0
selected
-
1.
Approved cannabinoids for medical purposes - Comparative systematic review and meta-analysis for sleep and appetite.
Spanagel, R, Bilbao, A
Neuropharmacology. 2021;:108680
Abstract
BACKGROUND Cannabinoids are used for numerous disease indications. However, cannabinoids can also produce adverse effects; for example, they can disturb physiological functions such as sleep and appetite. The medical use of cannabinoids refers to a wide variety of preparations and products. Approved cannabinoid products include dronabinol ((-)-trans-Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), nabilone (a THC analogue), and cannabidiol (CBD) that differ in their pharmacology and may thus have different adverse effects on sleep and appetite. OBJECTIVES Here we ask if (i) cannabinoids decrease sleep and appetite in somatic patients or patients that suffer from mental illness and if (ii) there is a difference between THC products (nabilone, dronabinol), vs. CBD in disturbing these physiological functions. METHODS In order to answer these two questions, we performed a comparative systematic review (SR) for nabilone, dronabinol, and CBD. For the comparative SR we searched PubMed, Medline, Embase, and PsycINFO for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and extracted information for adverse side effects or outcomes reporting a negative impact on sleep and appetite. RCT evidence was calculated as odds ratios (ORs) via fixed effects meta-analyses. Evidence quality was assessed by the Cochrane Risk of Bias and GRADE tools. This study is registered at PROSPERO (CRD42021229932). FINDINGS A total of 17 RCTs (n = 1479) and 15 RCTs (n = 1974) were included for sleep and appetite, respectively. Pharmaceutical THC (nabilone, dronabinol) does not affect sleep or appetite. In contrast, there is moderate evidence that CBD decreases appetite (OR = 2.46 [1.74:4.01] but has also no effect on sleep. INTERPRETATIONS Our comparative systematic study shows that approved cannabinoids can decrease appetite as a negative side effect - an effect that seems to be driven by CBD. Approved cannabinoid products do not negatively affect sleep in somatic and psychiatric patients. This article is part of the special Issue on "Cannabinoids".
-
2.
The role of incidental affective states in appetitive risk behavior: A meta-analysis.
Ferrer, RA, Taber, JM, Sheeran, P, Bryan, AD, Cameron, LD, Peters, E, Lerner, JS, Grenen, E, Klein, WMP
Health psychology : official journal of the Division of Health Psychology, American Psychological Association. 2020;(12):1109-1124
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
Objective: Appetitive risk behaviors (ARB), including tobacco use, alcohol consumption, consumption of calorie dense/nutrient-poor foods, and sexual risk behavior contribute substantially to morbidity and mortality. Affective states that arise from a wide array of unrelated circumstances (i.e., incidental affect) may carry over to influence ARB. A meta-analysis is needed to systematically examine causal evidence for the role of incidental affect (including specific emotions) in influencing ARB. Method: Integrating effect sizes from 91 published and unpublished experimental studies that include both an incidental-affect induction and neutral-control condition (k = 271 effect sizes: k = 183 negative affect, k = 78 positive affect), this meta-analysis examines how negative and positive affective states influenced ARB and related health cognitions (e.g., intentions, evaluations, craving, perceived control). Results: Negative affective states reliably increased ARB, in analyses where all negative affective states were analyzed (d = .29) and in stratified analyses of just negative mood (d = .30) and stress (d = .48). These effects were stronger among study populations coded as clinically at risk. Positive affective states generally did not influence ARB or related health cognitions, except in the presence of a craving cue. Design issues of extant literature largely precluded conclusions about the effects of specific positive and negative affective states. Conclusion: Taken together, findings suggest the importance of strategies to attenuate negative affect incidental to ARB to facilitate healthier behavioral patterns, especially among clinically at-risk individuals. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).
-
3.
Dietary energy density and appetite: A systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical trials.
