Non-Classical Aspects of Obesity Pathogenesis and Their Relative Clinical Importance for Obesity Treatment.

Obesity is a chronic disease and a major public health problem due to its association with non-communicable diseases and all-cause mortality. An increased energy intake and decreased physical activity have been long recognized as the classical parameters that contribute to the development of obesity. However, several other, non-classical factors have also been associated with obesity through various complex mechanisms. Some of them are diet related, such as diet quality, dietary habits and speed of eating. Other factors are non-dietary, such as endocrine-disrupting chemicals, sleep quality and quantity, psychotropic medications and light at night. The scope of the present narrative review is to address these non-classical factors that are implicated in the pathogenesis of obesity, to clarify their potential role in the management of obesity and, where possible, to provide some practical clinical recommendations.

Novel Noninvasive Approaches to the Treatment of Obesity: From Pharmacotherapy to Gene Therapy.

Recent insights into the pathophysiologic underlying mechanisms of obesity have led to the discovery of several promising drug targets and novel therapeutic strategies to address the global obesity epidemic and its comorbidities. Current pharmacologic options for obesity management are largely limited in number and of modest efficacy/safety profile. Therefore, the need for safe and more efficacious new agents is urgent. Drugs that are currently under investigation modulate targets across a broad range of systems and tissues, including the central nervous system, gastrointestinal hormones, adipose tissue, kidney, liver, and skeletal muscle. Beyond pharmacotherapeutics, other potential antiobesity strategies are being explored, including novel drug delivery systems, vaccines, modulation of the gut microbiome, and gene therapy. The present review summarizes the pathophysiology of energy homeostasis and highlights pathways being explored in the effort to develop novel antiobesity medications and interventions but does not cover devices and bariatric methods. Emerging pharmacologic agents and alternative approaches targeting these pathways and relevant research in both animals and humans are presented in detail. Special emphasis is given to treatment options at the end of the development pipeline and closer to the clinic (ie, compounds that have a higher chance to be added to our therapeutic armamentarium in the near future). Ultimately, advancements in our understanding of the pathophysiology and interindividual variation of obesity may lead to multimodal and personalized approaches to obesity treatment that will result in safe, effective, and sustainable weight loss until the root causes of the problem are identified and addressed.

Intermittent Energy Restriction, Weight Loss and Cardiometabolic Risk: A Critical Appraisal of Evidence in Humans.

Dietary patterns with intermittent energy restriction (IER) have been proposed as an attractive alternative to continuous energy restriction (CER) for the management of obesity and its associated comorbidities. The most widely studied regimens of IER comprise energy restriction on two days per week (5:2), alternate-day energy restriction by 60-70% (ADF), and timely restriction of energy intake during a specific time window within the day (TRF; time-restricted feeding). Although there is some evidence to suggest that IER can exert beneficial effects on human cardiometabolic health, yet is apparently not superior compared to CER, there are still some critical issues/questions that warrant further investigation: (i) high-quality robust scientific evidence regarding the long-term effects of IER (safety, efficacy, compliance) is limited since the vast majority of intervention studies had a duration of less than 6 months; (ii) whether the positive effects of IER are independent of or actually mediated by weight loss remains elusive; (iii) it remains unknown whether IER protocols are a safe recommendation for the general population; (iv) data concerning the impact of IER on ectopic fat stores, fat-free mass, insulin resistance and metabolic flexibility are inconclusive; (v) the cost-effectiveness of IER dietary regimens has not been adequately addressed; (vi) direct head-to-head studies comparing different IER patterns with variable macronutrient composition in terms of safety and efficacy are scarce; and (vii) evidence is limited with regard to the efficacy of IER in specific populations, including males, the elderly and patients with morbid obesity and diabetes mellitus. Until more solid evidence is available, individualization and critical perspective are definitely warranted to determine which patients might benefit the most from an IER intervention, depending on their personality traits and most importantly comorbid health conditions.

Clinical efficacy of aniracetam, either as monotherapy or combined with cholinesterase inhibitors, in patients with cognitive impairment: a comparative open study.

INTRODUCTION: Dementia constitutes an increasingly prevalent cognitive disorder with serious socioeconomic implications. AIMS: In the present study, we aimed to evaluate the efficacy of aniracetam, either as monotherapy or combined with cholinesterase inhibitors (ChEIs), in terms of several neuropsychological parameters, in a considerable number of patients with dementia. RESULTS: In our prospective, open-label study, we enrolled a total of 276 patients (mean age 71 ± 8 years, 95 males) with cognitive disorders. Our study population comprised four groups: no treatment group (n = 75), aniracetam monotherapy group (n = 58), ChEIs monotherapy group (n = 68), and group of combined treatment (n = 68). Patients were examined with validated neuropsychological tests at baseline, 3, 6, and 12 months of treatment. In patients treated with aniracetam, all studied parameters were adequately maintained at 6 and 12 months, while emotional state was significantly improved at 3 months. In patients treated with ChEIs, we observed a significant cognitive deterioration at 12 months. The comparison between aniracetam and ChEIs in patients with relatively mild dementia (15 ≤ MMSE ≤ 25) revealed a significantly better cognitive performance with aniracetam at 6 months and improved functionality at 3 months. Comparing aniracetam monotherapy with combined treatment in the same population, aniracetam performed better in the cognitive scale at 6 months, and displayed a notable tendency for enhanced mood at 12 months and improved functionality at 6 months. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicate that aniracetam (a nootropic compound with glutamatergic activity and neuroprotective potential) is a promising option for patients with cognitive deficit of mild severity. It preserved all neuropsychological parameters for at least 12 months, and seemed to exert a favorable effect on emotional stability of demented patients.