Dataset Information

High-protein vs. standard-protein diets in overweight and obese patients with heart failure and diabetes mellitus: findings of the Pro-HEART trial.

ABSTRACT:

Aims

The intermediate-term effects of dietary protein on cardiometabolic risk factors in overweight and obese patients with heart failure and diabetes mellitus are unknown. We compared the effect of two calorie-restricted diets on cardiometabolic risk factors in this population.

Methods and results

In this randomized controlled study, 76 overweight and obese (mean weight, 107.8 ± 20.8 kg) patients aged 57.7 ± 9.7 years, 72.4% male, were randomized to a high-protein (30% protein, 40% carbohydrates, and 30% fat) or standard-protein diet (15% protein, 55% carbohydrates, and 30% fat) for 3 months. Reductions in weight and cardiometabolic risks were evaluated at 3 months. Both diets were equally effective in reducing weight (3.6 vs. 2.9 kg) and waist circumference (1.9 vs. 1.3 cm), but the high-protein diet decreased to a greater extent glycosylated haemoglobin levels (0.7% vs. 0.1%, P = 0.002), cholesterol (16.8 vs. 0.9 mg/dL, P = 0.031), and triglyceride (25.7 vs. 5.7 mg/dL, P = 0.032), when compared with the standard-protein diet. The high-protein diet also significantly improved both systolic and diastolic blood pressure than the standard-protein diet (P < 0.001 and P = 0.040, respectively).

Conclusions

Both energy-restricted diets reduced weight and visceral fat. However, the high-protein diet resulted in greater reductions in cardiometabolic risks relative to a standard-protein diet. These results suggest that a high-protein diet may be more effective in reducing cardiometabolic risk in this population, but further trials of longer duration are needed.

SUBMITTER: Evangelista LS

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8006643 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Limited and inconsistent research findings exist about the effect of dietary protein intake on indexes of sleep. OBJECTIVE:We assessed the effect of protein intake during dietary energy restriction on indexes of sleep in overweight and obese adults in 2 randomized, controlled feeding studies. DESIGN:For study 1, 14 participants [3 men and 11 women; mean ± SE age: 56 ± 3 y; body mass index (BMI; in kg/m(2)): 30.9 ± 0.6] consumed energy-restricted diets (a 750-kcal/d deficit) with either beef and pork (BP; n = 5) or soy and legume (SL; n = 9) as the main protein sources for 3 consecutive 4-wk periods with 10% (control), 20%, or 30% of total energy from protein (random order). At baseline and the end of each period, the global sleep score (GSS) was assessed with the use of the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) questionnaire. For study 2, 44 participants (12 men and 32 women; age: 52 ± 1 y; BMI: 31.4 ± 0.5) consumed a 3-wk baseline energy-balance diet with 0.8 g protein · kg baseline body mass(-1) · d(-1). Then, study 2 subjects consumed either a normal-protein [NP (control); n = 23] or a high-protein (HP; n = 21) (0.8 compared with 1.5 g · kg(-1) · d(-1), respectively) energy-restricted diet (a 750-kcal/d deficit) for 16 wk. The PSQI was administered during baseline week 3 and intervention weeks 4, 8, 12, and 16. GSSs ranged from 0 to 21 arbitrary units (au), with a higher value representing a worse GSS during the preceding month. RESULTS:In study 1, we showed that a higher protein quantity improved GSSs independent of the protein source. The GSS was higher (P < 0.05) when 10% (6.0 ± 0.4 au) compared with 20% (5.0 ± 0.4 au) protein was consumed, with 30% protein (5.4 ± 0.6 au) intermediate. In study 2, at baseline, the GSS was not different between NP (5.2 ± 0.5 au) and HP (5.4 ± 0.5 au) groups. Over time, the GSS was unchanged for the NP group and improved for the HP group (P-group-by-time interaction < 0.05). After intervention (week 16), GSSs for NP and HP groups were 5.9 ± 0.5 and 4.0 ± 0.6 au, respectively (P < 0.01). CONCLUSION:The consumption of a greater proportion of energy from protein while dieting may improve sleep in overweight and obese adults. This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT01005563 (study 1) and NCT01692860 (study 2).

