Different effects of high-protein/low-carbohydrate versus standard hypocaloric diet on insulin resistance and lipid profile: Role of rs16147 variant of neuropeptide Y

Effect of Carbohydrate-Restricted Diets and Intermittent Fasting on Obesity, Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus, and Hypertension Management: Consensus Statement of the Korean Society for the Study of Obesity, Korean Diabetes Association, and Korean Society of Hypertension

Carbohydrate-restricted diets and intermittent fasting (IF) have been rapidly gaining interest among the general population and patients with cardiometabolic disease, such as overweight or obesity, diabetes, and hypertension. However, there are limited expert recommendations for these dietary regimens. This study aimed to evaluate the level of scientific evidence on the benefits and harms of carbohydrate-restricted diets and IF to make responsible recommendations. A meta-analysis and systematic literature review of 66 articles on 50 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of carbohydrate-restricted diets and 10 articles on eight RCTs of IF was performed. Based on the analysis, the following recommendations are suggested. In adults with overweight or obesity, a moderately-low carbohydrate or low carbohydrate diet (mLCD) can be considered as a dietary regimen for weight reduction. In adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus, mLCD can be considered as a dietary regimen for improving glycemic control and reducing body weight. In contrast, a very-low carbohydrate diet (VLCD) and IF are recommended against in patients with diabetes. Furthermore, no recommendations are suggested for VLCD and IF in adults with overweight or obesity, and carbohydrate-restricted diets and IF in patients with hypertension. Here, we describe the results of our analysis and the evidence for these recommendations.

Effect of carbohydrate-restricted diets and intermittent fasting on obesity, type 2 diabetes mellitus, and hypertension management: consensus statement of the Korean Society for the Study of obesity, Korean Diabetes Association, and Korean Society of Hypertension

BACKGROUND

Carbohydrate-restricted diets and intermittent fasting (IF) have been rapidly gaining interest among the general population and patients with cardiometabolic disease, such as overweight or obesity, diabetes, and hypertension. However, there are limited expert recommendations for these dietary regimens. This study aimed to evaluate the level of scientific evidence on the benefits and harms of carbohydrate-restricted diets and IF to make responsible recommendations.

METHODS

A meta-analysis and systematic literature review of 66 articles on 50 randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs) of carbohydrate-restricted diets and ten articles on eight RCTs of IF was performed.

RESULTS

Based on the analysis, the following recommendations are suggested. In adults with overweight or obesity, a moderately-low carbohydrate or low carbohydrate diet (mLCD) can be considered as a dietary regimen for weight reduction. In adults with type 2 diabetes, mLCD can be considered as a dietary regimen for improving glycemic control and reducing body weight. In contrast, a very-low carbohydrate diet (VLCD) and IF are recommended against in patients with diabetes. Furthermore, no recommendations are suggested for VLCD and IF in adults with overweight or obesity, and carbohydrate-restricted diets and IF in patients with hypertension.

CONCLUSION

Here, we describe the results of our analysis and the evidence for these recommendations.

Effect of Carbohydrate-Restricted Diets and Intermittent Fasting on Obesity, Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus, and Hypertension Management: Consensus Statement of the Korean Society for the Study of Obesity, Korean Diabetes Association, and Korean Society of Hypertension

Carbohydrate-restricted diets and intermittent fasting (IF) have been rapidly gaining interest among the general population and patients with cardiometabolic disease, such as overweight or obesity, diabetes, and hypertension. However, there are limited expert recommendations for these dietary regimens. This study aimed to evaluate the level of scientific evidence on the benefits and harms of carbohydrate-restricted diets and IF to make responsible recommendations. A meta-analysis and systematic literature review of 66 articles on 50 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of carbohydrate-restricted diets and 10 articles on eight RCTs of IF was performed. Based on the analysis, the following recommendations are suggested. In adults with overweight or obesity, a moderately-low carbohydrate or low carbohydrate diet (mLCD) can be considered as a dietary regimen for weight reduction. In adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus, mLCD can be considered as a dietary regimen for improving glycemic control and reducing body weight. In contrast, a very-low carbohydrate diet (VLCD) and IF are recommended against in patients with diabetes. Furthermore, no recommendations are suggested for VLCD and IF in adults with overweight or obesity, and carbohydrate-restricted diets and IF in patients with hypertension. Here, we describe the results of our analysis and the evidence for these recommendations.

