0
selected
-
1.
Intermittent Fasting versus Continuous Calorie Restriction: Which Is Better for Weight Loss?
Zhang, Q, Zhang, C, Wang, H, Ma, Z, Liu, D, Guan, X, Liu, Y, Fu, Y, Cui, M, Dong, J
Nutrients. 2022;14(9)
-
-
-
Free full text
Plain language summary
Obesity increases the risk of developing metabolic syndrome, diabetes, cardiovascular disease and associated comorbidities. Intermittent fasting (IF) and continuous calorie restriction (CCR) are fasting regimens known to reduce weight, which is at the heart of strategy in reducing obesity. IF and CCR restricts energy intake; however, CCR is harder to follow than IF. IF focuses more on time-restricted eating. This systematic review and meta-analysis examined the effectiveness of IF and CCR on body mass index (BMI), body weight, and metabolism in overweight and obese participants. This research showed that IF is significantly superior to CCR in weight loss in obese people. However, there was no difference in BMI between both regimens. There was a significant difference between IF and CCR for total cholesterol, triacylglycerol, and waist circumference. Further larger long-term robust studies are required to evaluate the effectiveness of different fasting regimens due to the high heterogeneity in this research. Healthcare professionals can use the results of this study to distinguish the weight loss effects between different fasting regimens.
Abstract
We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials and pilot trial studies to compare the effectiveness of intermittent fasting (IF) and continuous calorie restriction (CCR) in overweight and obese people. The parameters included body mass index (BMI), body weight, and other metabolism-related indicators. A systematic search in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science was conducted up to January 2022. Standardized mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used to measure the effectiveness. Publication bias was assessed using Egger's test. The stability of the results was evaluated using sensitivity analyses. The significance of body weight change (SMD = -0.21, 95% CI (-0.40, -0.02) p = 0.028) was more significant after IF than CCR. There was no significant difference in BMI (SMD = 0.02, 95% CI (-0.16, 0.20) p = 0.848) between IF and CCR. These findings suggest that IF may be superior to CCR for weight loss in some respects.
-
2.
Astaxanthin Influence on Health Outcomes of Adults at Risk of Metabolic Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Leung, LY, Chan, SM, Tam, HL, Wong, ES
Nutrients. 2022;14(10)
-
-
-
Free full text
Plain language summary
Metabolic syndrome is a term used to describe a combination of three or more health issues that can increase the risk of cardiovascular disease by 70%. Risk factors include hypertension, hyperglycaemia, obesity, and dyslipidaemia. Astaxanthin is a powerful antioxidant that can potentially reduce the risk of metabolic syndrome. This systematic review and meta-analysis included seven double-blinded randomised controlled trials that evaluated the beneficial effects of Astaxanthin in reducing the risk factors associated with metabolic syndrome. More than eight weeks of daily ≤6 mg Astaxanthin supplementation significantly reduced systolic blood pressure, total cholesterol, triglycerides, and LDL cholesterol. The therapeutic value of Astaxanthin supplementation requires long-term robust research since studies included in this study are highly heterogeneous in terms of the intervention period, the dosage of the supplements, participant health, and sample size. This study can assist healthcare professionals in understanding the beneficial effects of Astaxanthin supplements on people with metabolic syndrome.
Abstract
The use of medication is effective in managing metabolic syndrome (MetS), but side effects have led to increased attention on using nutraceuticals and supplements. Astaxanthin shows positive effects in reducing the risk of MetS, but results from individual studies are inconclusive. This systematic review summarizes the latest evidence of astaxanthin in adults with risk factors of MetS. A systematic search of English and Chinese randomized controlled trials in 14 electronic databases from inception to 30 June 2021 was performed. Two reviewers independently screened the titles and abstracts, and conducted full-text review, quality appraisal, and extraction of data. Risk of bias was assessed by PEDro. A total of 7 studies met the inclusion criteria with 321 participants. Six studies were rated to have excellent methodological quality, while the remaining one was rated at good. Results show marginal effects of astaxanthin on reduction in total cholesterol and systolic blood pressure, and a significant attenuating effect on low-density lipoprotein cholesterol. Further robust evidence is needed to examine the effects of astaxanthin in adults at risk of MetS.