Project description:BackgroundReduced calorie, low fat diet is currently recommended diet for overweight and obese adults. Prior data suggest that low carbohydrate diets may also be a viable option for those who are overweight and obese.PurposeCompare the effects of low carbohydrate versus low fats diet on weight and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk in overweight and obese patients.Data sourcesSystematic literature review via PubMed (1966-2014).Study selectionRandomized controlled trials with ≥8 weeks follow up, comparing low carbohydrate (≤120gm carbohydrates/day) and low fat diet (≤30% energy from fat/day).Data extractionData were extracted and prepared for analysis using double data entry. Prior to identification of candidate publications, the outcomes of change in weight and metabolic factors were selected as defined by Cochrane Collaboration. Assessment of the effects of diets on predicted risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk was added during the data collection phase.Data synthesis1797 patients were included from 17 trials with <1 year follow up in 12. Compared with low fat diet, low carbohydrate was associated with significantly greater reduction in weight (Δ = -2.0 kg, 95% CI: -3.1, -0.9) and significantly lower predicted risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease events (p<0.03). Frequentist and Bayesian results were concordant. The probability of greater weight loss associated with low carbohydrate was >99% while the reduction in predicted risk favoring low carbohydrate was >98%.LimitationsLack of patient-level data and heterogeneity in dropout rates and outcomes reported.ConclusionsThis trial-level meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing LoCHO diets with LoFAT diets in strictly adherent populations demonstrates that each diet was associated with significant weight loss and reduction in predicted risk of ASCVD events. However, LoCHO diet was associated with modest but significantly greater improvements in weight loss and predicted ASCVD risk in studies from 8 weeks to 24 months in duration. These results suggest that future evaluations of dietary guidelines should consider low carbohydrate diets as effective and safe intervention for weight management in the overweight and obese, although long-term effects require further investigation.

Project description:Background and aimsLow-carbohydrate diets (LCD) and low-fat diets (LFD) have shown beneficial effects on the management of obesity. Epidemiological studies were conducted to compare the effects of the two diets. However, the results were not always consistent. This study aimed to conduct a meta-analysis to compare the long-term effects of LCD and LFD on metabolic risk factors and weight loss in overweight and obese adults.MethodsWe performed a systematic literature search up to 30 March, 2022 in PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library. The meta-analysis compared the effects of LCD (carbohydrate intake ≤ 40%) with LFD (fat intake < 30%) on metabolic risk factors and weight loss for ≥6 months. Subgroup analyses were performed based on participant characteristics, dietary energy intake, and the proportions of carbohydrates.Results33 studies involving a total of 3,939 participants were included. Compared with participants on LFD, participants on LCD had a greater reduction in triglycerides (-0.14 mmol/L; 95% CI, -0.18 to -0.10 mmol/L), diastolic blood pressure (-0.87 mmHg; 95% CI, -1.41 to -0.32 mmHg), weight loss (-1.33 kg; 95% CI, -1.79 to -0.87 kg), and a greater increase in high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (0.07 mmol/L; 95% CI, 0.06 to 0.09 mmol/L) in 6-23 months. However, the decrease of total cholesterol (0.14 mmol/L; 95% CI, 0.07 to 0.20 mmol/L) and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (0.10 mmol/L; 95% CI, 0.06 to 0.14 mmol/L) was more conducive to LFD in 6-23 months. There was no difference in benefits between the two diets after 24 months. Subgroup analyses showed no significant difference in the reduction of total cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and blood pressure between the two diets in participants with diabetes, hypertension, or hyperlipidemia.ConclusionThe results suggest that LCD and LFD may have specific effects on metabolic risk factors and weight loss in overweight and obese adults over 6 months. At 24 months, the effects on weight loss and improvement of metabolic risk factors were at least the same. These indicated that we might choose different diets to manage the overweight and obese subjects. However, the long-term clinical efficacy and effects of various sources of carbohydrates or fat in the two diets need to be studied in the future.

Project description:Background & aimsMany companies provide genetic tests for obesity-related polymorphisms (nutrigenetics) and make dietary recommendations for weight loss that are based on the results. We performed a randomized controlled trial to determine whether more participants who followed a nutrigenetic-guided diet lost ≥5% of their body weight than participants on a standard balanced diet for 8 and 24 weeks.MethodsWe performed a prospective study of 51 obese or overweight U.S. veterans on an established weight management program at the Veterans Administration San Diego Healthcare System (the MOVE! program). Participants were randomly assigned to groups placed on a nutrigenetic-guided diet (balanced, low-carbohydrate, low-fat, or Mediterranean; n = 30) or a standard balanced diet (n = 21). Nutrigenetic diets were selected on the basis of results from the Pathway FIT test.ResultsThere was no significant difference in the percentage of participants on the balanced diet vs the nutrigenetic-guided diet who lost 5% of their body weight at 8 weeks (35.0% ± 20.9% vs 26.9% ± 17.1%, respectively; P = .28) or at 24 weeks. Both groups had difficulty adhering to the diets. However, adherence to the nutrigenetic-guided diet correlated with weight loss (r = 0.74; P = 4.0 × 10(-5)), but not adherence to standard therapy (r = 0.34; P = .23). Participants who had low-risk polymorphisms for obesity lost more weight than all other participants at 8 weeks (5.0% vs 2.9%, respectively; P = .02) and had significantly greater reductions in body mass index (6.4% vs 3.6%, respectively; P = .03) and waist circumference (6.5% vs 2.6%, respectively; P = .02) at 24 weeks.ConclusionsIn a prospective study, a nutrigenetic-based diet did not increase weight loss compared with a standard balanced diet. However, genetic features can identify individuals most likely to benefit from a balanced diet weight loss strategy; these findings require further investigation. ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT01859403.