Effects of weight loss through dietary intervention on pain characteristics, functional mobility, and inflammation in adults with elevated adiposity.

Background: The relationship between adiposity and pain is complex. Excess weight increases the risk for chronic musculoskeletal pain (CMP), driven by increased biomechanical load and low-grade systemic inflammation. Pain limits physical function, impacting energy balance contributing to weight gain. The primary aims of this study were to profile pain characteristics in participants with overweight or obesity and determine if weight loss through dietary-induced energy restriction, and presence of CMP, or magnitude of weight loss, was associated with changes in adiposity, pain, functional mobility, and inflammation. Methods: This was a secondary analysis of data from adults (25-65 years) with overweight or obesity (BMI 27.5-34.9 kg/m2) enrolled in a 3-month, 30% energy-restricted dietary intervention to induce weight loss (January 2019-March 2021). Anthropometric measures (weight, waist circumference and fat mass), pain prevalence, pain severity (McGill Pain Questionnaire, MPQ), pain intensity (Visual Analog Scale, VAS), functional mobility (timed up and go, TUG) and inflammation (high sensitivity C-Reactive Protein, hsCRP) were assessed at baseline and 3-months. Results: One hundred and ten participants completed the intervention and had weight and pain assessed at both baseline and 3-months. Participants lost 7.0 ± 0.3 kg, representing 7.9% ± 3.7% of body mass. At 3-months, functional mobility improved (TUG -0.2 ± 0.1 s, 95% CI -0.3, -0.1), but there was no change in hsCRP. Compared to baseline, fewer participants reported CMP at 3-months (n = 56, 51% to n = 27, 25%, p < 0.001) and presence of multisite pain decreased from 22.7% to 10.9% (p < 0.001). Improvements in anthropometric measures and functional mobility did not differ between those presenting with or without CMP at baseline. Improvements in pain were not related to the magnitude of weight loss. Conclusion: Weight loss was effective in reducing pain prevalence and improving functional mobility, emphasizing the importance of considering weight-loss as a key component of pain management. Clinical trial registration: identifier, ACTRN12618001861246.

Effects of energy-restricted diets with or without nuts on weight, body composition and glycaemic control in adults: a scoping review.

Energy-restricted (ER) diets promote weight loss and improve body composition and glycaemic control. Nut consumption also improves these parameters. However, less is known about the combined benefit of these two strategies. This scoping review implemented a systematic search of Medline, Embase and Scopus to identify randomised controlled trials evaluating the effect of ER diets with or without nuts on body mass, body composition and glycaemic control in adults. After reviewing titles and abstracts, twenty-nine full-text articles were screened, resulting in seven studies reported in eight papers that met the inclusion criteria. Energy restriction was achieved by prescribing a set energy target or reducing intake by 1000-4200 kJ from daily energy requirements. Interventions ranged from 4 to 52 weeks in duration and contained 42-84 g/d of almonds, peanuts, pistachios or walnuts. While all studies reported that energy restriction resulted in significant weight loss, the addition of nuts to ER diets demonstrated significantly greater weight loss in only approximately half of the included studies (4/7 studies). There was limited evidence to support additional benefits from nuts for body composition measures or glycaemic control. Although improvements in weight loss and glycaemia were not consistent when nuts were included in ER diets, no study revealed an adverse effect of nut consumption on health outcomes. Future studies could explore the effect of consuming different types and amounts of nuts, combined with various levels of energy restriction on weight, body composition and glycaemic control.

Study protocol for a 15-week randomised controlled trial assessing the independent effects of high-cholesterol and high-saturated fat diets on LDL cholesterol.