-
3.
Effect of oat supplementation interventions on cardiovascular disease risk markers: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Llanaj, E, Dejanovic, GM, Valido, E, Bano, A, Gamba, M, Kastrati, L, Minder, B, Stojic, S, Voortman, T, Marques-Vidal, P, et al
European journal of nutrition. 2022;61(4):1749-1778
-
-
-
Free full text
-
Plain language summary
Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is one of the leading causes of mortality among adults. Changes in diet can have a beneficial effect on the prevention and management of CVD. Studies have shown that increasing intake of wholegrains, particularly those containing oat components, reduces CVD risk markers including blood cholesterol, blood glucose and body mass index (BMI). The purpose of this systematic review was to look at the effects of oat supplementation interventions (OSI) on CVD risk markers among adults, accounting for different dietary backgrounds or control arms. 74 RCTs were included (4937 subjects). Supplementing the diet with oat cereals improves CVD risk markers in healthy adults and those with mild metabolic disturbances. In particular serum total and LDL cholesterol, BMI and waist circumference. The beneficial effects on total cholesterol and LDL-Cholesterol were independent of the dietary background. The role of OSIs on blood pressure, glucose homeostasis or other markers, could not be established.
Abstract
PURPOSE Oat supplementation interventions (OSIs) may have a beneficial effect on cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk. However, dietary background can modulate such effect. This systematic review assesses the effects of OSIs on CVD risk markers among adults, accounting for different dietary backgrounds or control arms. METHODS We included randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that assessed the effect of oat, oat beta-glucan-rich extracts or avenanthramides on CVD risk markers. RESULTS Seventy-four RCTs, including 4937 predominantly hypercholesterolemic, obese subjects, with mild metabolic disturbances, were included in the systematic review. Of these, 59 RCTs contributed to the meta-analyses. Subjects receiving an OSI, compared to control arms without oats, had improved levels of total cholesterol (TC) [weighted mean difference and (95% CI) - 0.42 mmol/L, (- 0.61; - 0.22)], LDL cholesterol [- 0.29 mmol/L, (- 0.37; - 0.20)], glucose [- 0.25 nmol/L, (- 0.36; - 0.14)], body mass index [- 0.13 kg/m2, (- 0.26; - 0.01)], weight [- 0.94 kg, (- 1.84: - 0.05)], and waist circumference [- 1.06 cm, (- 1.85; - 0.27)]. RCTs on inflammation and/or oxidative stress markers were scarce and with inconsistent findings. RCTs comparing an OSI to heterogeneous interventions (e.g., wheat, eggs, rice, etc.), showed lowered levels of glycated haemoglobin, diastolic blood pressure, HDL cholesterol and apolipoprotein B. The majority of included RCTs (81.1%) had some concerns for risk of bias. CONCLUSION Dietary OSIs resulted in lowered levels of blood lipids and improvements in anthropometric parameters among participants with predominantly mild metabolic disturbances, regardless of dietary background or control. Further high-quality trials are warranted to establish the role of OSIs on blood pressure, glucose homeostasis and inflammation markers.
-
4.