Moosavian, SP, Haghighatdoost, F
Nutrition (Burbank, Los Angeles County, Calif.). 2020;:110551
Abstract
Studies have suggested that dietary energy density (DED) may affect weight gain by altering appetite. Although many studies have investigated the effect of DED on appetite, findings are inconsistent and, to our knowledge, there are no systematic reviews and meta-analyses on this topic. Therefore, the aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to summarize the effect of DED on appetite. The current meta-analysis revealed changing the DED had no significant effect on hunger but increased fullness. More high-quality randomized controlled trials are needed to investigate the effects of DED on appetite components. We searched titles, abstracts, and keywords of articles indexed in ScienceDirect, MEDLINE, and Google Scholar databases up to July 2018 to identify eligible RCT studies. Random effects model was used to estimate the pooled effect of DED on appetite. Among the 21 studies identified in the systematic literature search, 11 reports were included in the meta-analysis. Based on the Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias tool, 6 studies were considered as good quality, two were fair, and three studies were poor. The mean ± standard deviation for energy density, in studies which assessed fullness, was 1.65 ± 1 in high energy dense (HED) diet and 0.93 ± 0.93 in low energy dense (LED) diet. The corresponding values for hunger were 1.67 ± 0.69 and 0.70 ± 0.32, respectively. Compared with a LED diet, consumption of HED increased fullness (weighed mean difference [WMD] 2.95 mm; 95% CI 0.07-5.82, P = 0.044, I2 98.1%) but had no significant effect on hunger (WMD 1.31 mm; 95% CI -7.20 to 9.82, P = 0.763, I2 99.1%). The current meta-analysis revealed changing the DED had no significant effect on hunger but increased fullness. More high-quality RCTs are needed to investigate the effects of DED on appetite components.
-
4.
Is reducing appetite beneficial for body weight management in the context of overweight and obesity? A systematic review and meta-analysis from clinical trials assessing body weight management after exposure to satiety enhancing and/or hunger reducing products.
Hansen, TT, Andersen, SV, Astrup, A, Blundell, J, Sjödin, A
Obesity reviews : an official journal of the International Association for the Study of Obesity. 2019;(7):983-997
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
This review aims to investigate whether interventions that enhance satiety and/or reduce hunger lead to beneficial effects on body weight management in the context of overweight and obesity. A comprehensive review protocol was prepared before conducting a systematic search in PubMed identifying 517 papers with 12 meeting the inclusion criteria. A thorough risk of bias assessment was performed based on the Cochrane collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias. Based on a meta-analysis, the average of 75 subjects exposed to satiety enhancing and/or hunger reducing foods during more than 8 weeks coincidently reduced their body weight by 3.60 (1.05; 6.15) kg (mean (95% confidence interval)) more compared with controls. Two studies analysed whether individual reductions in appetite were associated with body weight. Decreased ad libitum energy intake after exposure to the satiety enhancing and/or hunger reducing interventions explained 58% (P < 0.001) and 23% (P < 0.001) of the variations in the subsequent weight losses over 12 and 8 weeks, respectively. Robust acute effects on appetite were found equally likely to be linked to improved body weight management as sustained effects. Satiety enhancing and/or hunger reducing interventions are supported to improve body weight management, but studies specifically designed to demonstrate a causal link remain needed.
-
5.
Influence of oral processing on appetite and food intake - A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Krop, EM, Hetherington, MM, Nekitsing, C, Miquel, S, Postelnicu, L, Sarkar, A
Appetite. 2018;:253-269
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
Food delivers energy, nutrients and a pleasurable experience. Slow eating and prolonged oro-sensory exposure to food during consumption can enhance the processes that promote satiation. This systematic review and meta-analysis investigated the effects of oral processing on subjective measures of appetite (hunger, desire to eat) and objectively measured food intake. The aim was to investigate the influence of oral processing characteristics, specifically "chewing" and "lubrication", on "appetite" and "food intake". A literature search of six databases (Cochrane library, PubMed, Medline, Food Science and Technology Abstracts, Web of Science, Scopus), yielded 12161 articles which were reduced to a set of 40 articles using pre-specified inclusion and exclusion criteria. A further two articles were excluded from the meta-analysis due to missing relevant data. From the remaining 38 papers, detailing 40 unique studies with 70 subgroups, raw data were extracted for meta-analysis (food intake n = 65, hunger n = 22 and desire to eat ratings n = 15) and analyzed using random effects modelling. Oral processing parameters, such as number of chews, eating rate and texture manipulation, appeared to influence food intake markedly but appetite ratings to a lesser extent. Meta-analysis confirmed a significant effect of the direct and indirect aspects of oral processing that were related to chewing on both self-reported hunger (-0.20 effect size, 95% confidence interval CI: -0.30, -0.11), and food intake (-0.28 effect size, 95% CI: -0.36, -0.19). Although lubrication is an important aspect of oral processing, few studies on its effects on appetite have been conducted. Future experiments using standardized approaches should provide a clearer understanding of the role of oral processing, including both chewing and lubrication, in promoting satiety.