Evidence Hub

Intermittent energy restriction ameliorates adipose tissue-associated inflammation in adults with obesity: A randomised controlled trial

Inês Castela, C. Rodrigues, S. Ismael, Inês Barreiros-Mota, J. Morais, J. Araújo, C. Marques, M. Silvestre et al.

Clinical Nutrition, 2022

14 participants · 32 citations

Abstract

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Although intermittent energy restriction (IER) seems to be as effective as continuous energy restriction (CER) for weight loss, there is still a need to determine the putative effect of this strategy upon the metabolic-inflammatory status. This study aimed to compare the effects of IER versus CER on cardiometabolic and inflammatory markers, over a 12-week period, in adults with obesity.

METHODS

Twenty-eight Norwegian adults (20-55 years) with obesity [body mass index: 35.4 (3.7) kg/m2] from a clinical trial (NCT02169778) who completed a 12-weeks diet-induced weight loss as IER (n = 14) or CER (n = 14) were included in this study. Cardiometabolic, adipokines and inflammatory markers were evaluated at baseline and after the intervention. Plasma levels of 13 inflammatory cytokines and chemokines (IL-1β, IFN-α2, IFN-γ, TNF-α, MCP-1, IL-6, IL-8, IL-10, IL-12, IL-17A, IL-18, IL-23, and IL-33) and 4 adipokines (adiponectin, adipsin, leptin and resistin) were measured through multiplex bead-based flow cytometric immunoassays.

RESULTS

Both interventions resulted in comparable reductions in fasting glucose and insulin concentrations, lipid profile biomarkers, and adipokines. There were significant differences in HOMA-IR between interventions, with a more pronounced reduction in the IER group (-3.7 vs -1.6, P = 0.040). Inflammatory cytokines and chemokines decreased significantly in the IER group only. Differences in the relative changes of IL-1β (-48.5 vs 58.2%, P =…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 14 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free