1.
Effect of a Personalized Diet to Reduce Postprandial Glycemic Response vs a Low-fat Diet on Weight Loss in Adults With Abnormal Glucose Metabolism and Obesity: A Randomized Clinical Trial.
Popp, CJ, Hu, L, Kharmats, AY, Curran, M, Berube, L, Wang, C, Pompeii, ML, Illiano, P, St-Jules, DE, Mottern, M, et al
JAMA network open. 2022;5(9):e2233760
-
-
-
Free full text
-
Plain language summary
Postprandial glycaemic response (PPGR) to foods can be different from person to person. This could be the reason why people experience different weight loss outcomes with standardised diets such as a low glycaemic index diet, low-fat diet or a low carbohydrate diet. In this single-centre, population-based, randomised, blinded clinical trial, 204 participants with irregular glucose metabolism and obesity were randomised to consume either a low-fat or personalised diet for six months in combination with fourteen behavioural change counselling sessions. The participants in the personalised diet group received a colour-coded meal score to indicate their estimated PPGR for different foods. The results of this study showed no significant weight reduction in the personalised diet group compared to the low-fat diet. Further robust studies are required to develop appropriate precision nutrition interventions for weight loss and energy balance. However, healthcare professionals can use the results of this study to understand that both a low-fat diet and a personalised diet, coupled with behavioural counselling, may be effective in promoting weight loss in obese populations with irregular glucose metabolism.
Abstract
IMPORTANCE Interindividual variability in postprandial glycemic response (PPGR) to the same foods may explain why low glycemic index or load and low-carbohydrate diet interventions have mixed weight loss outcomes. A precision nutrition approach that estimates personalized PPGR to specific foods may be more efficacious for weight loss. OBJECTIVE To compare a standardized low-fat vs a personalized diet regarding percentage of weight loss in adults with abnormal glucose metabolism and obesity. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS The Personal Diet Study was a single-center, population-based, 6-month randomized clinical trial with measurements at baseline (0 months) and 3 and 6 months conducted from February 12, 2018, to October 28, 2021. A total of 269 adults aged 18 to 80 years with a body mass index (calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared) ranging from 27 to 50 and a hemoglobin A1c level ranging from 5.7% to 8.0% were recruited. Individuals were excluded if receiving medications other than metformin or with evidence of kidney disease, assessed as an estimated glomerular filtration rate of less than 60 mL/min/1.73 m2 using the Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration equation, to avoid recruiting patients with advanced type 2 diabetes. INTERVENTIONS Participants were randomized to either a low-fat diet (<25% of energy intake; standardized group) or a personalized diet that estimates PPGR to foods using a machine learning algorithm (personalized group). Participants in both groups received a total of 14 behavioral counseling sessions and self-monitored dietary intake. In addition, the participants in the personalized group received color-coded meal scores on estimated PPGR delivered via a mobile app. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was the percentage of weight loss from baseline to 6 months. Secondary outcomes included changes in body composition (fat mass, fat-free mass, and percentage of body weight), resting energy expenditure, and adaptive thermogenesis. Data were collected at baseline and 3 and 6 months. Analysis was based on intention to treat using linear mixed modeling. RESULTS Of a total of 204 adults randomized, 199 (102 in the personalized group vs 97 in the standardized group) contributed data (mean [SD] age, 58 [11] years; 133 women [66.8%]; mean [SD] body mass index, 33.9 [4.8]). Weight change at 6 months was -4.31% (95% CI, -5.37% to -3.24%) for the standardized group and -3.26% (95% CI, -4.25% to -2.26%) for the personalized group, which was not significantly different (difference between groups, 1.05% [95% CI, -0.40% to 2.50%]; P = .16). There were no between-group differences in body composition and adaptive thermogenesis; however, the change in resting energy expenditure was significantly greater in the standardized group from 0 to 6 months (difference between groups, 92.3 [95% CI, 0.9-183.8] kcal/d; P = .05). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE A personalized diet targeting a reduction in PPGR did not result in greater weight loss compared with a low-fat diet at 6 months. Future studies should assess methods of increasing dietary self-monitoring adherence and intervention exposure. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03336411.
2.
The Weight Optimization Revamping Lifestyle using the Dietary Guidelines (WORLD) Study: Sustained Weight Loss Over 12 Months.