INTRODUCTION: Previous research has associated high dietary cholesterol intake with raised low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and thus increased risk for cardiovascular disease (CVD). Emerging research suggests that it is saturated fat, not dietary cholesterol, associated with increased CVD risk. Despite being high in cholesterol, eggs, low in saturated fat, are not adversely associated with blood lipids or CVD risk. This paper describes a randomised controlled counter-balanced, cross-over trial assessing the effects of a high-cholesterol/low-saturated fat (egg) diet and a low-cholesterol/high-saturated fat diet (egg free) on blood lipids and lipoproteins, while accounting for physical activity levels which can also influence these parameters. The primary aim is to demonstrate that high cholesterol intake (from eggs) within a healthy, low-saturated fat diet does not adversely affect blood lipid levels and lipoprotein profiles. Instead, we propose that adverse effects on these parameters are mediated by saturated fat intake. The secondary aim is to explore relationships between changes in blood lutein and zeaxanthin concentrations and alterations in physical activity, examining whether changes in physical activity mediate effects on blood lipids and lipoproteins. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Fifty-two adults aged 18-60 years with LDL-C less than 3.5 mmol/L will be randomly allocated to three isocaloric diets for 5 weeks each: a high-cholesterol (600 mg)/low-saturated fat (6%) (egg) diet, a low-cholesterol (300 mg)/high-saturated fat (12%) (egg free) diet and a control diet that is high in both cholesterol (600 mg) and saturated fat (12%). Lipid and lipoprotein levels, lipoprotein size and concentrations, blood pressure, blood glucose, physical activity levels, and plasma lutein and zeaxanthin concentrations will be measured. Treatment effects will be analysed using linear mixed effects models. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval was obtained from the University of South Australia Human Research Ethics Committee no. 204 327. Results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journals and national and international presentations. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05267522.

Almonds vs. carbohydrate snacks in an energy-restricted diet: Weight and cardiometabolic outcomes from a randomized trial.

OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated weight and cardiometabolic outcomes after a 3-month energy-restricted diet (-30%) containing almonds (almond-enriched diet [AED]) or containing carbohydrate-rich snacks (nut-free control diet [NFD]) (Phase 1), followed by 6 months of weight maintenance (Phase 2). METHODS: Participants (25-65 years old) with overweight or obesity (BMI 27.5-34.9 kg/m2 ) were randomly allocated to AED (n = 68) or NFD (n = 72). RESULTS: Both groups lost weight during Phase 1 (p < 0.001) (mean [SE], -7.0 [0.5] kg AED vs. -7.0 [0.5] kg NFD, p = 0.858) and Phase 2 (p = 0.009) (-1.1 [0.5] kg AED vs. -1.3 [0.6] NFD, p = 0.756), with improvements in percentage lean mass after Phase 2 (4.8% [0.3%], p < 0.001). Reductions occurred in fasting glucose (-0.2 [0.07] mmol/L, p = 0.003), insulin (-8.1 [4.0] pmol/L, p = 0.036), blood pressure (-4.9 [0.8] mm Hg systolic, -5.0 [0.5] mm Hg diastolic, p < 0.001), total cholesterol (-0.3 [0.1] mmol/L), low-density lipoprotein (LDL) (-0.2 [0.1] mmol/L), very low-density lipoprotein (-0.1 [0.03] mmol/L), and triglycerides (-0.3 [0.06] mmol/L) (all p < 0.001), and high-density lipoprotein increased (0.1 [0.02] mmol/L, p = 0.011) by the end of Phase 2 in both groups. There were group by time interactions for lipoprotein particle concentrations: very small triglyceride-rich (-31.0 [7.7] nmol/L AED vs. -4.8 [7.9] nmol/L NFD, p = 0.007), small LDL (-109.3 [40.5] nmol/L AED vs. -20.7 [41.6] nmol/L NFD, p = 0.017), and medium LDL (-24.4 [43.4] nmol/L AED vs. -130.5 [44.4] nmol/L NFD, p = 0.045). CONCLUSIONS: An energy-restricted AED resulted in weight loss and weight loss maintenance comparable to an energy-restricted NFD, and both diets supported cardiometabolic health. The AED resulted in greater improvements in some lipoprotein subfractions, which may enhance reductions in cardiovascular risk.

