% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded. This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.
@ARTICLE{Schbel:141907,
author = {R. Schübel$^*$ and J. Nattenmüller$^*$ and D. Sookthai
and T. Nonnenmacher$^*$ and M. E. Graf$^*$ and L. Riedl and
C. L. Schlett and O. von Stackelberg and T. S. Johnson$^*$
and D. Nabers and R. Kirsten and M. Kratz and H.-U. Kauczor
and C. M. Ulrich and R. Kaaks$^*$ and T. Kühn$^*$},
title = {{E}ffects of intermittent and continuous calorie
restriction on body weight and metabolism over 50 wk: a
randomized controlled trial.},
journal = {The American journal of clinical nutrition},
volume = {108},
number = {5},
issn = {1938-3207},
address = {Oxford},
publisher = {Oxford University Press},
reportid = {DKFZ-2018-02164},
pages = {933 - 945},
year = {2018},
abstract = {Although preliminary evidence suggests that intermittent
calorie restriction (ICR) exerts stronger effects on
metabolic parameters, which may link obesity and major
chronic diseases, compared with continuous calorie
restriction (CCR), there is a lack of well-powered
intervention studies.We conducted a randomized controlled
trial to test whether ICR, operationalized as the '5:2
diet,' has stronger effects on adipose tissue gene
expression, anthropometric and body composition measures,
and circulating metabolic biomarkers than CCR and a control
regimen.One hundred and fifty overweight and obese
nonsmokers [body mass index (kg/m2) ≥25 to <40, $50\%$
women], aged 35-65 y, were randomly assigned to an ICR group
(5 d without energy restriction and 2 d with $75\%$ energy
deficit, net weekly energy deficit $∼20\%),$ a CCR group
(daily energy deficit $∼20\%),$ or a control group (no
advice to restrict energy) and participated in a 12-wk
intervention phase, a 12-wk maintenance phase, and a 26-wk
follow-up phase.Loge relative weight change over the
intervention phase was $-7.1\% ± 0.7\%$ (mean ± SEM)
with ICR, $-5.2\% ± 0.6\%$ with CCR, and
$-3.3\% ± 0.6\%$ with the control regimen
(Poverall < 0.001, PICR vs. CCR = 0.053). Despite
slightly greater weight loss with ICR than with CCR, there
were no significant differences between the groups in the
expression of 82 preselected genes in adipose tissue
implicated in pathways linking obesity to chronic diseases.
At the final follow-up assessment (week 50), weight loss was
$-5.2\% ± 1.2\%$ with ICR, $-4.9\% ± 1.1\%$ with CCR,
and $-1.7\% ± 0.8\%$ with the control regimen
(Poverall = 0.01, PICR vs. CCR = 0.89). These effects
were paralleled by proportional changes in visceral and
subcutaneous adipose tissue volumes. There were no
significant differences between ICR and CCR regarding
various circulating metabolic biomarkers.Our results on the
effects of the '5:2 diet' indicate that ICR may be
equivalent but not superior to CCR for weight reduction and
prevention of metabolic diseases. This trial was registered
at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT02449148.},
cin = {C020},
ddc = {570},
cid = {I:(DE-He78)C020-20160331},
pnm = {313 - Cancer risk factors and prevention (POF3-313)},
pid = {G:(DE-HGF)POF3-313},
typ = {PUB:(DE-HGF)16},
pubmed = {pmid:30475957},
doi = {10.1093/ajcn/nqy196},
url = {https://inrepo02.dkfz.de/record/141907},
}