1.
Randomized Trial Testing the Effects of Eating Frequency on Two Hormonal Biomarkers of Metabolism and Energy Balance.
Perrigue, MM, Drewnowski, A, Wang, CY, Song, X, Kratz, M, Neuhouser, ML
Nutrition and cancer. 2017;(1):56-63
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
BACKGROUND Eating frequency (EF) may influence obesity-related disease risk by attenuating postprandial fluctuations in hormones involved in metabolism, appetite regulation, and inflammation. MATERIALS/METHODS This randomized crossover intervention trial tested the effects of EF on fasting plasma insulin-like growth factor-I (IGF-1) and leptin. Fifteen subjects (4 males, 11 females) completed two eucaloric intervention phases lasting 21 days each: low EF ("low-EF"; 3 eating occasions/day) and high EF ("high-EF"; 8 eating occasions/day). Subjects were free-living and consumed their own meals using individualized structured meal plans with instruction from study staff. Subjects completed fasting blood draws and anthropometry on the first and last day of each study phase. The generalized estimated equations modification of linear regression tested the intervention effect on fasting serum IGF-1 and leptin. RESULTS Mean (± SD) age was 28.5 ± 8.70 years, and mean (± SD) Body Mass Index was 23.3 (3.4) kg/m2. We found lower mean serum IGF-1 following the high-EF condition compared to the low-EF condition (P < 0.001). There was no association between EF and plasma leptin (P = 0.83). CONCLUSION These results suggest that increased EF may lower serum IGF-1, which is a hormonal biomarker linked to increased risk of breast, prostate, and colorectal cancer.
2.
Factors that determine energy compensation: a systematic review of preload studies.
Almiron-Roig, E, Palla, L, Guest, K, Ricchiuti, C, Vint, N, Jebb, SA, Drewnowski, A
Nutrition reviews. 2013;(7):458-73
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
Insufficient energy compensation after a preload (meal, snack, or beverage) has been associated with excess energy intake, but experimental studies have used heterogeneous methodologies, making energy compensation difficult to predict. The aim of this systematic review was to analyze the relative contributions of two key variables, preload physical form and intermeal interval (IMI), to differences in energy compensation. Forty-eight publications were included, from which percent energy compensation (%EC) data were extracted for 253 interventions (121 liquid, 69 semisolid, 20 solid, and 43 composite preloads). Energy compensation ranged from -370% (overconsumption, mostly of liquids) to 450% (overcompensation). A meta-regression analysis of studies reporting positive energy compensation showed that IMI (as the predominant factor) together with preload physical form and energy contributed significantly to %EC differences, accounting for 50% of the variance, independently from gender and BMI. Energy compensation was maximized when the preload was in semisolid/solid form and the IMI was 30-120 min. These results may assist in the interpretation of studies assessing the relative efficacy of interventions to enhance satiety, including functional foods and weight management products.