Eggs and Cardiovascular Disease Risk: An Update of Recent Evidence.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review summarizes recent evidence published since a previous review in 2018 on the association between egg consumption and risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) mortality, CVD incidence, and CVD risk factors. RECENT FINDINGS: No recent randomized controlled trials were identified. Evidence from observational studies is mixed, with studies reporting either an increased risk or no association of highest egg consumption with CVD mortality, and a similar spread of increased risk, decreased risk, or no association between egg intake and total CVD incidence. Most studies reported a reduced risk or no association between egg consumption and CVD risk factors. Included studies reported low and high egg intake as between 0 and 1.9 eggs/week and 2 and ≥14 eggs/week, respectively. Ethnicity may influence the risk of CVD with egg consumption, likely due to differences in how eggs are consumed in the diet rather than eggs themselves. Recent findings are inconsistent regarding the possible relationship between egg consumption and CVD mortality and morbidity. Dietary guidance should focus on improving the overall quality of the diet to promote cardiovascular health.

Acute feeding with almonds compared to a carbohydrate-based snack improves appetite-regulating hormones with no effect on self-reported appetite sensations: a randomised controlled trial.

PURPOSE: Early satiety has been identified as one of the mechanisms that may explain the beneficial effects of nuts for reducing obesity. This study compared postprandial changes in appetite-regulating hormones and self-reported appetite ratings after consuming almonds (AL, 15% of energy requirement) or an isocaloric carbohydrate-rich snack bar (SB). METHODS: This is a sub-analysis of baseline assessments of a larger parallel-arm randomised controlled trial in overweight and obese (Body Mass Index 27.5-34.9 kg/m2) adults (25-65 years). After an overnight fast, 140 participants consumed a randomly allocated snack (AL [n = 68] or SB [n = 72]). Appetite-regulating hormones and self-reported appetite sensations, measured using visual analogue scales, were assessed immediately before snack food consumption, and at 30, 60, 90 and 120 min following snack consumption. A sub-set of participants (AL, n = 49; SB, n = 48) then consumed a meal challenge buffet ad libitum to assess subsequent energy intake. An additional appetite rating assessment was administered post buffet at 150 min. RESULTS: Postprandial C-peptide area under the curve (AUC) response was 47% smaller with AL compared to SB (p < 0.001). Glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide, glucagon and pancreatic polypeptide AUC responses were larger with AL compared to SB (18%, p = 0.005; 39% p < 0.001; 45% p < 0.001 respectively). Cholecystokinin, ghrelin, glucagon-like peptide-1, leptin and polypeptide YY AUCs were not different between groups. Self-reported appetite ratings and energy intake following the buffet did not differ between groups. CONCLUSION: More favourable appetite-regulating hormone responses to AL did not translate into better self-reported appetite or reduced short-term energy consumption. Future studies should investigate implications for longer term appetite regulation. ANZCTR REFERENCE NUMBER: ACTRN12618001861246 2018.

The Effect of Nut Consumption on Diet Quality, Cardiometabolic and Gastrointestinal Health in Children: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Tree nuts and ground nuts are nutrient-rich foods known to improve human health when consumed regularly in the diet. Past observational studies suggest that nuts improve adult and child health; however, limited randomized control trials (RCTs) have assessed the health effects of nuts in children. Using a systematic review approach, we examined the effect of nut intake on health outcomes in children aged 8-18 years. We searched PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, EMBASE and Cochrane library to identify RCTs of interest. A total of 5783 articles were identified, 4821 were screened by title and abstract and 37 by full text resulting in four articles that met the inclusion criteria for the review. Nut consumption was between 15 and 30 g with durations of between 3 and 16 weeks. Nut consumption was shown to improve children's diet quality (increase children's intake of essential nutrients including fats (monounsaturated and polyunsaturated fats), protein and fiber), there were inconsistent effects on biomarkers of cardiometabolic health (improve lipid profiles, microvascular reactivity and inflammation) and gastrointestinal health (increase in the proportion of beneficial fecal bacteria). Further studies exploring the broad health benefits of nuts in children are needed with consideration given to higher doses and longer intervention periods.