Low-carbohydrate versus balanced-carbohydrate diets for reducing weight and cardiovascular risk

BACKGROUND

Debates on effective and safe diets for managing obesity in adults are ongoing. Low-carbohydrate weight-reducing diets (also known as 'low-carb diets') continue to be widely promoted, marketed and commercialised as being more effective for weight loss, and healthier, than 'balanced'-carbohydrate weight-reducing diets.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effects of low-carbohydrate weight-reducing diets to weight-reducing diets with balanced ranges of carbohydrates, in relation to changes in weight and cardiovascular risk, in overweight and obese adults without and with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched MEDLINE (PubMed), Embase (Ovid), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Web of Science Core Collection (Clarivate Analytics), ClinicalTrials.gov and WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) up to 25 June 2021, and screened reference lists of included trials and relevant systematic reviews. Language or publication restrictions were not applied.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in adults (18 years+) who were overweight or living with obesity, without or with T2DM, and without or with cardiovascular conditions or risk factors. Trials had to compare low-carbohydrate weight-reducing diets to balanced-carbohydrate (45% to 65% of total energy (TE)) weight-reducing diets, have a weight-reducing phase of 2 weeks or longer and be explicitly implemented for the primary purpose of reducing weight, with or without advice to restrict energy intake.  DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently screened titles and abstracts and full-text articles to determine eligibility; and independently extracted data, assessed risk of bias using RoB 2 and assessed the certainty of the evidence using GRADE. We stratified analyses by participants without and with T2DM, and by diets with weight-reducing phases only and those with weight-reducing phases followed by weight-maintenance phases. Primary outcomes were change in body weight (kg) and the number of participants per group with weight loss of at least 5%, assessed at short- (three months to < 12 months) and long-term (≥ 12 months) follow-up.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 61 parallel-arm RCTs that randomised 6925 participants to either low-carbohydrate or balanced-carbohydrate weight-reducing diets. All trials were conducted in high-income countries except for one in China. Most participants (n = 5118 randomised) did not have T2DM. Mean baseline weight across trials was 95 kg (range 66 to 132 kg). Participants with T2DM were older (mean 57 years, range 50 to 65) than those without T2DM (mean 45 years, range 22 to 62). Most trials included men and women (42/61; 3/19 men only; 16/19 women only), and people without baseline cardiovascular conditions, risk factors or events (36/61). Mean baseline diastolic blood pressure (DBP) and low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol across trials were within normal ranges. The longest weight-reducing phase of diets was two years in participants without and with T2DM. Evidence from studies with weight-reducing phases followed by weight-maintenance phases was limited. Most trials investigated low-carbohydrate diets (> 50 g to 150 g per day or < 45% of TE; n = 42), followed by very low (≤ 50 g per day or < 10% of TE; n = 14), and then incremental increases from very low to low (n = 5). The most common diets compared were low-carbohydrate, balanced-fat (20 to 35% of TE) and high-protein (> 20% of TE) treatment diets versus control diets balanced for the three macronutrients (24/61). In most trials (45/61) the energy prescription or approach used to restrict energy intake was similar in both groups. We assessed the overall risk of bias of outcomes across trials as predominantly high, mostly from bias due to missing outcome data. Using GRADE, we assessed the certainty of evidence as moderate to very low across outcomes.  Participants without and with T2DM lost weight when following weight-reducing phases of both diets at the short (range: 12.2 to 0.33 kg) and long term (range: 13.1 to 1.7 kg).  In overweight and obese participants without T2DM: low-carbohydrate weight-reducing diets compared to balanced-carbohydrate weight-reducing diets (weight-reducing phases only) probably result in little to no difference in change in body weight over three to 8.5 months (mean difference (MD) -1.07 kg, (95% confidence interval (CI) -1.55 to -0.59, I2 = 51%, 3286 participants, 37 RCTs, moderate-certainty evidence) and over one to two years (MD -0.93 kg, 95% CI -1.81 to -0.04, I2 = 40%, 1805 participants, 14 RCTs, moderate-certainty evidence); as well as change in DBP and LDL cholesterol over one to two years. The evidence is very uncertain about whether there is a difference in the number of participants per group with weight loss of at least 5% at one year (risk ratio (RR) 1.11, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.31, I2 = 17%, 137 participants, 2 RCTs, very low-certainty evidence).  In overweight and obese participants with T2DM: low-carbohydrate weight-reducing diets compared to balanced-carbohydrate weight-reducing diets (weight-reducing phases only) probably result in little to no difference in change in body weight over three to six months (MD -1.26 kg, 95% CI -2.44 to -0.09, I2 = 47%, 1114 participants, 14 RCTs, moderate-certainty evidence) and over one to two years (MD -0.33 kg, 95% CI -2.13 to 1.46, I2 = 10%, 813 participants, 7 RCTs, moderate-certainty evidence); as well in change in DBP, HbA1c and LDL cholesterol over 1 to 2 years. The evidence is very uncertain about whether there is a difference in the number of participants per group with weight loss of at least 5% at one to two years (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.20, I2 = 0%, 106 participants, 2 RCTs, very low-certainty evidence).  Evidence on participant-reported adverse effects was limited, and we could not draw any conclusions about these.  AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is probably little to no difference in weight reduction and changes in cardiovascular risk factors up to two years' follow-up, when overweight and obese participants without and with T2DM are randomised to either low-carbohydrate or balanced-carbohydrate weight-reducing diets.

