –1·50 | 2·17 | 0·616 |
| HDL-cholesterol (mg/dl) | |||||
| Before | 45·6 | 0·98 | 43·7 | 0·78 | 0·165 |
| After | 48·1 | 0·88** | 44·8 | 0·80 | 0·003 |
| Change | 2·48 | 0·76 | 1·55 | 0·63 | 0·342 |
| Glucose (mg/dl) | |||||
| Before | 97·4 | 1·82 | 99·3 | 1·78 | 0·531 |
| After | 93·8 | 2·65** | 97·9 | 1·99 | 0·039 |
| Change | –3·59 | 1·94 | –1·41 | 1·63 | 0·388 |
| Insulin (μIU/ml) | |||||
| Before | 11·8 | 0·54 | 10·8 | 0·36 | 0·446 |
| After | 9·17 | 1·07** | 10·6 | 0·52 | < 0·001 |
| Change | –2·58 | 0·96 | –0·17 | 0·53 | 0·020 |
| NEFA (μEq/l) | |||||
| Before | 532·4 | 1·8·0 | 524·9 | 17·3 | 0·572 |
| After | 507·5 | 20·1 | 503·0 | 16·3 | 0·952 |
| Change | –24·8 | 18·8 | –21·9 | 17·7 | 0·911 |
| hs-CRP (mg/dl) | |||||
| Before | 1·97 | 0·08 | 2·09 | 0·09 | 0·707 |
| After | 1·89 | 0·09 | 2·09 | 0·11 | 0·854 |
| Change | –0·19 | 0·07 | 0·00 | 0·10 | 0·132 |
| 8-epi-PGF2α (pg/mg creatinine) | |||||
| Before | 1330·5 | 81·9 | 1346·4 | 66·7 | 0·504 |
| After | 1216·6 | 80·7* | 1299·2 | 65·5 | 0·077 |
| Change | –56·3 | 75·7 | –36·7 | 65·9 | 0·844 |
hs-CRP, high-sensitivity C-reactive protein.
*P < 0·05, **P < 0.001 compared with baseline values in each diet group as tested using paired t test. P-values derived from independent t test.
Tested using logarithmic transformation.
Fig. 1.Effects of legume consumption on the levels of TAG and adiponectin and the HOMA-IR index value. Mean ± SEM. §Tested using log transformation. *P < 0·001 compared with baseline values in each group as tested using paired t test. P-values derived from independent t test. P′ = after adjusting for baseline value. ‡ P < 0·001 comparison between two groups at the 12-week follow-up and † P < 0·05, †† P < 0·001 comparison between two groups at changed values tested using independent t test. HOMA-IR, homoeostasis model assessment-insulin resistance. , baseline; , 12-week.
Fig. 2.Correlations between changes (difference from baseline) in BMI, the HOMA-IR index value, and the levels of HDL-cholesterol and adiponectin in 383 subjects. r = Pearson’s correlation coefficients in all subjects. r 1 = correlation coefficients in the LD group. r 2 = correlation coefficients in the UD group. HOMA-IR, homoeostasis model assessment-insulin resistance. , legume-enriched diet; , usual diet.
Fig. 3.Correlations between changes (difference from baseline) in major indicators in the legume-enriched diet group by sex. (a) Male with legume-enriched diet. (b) Female with legume-enriched diet. r = Pearson’s correlation coefficients. Red represents a positive correlation, and blue represents a negative correlation.