Study protocol for a 9-month randomised controlled trial assessing the effects of almonds versus carbohydrate-rich snack foods on weight loss and weight maintenance.

INTRODUCTION: Epidemiological studies indicate an inverse association between nut consumption and body mass index (BMI). However, clinical trials evaluating the effects of nut consumption compared with a nut-free diet on adiposity have reported mixed findings with some studies reporting greater weight loss and others reporting no weight change. This paper describes the rationale and detailed protocol for a randomised controlled trial assessing whether the inclusion of almonds or carbohydrate-rich snacks in an otherwise nut-free energy-restricted diet will promote weight loss during 3 months of energy restriction and limit weight regain during 6 months of weight maintenance. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: One hundred and thirty-four adults aged 25-65 years with a BMI of 27.5-34.9 kg/m2 will be recruited and randomly allocated to either the almond-enriched diet (AED) (15% energy from almonds) or a nut-free control diet (NFD) (15% energy from carbohydrate-rich snack foods). Study snack foods will be provided. Weight loss will be achieved through a 30% energy restriction over 3 months, and weight maintenance will be encouraged for 6 months by increasing overall energy intake by ~120-180 kcal/day (~500-750kJ/day) as required. Food will be self-selected, based on recommendations from the study dietitian. Body composition, resting energy expenditure, total daily energy expenditure (via doubly labelled water), physical activity, appetite regulation, cardiometabolic health, gut microbiome, liver health, inflammatory factors, eating behaviours, mood and personality, functional mobility and pain, quality of life and sleep patterns will be measured throughout the 9-month trial. The effects of intervention on the outcome measures over time will be analysed using random effects mixed models, with treatment (AED or NFD) and time (baseline, 3 months and 9 months) being the between and within factors, respectively in the analysis. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval was obtained from the University of South Australia Human Research Ethics Committee (201436). Results from this trial will be disseminated through publication in peer-reviewed journals, national and international presentations. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12618001861246).

Effect of Intermittent Compared With Continuous Energy Restricted Diet on Glycemic Control in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes: A Randomized Noninferiority Trial.

Importance: Intermittent energy restriction is an alternative weight loss method that is becoming popular; however, to date, there are no long-term clinical trials of intermittent energy restriction in patients with type 2 diabetes. Objective: To compare the effects of intermittent energy restriction (2 days per week) with those of continuous energy restriction on glycemic control and weight loss in patients with type 2 diabetes during a 12-month period. Design, Setting, and Participants: Adult participants (N = 137) with type 2 diabetes were randomized 1:1 to parallel diet groups (intermittent energy restriction [n = 70] or continuous energy restriction [n = 67]) between April 7, 2015, and September 7, 2017, at the University of South Australia. Medications likely to cause hypoglycemia were reduced at baseline according to the medication management protocol. Interventions: An intermittent energy restriction diet (500-600 kcal/d) followed for 2 nonconsecutive days per week (participants followed their usual diet for the other 5 days) or a continuous energy restriction diet (1200-1500 kcal/d) followed for 7 days per week for 12 months. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was change in hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) level, with equivalence prespecified by a 90% CI margin of ±0.5%. The secondary outcome was weight loss with equivalence set at ±2.5 kg (±1.75 kg for fat mass loss and ±0.75 kg for fat-free mass loss). All other outcomes were tested for superiority. Results: Of the 137 randomized participants (77 women and 60 men; mean [SD] age, 61.0 [9.1] years; mean [SD] body mass index, 36.0 [5.8] [calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared]; and mean [SD] HbA1c level, 7.3% [1.3%]), 97 completed the trial. Intention-to-treat analysis showed similar reductions in mean (SEM) HbA1c level between the continuous and intermittent energy restriction groups (-0.5% [0.2%] vs -0.3% [0.1%]; P = .65), with a between-group difference of 0.2% (90% CI, -0.2% to 0.5%) meeting the criteria for equivalence. Mean (SEM) weight change was similar between the continuous and intermittent energy restriction groups (-5.0 [0.8] kg vs -6.8 [0.8] kg; P = .25), but the between-group difference did not meet the criteria for equivalence (-1.8 kg; 90% CI, -3.7 to 0.07 kg), nor did the between-group difference in fat mass (-1.3 kg; 90% CI, -2.8 to 0.2 kg) or fat-free mass (-0.5 kg; 90% CI, -1.4 to 0.4 kg). There were no significant differences between groups in final step count, fasting glucose levels, lipid levels, or total medication effect score at 12 months. Effects did not differ using completers analysis. Hypoglycemic or hyperglycemic events in the first 2 weeks of treatment were similar between the continuous and intermittent energy restriction groups (mean number [SEM] of events, 3.2 [0.7] vs 4.9 [1.4]; P = .28), affecting 35% of participants (16 of 46) using sulfonylureas and/or insulin. Conclusions and Relevance: Intermittent energy restriction is an effective alternative diet strategy for the reduction of HbA1c and is comparable with continuous energy restriction in patients with type 2 diabetes. Trial Registration: anzctr.org.au Identifier: ACTRN12615000383561.

