1.
A double-blinded, randomized, parallel intervention to evaluate biomarker-based nutrition plans for weight loss: The PREVENTOMICS study.
Aldubayan, MA, Pigsborg, K, Gormsen, SMO, Serra, F, Palou, M, Galmés, S, Palou-March, A, Favari, C, Wetzels, M, Calleja, A, et al
Clinical nutrition (Edinburgh, Scotland). 2022;41(8):1834-1844
-
-
-
Free full text
Plain language summary
Obesity, and particularly abdominal adiposity, is associated with various metabolic abnormalities. Diet has a vital role in preventing and managing obesity, but evidence from clinical studies demonstrates there is a great interindividual variability in response to the same dietary intervention, which likely indicates that no one diet is superior to another. The aim of this study was to examine the efficacy of the PREVENTOMICS (empowering consumers to PREVENT diet-related diseases through OMICS sciences) platform, incorporated in an e-commerce digital tool, for producing more favourable health outcomes over dietary plans based on general diet recommendations, in subjects with overweight or obesity and elevated waist circumference. This study is a 10-week randomised single-centre, parallel-group, double-blinded intervention study. Participants were allocated in a 1:1 ratio, stratified by cluster to either the intervention group (personalised plan) or the control group (generic recommendations). Results show that there isn’t any additional benefit of personalising dietary plans, over a generic approach, on the change in fat mass and body weight in individuals with overweight or obesity and elevated waist circumference. Accordingly, personalisation of the diet did not significantly improve health parameters beyond the changes induced by the control diet. Participants in both groups lost approximately 3 kg of body weight. Authors conclude that based on their findings evidence to translate personalised nutrition approaches into clinical practice is insufficient.
Abstract
BACKGROUND & AIMS Growing evidence suggests that biomarker-guided dietary interventions can optimize response to treatment. In this study, we evaluated the efficacy of the PREVENTOMCIS platform-which uses metabolomic and genetic information to classify individuals into different 'metabolic clusters' and create personalized dietary plans-for improving health outcomes in subjects with overweight or obesity. METHODS A 10-week parallel, double-blinded, randomized intervention was conducted in 100 adults (82 completers) aged 18-65 years, with body mass index ≥27 but <40 kg/m2, who were allocated into either a personalized diet group (n = 49) or a control diet group (n = 51). About 60% of all food was provided free-of-charge. No specific instruction to restrict energy intake was given. The primary outcome was change in fat mass from baseline, evaluated by dual energy X-ray absorptiometry. Other endpoints included body weight, waist circumference, lipid profile, glucose homeostasis markers, inflammatory markers, blood pressure, physical activity, stress and eating behavior. RESULTS There were significant main effects of time (P < 0.01), but no group main effects, or time-by-group interactions, for the change in fat mass (personalized: -2.1 [95% CI -2.9, -1.4] kg; control: -2.0 [95% CI -2.7, -1.3] kg) and body weight (personalized: -3.1 [95% CI -4.1, -2.1] kg; control: -3.3 [95% CI -4.2, -2.4] kg). The difference between groups in fat mass change was -0.1 kg (95% CI -1.2, 0.9 kg, P = 0.77). Both diets resulted in significant improvements in insulin resistance and lipid profile, but there were no significant differences between groups. CONCLUSION Personalized dietary plans did not result in greater benefits over a generic, but generally healthy diet, in this 10-week clinical trial. Further studies are required to establish the soundness of different precision nutrition approaches, and translate this science into clinically relevant dietary advice to reduce the burden of obesity and its comorbidities. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRY ClinicalTrials.gov registry (NCT04590989).
2.
Resistance Training Prevents Muscle Loss Induced by Caloric Restriction in Obese Elderly Individuals: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Sardeli, AV, Komatsu, TR, Mori, MA, Gáspari, AF, Chacon-Mikahil, MPT
Nutrients. 2018;10(4)
-
-
-
Free full text
Plain language summary
Caloric restriction (55% carbohydrate, 15% protein, 30% fat) is associated with increased lifespans and the attenuation of the harmful effects of aging. Furthermore, it has been shown that resistance training increases lean body mass, promotes strength, and attenuates muscle loss and function in elderly people. The aim of the study is to determine the level of lean body mass that can be preserved when resistance training is associated with caloric restriction interventions in elderly obese humans. The study is a meta-analysis, based on data from randomised-controlled trials. The participants were older adults or elderly people with a mean age > 57 year. Results indicate that caloric restriction associated with resistance training prevents 93% lean body mass loss induced by caloric restriction. Authors conclude that caloric restriction with resistance training almost stopped caloric restriction induced lean body mass loss completely.
Abstract
It remains unclear as to what extent resistance training (RT) can attenuate muscle loss during caloric restriction (CR) interventions in humans. The objective here is to address if RT could attenuate muscle loss induced by CR in obese elderly individuals, through summarized effects of previous studies. Databases MEDLINE, Embase and Web of Science were used to perform a systematic search between July and August 2017. Were included in the review randomized clinical trials (RCT) comparing the effects of CR with (CRRT) or without RT on lean body mass (LBM), fat body mass (FBM), and total body mass (BM), measured by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry, on obese elderly individuals. The six RCTs included in the review applied RT three times per week, for 12 to 24 weeks, and most CR interventions followed diets of 55% carbohydrate, 15% protein, and 30% fat. RT reduced 93.5% of CR-induced LBM loss (0.819 kg [0.364 to 1.273]), with similar reduction in FBM and BM, compared with CR. Furthermore, to address muscle quality, the change in strength/LBM ratio tended to be different (p = 0.07) following CRRT (20.9 ± 23.1%) and CR interventions (−7.5 ± 9.9%). Our conclusion is that CRRT is able to prevent almost 100% of CR-induced muscle loss, while resulting in FBM and BM reductions that do not significantly differ from CR.