Interactions of Carbohydrate Intake and Physical Activity with Regulatory Genes Affecting Glycaemia: A Food4Me Study Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Carbohydrate intake and physical activity are related to glucose homeostasis, both being influenced by individual genetic makeup. However, the interactions between these 2 factors, as affected by genetics, on glycaemia have been scarcely reported.

OBJECTIVE

We focused on analysing the interplay between carbohydrate intake and physical activity levels on blood glucose, taking into account a genetic risk score (GRS), based on SNPs related to glucose/energy metabolism.

METHODS

A total of 1,271 individuals from the Food4Me cohort, who completed the nutritional intervention, were evaluated at baseline. We collected dietary information by using an online-validated food frequency questionnaire, a questionnaire on physical activity, blood biochemistry by analysis of dried blood spots, and by analysis of selected SNPs. Fifteen out of 31 SNPs, with recognized participation in carbohydrate/energy metabolism, were included in the component analyses. The GRS included risk alleles involved in the control of glycaemia or energy-yielding processes.

RESULTS

Data concerning anthropometric, clinical, metabolic, dietary intake, physical activity, and genetics related to blood glucose levels showed expected trends in European individuals of comparable sex and age, being categorized by lifestyle, BMI, and energy/carbohydrate intakes, in this Food4Me population. Blood glucose was inversely associated with physical activity level (β = -0.041, p = 0.013) and positively correlated with the GRS values (β = 0.015, p = 0.047). Interestingly, an interaction affecting glycaemia, concerning physical activity level with carbohydrate intake, was found (β = -0.060, p = 0.033), which also significantly depended on the genetic background (GRS).

CONCLUSIONS

The relationships of carbohydrate intake and physical activity are important in understanding glucose homeostasis, where a role for the genetic background should be ascribed.

[Effect of a Mediterranean-pattern diet on the metabolic response secondary to weight loss; role of the single nucleotide polymorphism (rs16147) of neuropeptide Y]

Introduction

Background and aims: intervention studies that evaluate the effect of rs16147 on metabolic response and weight change after dietary intervention are scarce. We propose to evaluate the role of the rs16147 genetic variant in the metabolic effects produced by a hypocaloric Mediterranean-pattern diet with high content of omega-9. Material and methods: a sample of 363 obese subjects was recruited. At the baseline visit the patients were randomly assigned to one of two hypocaloric diets for 12 weeks (diet M, Mediterranean pattern; diet C, standard hypocaloric). All patients, at baseline and at 12 weeks, had biochemical and anthropometric variables measured, and genotyping performed for the rs16147 variant. Results: in all subjects, and with both diets, the parameters of adiposity, blood pressure, and circulating leptin improved. In obese subjects with allele (A) insulin levels (GG vs. GA + AA) (-0.9 ± 1.1 IU/L vs. -4.4 ± 1.0 IU/L; p = 0.01) and HOMA-IR (-0.3 ± 0.1 units vs. -1.2 ± 0.3 units; p = 0.02) decreased significantly with diet M. Subjects carrying the minor allele showed a significant decrease in basal insulin levels (GG vs. GA + AA) (0.7 ± 0.3 IU/L vs. -2.2 ± 0.9 IU/L: p = 0.02) and HOMA-IR (-0.3 ± 0.2 units vs. -0.7 ± 0.1 units: p = 0.01) after diet C. This decrease in circulating insulin and HOMA-IR levels in patients with allele A was significantly higher with diet M than with diet C. Conclusions: the A allele of the rs16147 variant produces a better metabolic response in terms of insulin resistance and basal insulin secondary to weight loss with two different hypocaloric diets in obese subjects, with improvement being higher with the Mediterranean diet.