4.1 Article Proceedings Paper

Chromium Picolinate Does Not Improve Key Features of Metabolic Syndrome in Obese Nondiabetic Adults

Journal

METABOLIC SYNDROME AND RELATED DISORDERS
Volume 7, Issue 2, Pages 143-150

Publisher

MARY ANN LIEBERT, INC
DOI: 10.1089/met.2008.0048

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. NCCIH NIH HHS [K-23 AT-00058] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NCRR NIH HHS [M01-RR00040] Funding Source: Medline
  3. NIDDK NIH HHS [R21DK067241] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: The use of chromium-containing dietary supplements is widespread among patients with type 2 diabetes. Chromium's effects in patients at high risk for developing diabetes, especially those with metabolic syndrome, is unknown. The objective of this study was to determine the effects of chromium picolinate (CrPic) on glucose metabolism in patients with metabolic syndrome. Method: A double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized trial was conducted at a U. S. academic medical center. Sixty three patients with National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) Adult Treatment Panel III (ATP III)-defined metabolic syndrome were included. The primary end point was a change in the insulin sensitivity index derived from a frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance test. Prespecified secondary end points included changes in other measurements of glucose metabolism, oxidative stress, fasting serum lipids, and high sensitivity C-reactive protein. Results: After 16 weeks of CrPic treatment, there was no significant change in insulin sensitivity index between groups (P = 0.14). However, CrPic increased acute insulin response to glucose (P = 0.02). CrPic had no significant effect on other measures of glucose metabolism, body weight, serum lipids, or measures of inflammation and oxidative stress. Conclusion: CrPic at 1000 mu g/day does not improve key features of the metabolic syndrome in obese nondiabetic patients.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available