Effectiveness and safety of carbohydrate counting in the management of adult patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Vaz, EC, Porfírio, GJM, Nunes, HRC, Nunes-Nogueira, VDS
Archives of endocrinology and metabolism. 2018;62(3):337-345
-
-
-
Free full text
Plain language summary
Glycaemic control of patients with diabetes mellitus is important because it impacts the development of diabetic complications. Carbohydrate counting is a meal planning tool that allows for great variation and flexibility in food choices among individuals with diabetes mellitus. The aim of the study was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of carbohydrate counting in the treatment of adult patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus using a systematic literature review. The study included randomised controlled trials with at least 3 months of follow-up, and evaluation of outcomes in which patients were randomly divided into two groups. The meta-analysis showed that the final haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) - a test that shows the average blood glucose levels for the last two to three months - was significantly lower in the carbohydrate counting group than in the control group. Authors conclude that the meta-analysis showed evidence favouring the use of carbohydrate counting in the management of adult patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus. However, this benefit was limited to the final HbA1c.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of carbohydrate counting (CHOC) in the treatment of adult patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus (DM1). MATERIALS AND METHODS We performed a systematic review of randomized studies that compared CHOC with general dietary advice in adult patients with DM1. The primary outcomes were changes in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), quality of life, and episodes of severe hypoglycemia. We searched the following electronic databases: Embase, PubMed, Lilacs, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. The quality of evidence was analyzed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE). RESULTS A total of 3,190 articles were identified, and two reviewers independently screened the titles and abstracts. From the 15 potentially eligible studies, five were included, and 10 were excluded because of the lack of randomization or different control/intervention groups. Meta-analysis showed that the final HbA1c was significantly lower in the CHOC group than in the control group (mean difference, random, 95% CI: -0.49 (-0.85, -0.13), p = 0.006). The meta-analysis of severe hypoglycemia and quality of life did not show any significant differences between the groups. According to the GRADE, the quality of evidence for severe hypoglycemia, quality of life, and change in HbA1c was low, very low, and moderate, respectively. CONCLUSION The meta-analysis showed evidence favoring the use of CHOC in the management of DM1. However, this benefit was limited to final HbA1c, which was significantly lower in the CHOC than in the control group.
-
5.
Serum levels of IGF-I, IGFBP-3 and colorectal cancer risk: results from the EPIC cohort, plus a meta-analysis of prospective studies.
Rinaldi, S, Cleveland, R, Norat, T, Biessy, C, Rohrmann, S, Linseisen, J, Boeing, H, Pischon, T, Panico, S, Agnoli, C, et al
International journal of cancer. 2010;126(7):1702-15
-
-
-
Free full text
-
Plain language summary
Insulin-like growth factor-I (IGF-1) plays an important role in growth and development as a function of available energy and essential nutrients from body reserves and diet. The aim of the study was to examine the relationships of colorectal cancers with serum levels of IGF-I, and with 2 measures of IGF-binding protein (IGFBP)-3. The study also examined whether relative risks associated to IGF-I levels were modified by anthropometric and dietary factors. A meta-analysis was performed where the study results were combined with the results from previously published prospective studies. For the study, 1,121 case sets with IGF-1 and total IGFBP-3 measurements were observed. For each case participant with colon or rectum cancer, 1 control participant was selected randomly. Control were matched to cases depending on a set criteria. The study found no association between colorectal cancer risk and serum levels of IGF-1 or IGFBP-3. However, the results from the meta-analysis showed only a very mild significant positive association. Overall, findings from the study together with those from the prospective cohort studies indicate a modest role for elevated circulating IGF-I levels in the development of colorectal cancer.
Abstract
Several prospective studies have shown a moderate positive association between increasing circulating insulin-like growth factor-I (IGF-I) levels and colorectal cancer risk. However, the associations were often statistically nonsignificant, and the relationship of cancer risk with IGF-I's major binding protein, IGFBP-3, showed major discrepancies between studies. We investigated the association of colorectal cancer risk with serum IGF-I, total and intact IGFBP-3, in a case-control study nested within the EPIC cohort (1,121 cases of colorectal cancer and 1,121 matched controls). Conditional logistic regression was used to adjust for possible confounders. Our present study results were combined in a meta-analysis with those from 9 previous prospective studies to examine the overall evidence for a relationship of prediagnostic serum IGF-I with colorectal cancer risk. In the EPIC study, serum concentrations of IGF-I and IGFBP-3 showed no associations with risk of colorectal cancer overall. Only in subgroup analyses did our study show moderate positive associations of IGF-I levels with risk, either among younger participants only (and only for colon cancer) or among participants whose milk intakes were in the lowest tertile of the population distribution (RR for an increase of 100 ng/ml = 1.43 [95% CI = 1.13-1.93]). Nevertheless, in the meta-analysis a modest positive association remained between serum IGF-I and colorectal cancer risk overall (RR = 1.07 [1.01-1.14] for 1 standard deviation increase in IGF-I). Overall, data from our present study and previous prospective studies combined indicate a relatively modest association of colorectal cancer risk with serum IGF-I.