Intermittent energy restriction in type 2 diabetes: A short discussion of medication management.

AIM: To discuss type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) medication changes required during the popular 5:2 intermittent energy restriction (IER) diet. METHODS: A search was conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, AMED, CINAHL and Cochrane library for original research articles investigating the use of very low calorie diets (VLCD) in people with T2DM. The search terms used included "VLCD" or "very low energy diet" or "very low energy restriction" or "IER" or "intermittent fasting" or "calorie restriction" or "diabetes mellitus type 2" and "type 2 diabetes". Reference lists of selected articles were also screened for relevant publications. Only research articles written in English, which also included an explanation of medication changes were included. A recent pilot trial using the 5:2 IER method, conducted by our research group, will also be summarized. RESULTS: A total of 8 studies were found that investigated the use of VLCD in T2DM and discussed medication management. Overall these studies indicate that the use of a VLCD for people with T2DM usually require the cessation of medication to prevent hypoglycemia. Therefore, the 5:2 IER method will also require medication changes, but as seen in our pilot trial, may not require total cessation of medication, rather a cessation on the 2 IER days only. CONCLUSION: Guidelines outlined here can be used in the initial stages of a 2-d IER diet, but extensive blood glucose monitoring is still required to make the necessary individual reductions to medications in response to weight loss.

Weight-Loss Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Intermittent Energy Restriction Trials Lasting a Minimum of 6 Months.

The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to summarise the effects of intermittent energy restriction on weight and biological markers in long term intervention studies of >6 months duration. An electronic search was performed using the MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library databases for intervention trials lasting 6 months or longer investigating the effects of intermittent energy restriction. A total of nine studies were identified as meeting the pre-specified criteria. All studies included an intermittent energy restriction arm, with six being directly compared to continuous energy restriction. A total of 981 subjects were enrolled and randomised, with weight loss observed in all intermittent energy restriction arms regardless of study duration or follow up length. Eight interventions in six trials were used for the meta-analyses, with results indicating neither intermittent or continuous energy restriction being superior with respect to weight loss, 0.084 ± 0.114 (overall mean difference between groups ± standard error; p = 0.458). The effects of intermittent energy restriction in the long term remain unclear. The number of long term studies conducted is very limited, and participant numbers typically small (less than 50 completers), indicating the need for larger, long term trials of 12 months or more, to be conducted in order to understand the impact of intermittent energy restriction on weight loss and long term weight management. Blood lipid concentrations, glucose, and insulin were not altered by intermittent energy expenditure in values greater than those seen with continuous energy restriction.