Psota, TL, Tindall, AM, Lohse, B, Miller, PE, Petersen, KS, Kris-Etherton, PM
Obesity (Silver Spring, Md.). 2020;28(7):1235-1244
-
-
-
Free full text
-
Plain language summary
Effective long-term weight loss strategies to reduce the risk of death and diseases associated with being obese or overweight are required, as restrictive programmes are difficult to sustain, and weight loss may be heavily influenced by behavioural factors. This randomised control trial of 101 premenopausal women with obesity or overweight aimed to compare a lower-fat and moderate-fat diets, both with nutrition education for 12 months. The results showed that both treatment groups lost weight. Both groups consumed the same amount of fat but increased their diet quality. Diet quality and greater attendance at nutritional education sessions were associated with greater weight loss. Cholesterol was significantly lower in both groups, but blood pressure remained unchanged. Interestingly there were a large number of women who did not complete the trial. It was concluded that irrespective of the amount of fat consumed, nutrition education can help to achieve sustained weight loss, improve diet quality and decrease heart disease risk for at least 12 months. This study could be used by healthcare professionals to understand that recommending fat-based targets for weight loss may be ineffective and the importance of emotional and behavioural support for individuals on a weight loss regime to improve their risk for heart disease.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE This study aimed to compare two energy-restricted, nutrient-dense diets at the upper or lower ends of the dietary fat recommendation range (lower fat [20% energy from fat] versus moderate fat [35%]) on weight loss using behavioral theory-based nutrition education. METHODS A total of 101 premenopausal women with overweight or obesity were randomized to an energy-restricted lower-fat or moderate-fat diet for 1 year. Interventions included 28 behavioral theory-based nutrition education sessions plus weekly exercise sessions. RESULTS Both treatment groups experienced weight loss (-5.0 kg for lower fat and -4.3 kg for moderate fat; P < 0.0001), but there was no difference in weight loss or fat intake between groups. Total and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol decreased (-3. 4 mg/dL and -3.8 mg/dL; P < 0.05), and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol increased (1.9 mg/dL; P < 0.05) in both groups at 12 months. Diet quality, assessed by the Healthy Eating Index, increased significantly at 4 months versus baseline (70.8 [0.9] vs. 77.8 [1.0]) and was maintained through 12 months. Higher Healthy Eating Index scores were associated with greater weight loss at 4 months (r = -0.2; P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS In the context of a well-resourced, free-living weight-loss intervention, total fat intake did not change; however, theory-based nutrition education underpinned by food-based recommendations resulted in caloric deficits, improvements in diet quality, and weight loss that was sustained for 1 year.
3.
Dietary and Policy Priorities for Cardiovascular Disease, Diabetes, and Obesity: A Comprehensive Review.
Mozaffarian, D
Circulation. 2016;133(2):187-225
-
-
-
Free full text
-
Plain language summary
Diet-related cardiometabolic conditions, such as heart disease and diabetes, pose a significant health and economic burden across the world. In recent years, scientific advances and research have generated enormous insights, yet there remain many controversies and unanswered questions. This extensive review summarizes recent evidence of key-dietary components and their impact on cardiometabolic health. Amongst the topics covered are dietary patterns, food quality and processing, genetics, personalized nutrition, supplements, functional foods and the existing knowledge on selected food groups such as carbohydrates, meat and fats alongside relevant vitamins, minerals and plant compounds. The author highlights how an oversimplified concept of nutrition from previous decades, has led to an array of conflicting advice and undermined the nuanced and complex impact that diet and nutrition can have on the body. Thus in light of the evidence, food-based interventions and dietary patterns are suggested as favourable, with less focus on dietary components in isolation. Throughout the paper, the need for adjunct support to facilitate sustainable health-promoting behaviour changes is recognized. Calling for additional measures to address behaviour change, health systems reforms, targeting socioeconomic inequalities, employing novel technologies, and adequate policymaking. This overview of recent evidence yields a comprehensive source of information, worthwhile reviewing when designing personalised diet plans in support of cardiometabolic health.
Abstract
Suboptimal nutrition is a leading cause of poor health. Nutrition and policy science have advanced rapidly, creating confusion yet also providing powerful opportunities to reduce the adverse health and economic impacts of poor diets. This review considers the history, new evidence, controversies, and corresponding lessons for modern dietary and policy priorities for cardiovascular diseases, obesity, and diabetes mellitus. Major identified themes include the importance of evaluating the full diversity of diet-related risk pathways, not only blood lipids or obesity; focusing on foods and overall diet patterns, rather than single isolated nutrients; recognizing the complex influences of different foods on long-term weight regulation, rather than simply counting calories; and characterizing and implementing evidence-based strategies, including policy approaches, for lifestyle change. Evidence-informed dietary priorities include increased fruits, nonstarchy vegetables, nuts, legumes, fish, vegetable oils, yogurt, and minimally processed whole grains; and fewer red meats, processed (eg, sodium-preserved) meats, and foods rich in refined grains, starch, added sugars, salt, and trans fat. More investigation is needed on the cardiometabolic effects of phenolics, dairy fat, probiotics, fermentation, coffee, tea, cocoa, eggs, specific vegetable and tropical oils, vitamin D, individual fatty acids, and diet-microbiome interactions. Little evidence to date supports the cardiometabolic relevance of other popular priorities: eg, local, organic, grass-fed, farmed/wild, or non-genetically modified. Evidence-based personalized nutrition appears to depend more on nongenetic characteristics (eg, physical activity, abdominal adiposity, gender, socioeconomic status, culture) than genetic factors. Food choices must be strongly supported by clinical behavior change efforts, health systems reforms, novel technologies, and robust policy strategies targeting economic incentives, schools and workplaces, neighborhood environments, and the food system. Scientific advances provide crucial new insights on optimal targets and best practices to reduce the burdens of diet-related cardiometabolic diseases.