ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Obesity is associated with increased consumption and preference for dietary fat. Experimental models of fat-induced obesity use either lard or vegetable shortening. Yet, there are no direct comparisons of these commonly used fat sources, or the influence of their fatty acid composition, on the development of diet-induced obesity. OBJECTIVE: To compare the effects of lard and hydrogenated vegetable-shortening diets, which differ in their fatty acid composition, on weight gain and the development of obesity and insulin resistance in rats. METHODS AND DESIGN: Male Wistar rats were fed ad libitum for 14 weeks high-fat diets containing either (1) high vegetable fat (HVF, 60 kcal% from vegetable shortening) or (2) high lard fat (HLF, 60 kcal% from lard). Rats fed normal-fat (NF, 16 kcal% from vegetable shortening) diet served as control. Body weight, food intake, adipose tissue mass, serum 25[OH]D3, glucose, insulin and fatty acid composition of diets were measured. RESULTS: Rats fed either of the two high-fat diets had higher energy intake, weight gain and fat accretion than rats fed normal-fat diet. However, rats fed the HLF diet consumed more calories and gained more weight and body fat with greater increases of 32% in total (158.5±8.2 vs 120.2±6.6 g, P<0.05), 30% in visceral (104.4±5.2 vs 80.3±4.2 g, P<0.05) and 36% in subcutaneous fat mass (54.1±3.6 vs 39.9±3.1 g, P<0.05), compared with rats fed the HVF diet. Higher visceral adiposity was positively correlated with serum insulin (r=0.376, P<0.05) and homeostatic model assessment insulin resistance (r=0.391, P<0.05). CONCLUSION: We conclude that lard-based high-fat diets accentuate the increase in weight gain and the development of obesity and insulin resistance more than hydrogenated vegetable-shortening diets. These results further point to the importance of standardizing fatty acid composition and type of fat used in determining outcomes of consuming high-fat diets.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: This is a single center, randomized, double-blind placebo-controlled study to evaluate the NK(1)-receptor antagonist, aprepitant, in Chinese breast cancer patients. The primary objective was to compare the efficacy of aprepitant-based antiemetic regimen and standard antiemetic regimen for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) in patients who received moderately emetogenic chemotherapy. The secondary objective was to compare the patient-reported quality of life in these two groups of patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligible breast cancer patients were chemotherapy-naive and treated with adjuvant AC chemotherapy (i.e. doxorubicin 60 mg/m(2) and cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m(2)). Patients were randomly assigned to either an aprepitant-based regimen (day 1, aprepitant 125 mg, ondansetron 8 mg, and dexamethasone 12 mg before chemotherapy and ondansetron 8 mg 8 h later; days 2 through 3, aprepitant 80 qd) or a control arm which consisted of standard regimen (day 1, ondansetron 8 mg and dexamethasone 20 mg before chemotherapy and ondansetron 8 mg 8 h later; days 2 through 3, ondansetron 8 mg bid). Data on nausea, vomiting, and use of rescue medication were collected with a self-report diary, patients quality of life were assessed by self-administered Functional Living Index-Emesis (FLIE). RESULTS: Of 127 patients randomized, 124 were assessable. For CINV in Cycle 1 AC, there was no significant difference in the proportion of patients with reported complete response, complete protection, total control, 'no vomiting', 'no significant nausea' and 'no nausea'. The requirement of rescue medication appears to be lesser in patients treated with the aprepitant-based regimen compared to those with the standard regimen (11% vs. 20%; P = 0.06). Assessment of FLIE revealed that while there was no difference in the nausea domain and the total score between the two groups; however, patients receiving standard antiemetic regimen had significantly worse quality of life in the vomiting domain (mean score [SD] = 23.99 [30.79]) when compared with those who received the aprepitant-based regimen (mean score [SD] = 3.40 [13.18]) (P = 0.0002). Both treatments were generally well tolerated. Patients treated with the aprepitant-based regimen had a significantly lower incidence of neutropenia (53.2% vs. 35.5%, P = 0.0468), grade >or= 3 neutropenia (21.0% vs. 45.2, P = 0.0042) and delay in subsequent cycle of chemotherapy (8.1% vs. 27.4%, P = 0.0048). CONCLUSION: The aprepitant regimen appears to reduce the requirement of rescue medication when compared with the control regimen for prevention of CINV in patients receiving both an anthracycline and cyclophosphamide, and is associated with a better quality of life during adjuvant AC chemotherapy.
