4.8 Article

Diets with High or Low Protein Content and Glycemic Index for Weight-Loss Maintenance.

Journal

NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE
Volume 363, Issue 22, Pages 2102-2113

Publisher

MASSACHUSETTS MEDICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1007137

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. European Commission [FP6-2005-513946]
  2. Almond Board of California
  3. Arla
  4. Campina
  5. Astellas Pharma
  6. Nutrition et Sante (Belgium)
  7. Asociacion General Fabricantes de Azucar (Spain)
  8. Top Institute Food and Nutrition (Wageningen, the Netherlands)
  9. Commercial obesity treatment center, Center for Obesity Europe (Heerlen, the Netherlands)
  10. Danone Medical Nutrition
  11. Bundesministerium fur Bildung und Forschung
  12. German Diabetes Foundation
  13. Bayer
  14. Rettenmayer
  15. Sohne
  16. Tanita UK
  17. Rosemary Conley Enterprises for the development of educational presentations
  18. World Cancer Research Fund
  19. Tanita
  20. WeightWatchers
  21. CocaCola
  22. Sanofi-Aventis
  23. Unilever
  24. Institute Danone
  25. Milcom-Dairy Research Institute of the Federation of the Food and Drink Industries of the Czech Republic
  26. Novo Nordisk
  27. Abbott Laboratories
  28. Merck
  29. Pfizer
  30. Novartis
  31. Kowa Research Institute
  32. Roche
  33. Johnson Johnson
  34. Cyncron
  35. Parexel
  36. AstraZeneca
  37. Janssen-Cilag
  38. Nutrition and Sante (Belgium)
  39. Dutch Dairy Foundation
  40. Medical Research Council [MC_U105960389] Funding Source: researchfish
  41. MRC [MC_U105960389] Funding Source: UKRI

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Studies of weight-control diets that are high in protein or low in glycemic index have reached varied conclusions, probably owing to the fact that the studies had insufficient power. Methods: We enrolled overweight adults from eight European countries who had lost at least 8% of their initial body weight with a 3.3-MJ (800-kcal) low-calorie diet. Participants were randomly assigned, in a two-by-two factorial design, to one of five ad libitum diets to prevent weight regain over a 26-week period: a low-protein and low-glycemic-index diet, a low-protein and high-glycemic-index diet, a high-protein and low-glycemic-index diet, a high-protein and high-glycemic-index diet, or a control diet. Results: A total of 1209 adults were screened (mean age, 41 years; body-mass index [the weight in kilograms divided by the square of the height in meters], 34), of whom 938 entered the low-calorie-diet phase of the study. A total of 773 participants who completed that phase were randomly assigned to one of the five maintenance diets; 548 completed the intervention (71%). Fewer participants in the high-protein and the low-glycemic-index groups than in the low-protein-high-glycemic-index group dropped out of the study (26.4% and 25.6%, respectively, vs. 37.4%; P=0.02 and P=0.01 for the respective comparisons). The mean initial weight loss with the low-calorie diet was 11.0 kg. In the analysis of participants who completed the study, only the low-protein-high-glycemic-index diet was associated with subsequent significant weight regain (1.67 kg; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.48 to 2.87). In an intention-to-treat analysis, the weight regain was 0.93 kg less (95% CI, 0.31 to 1.55) in the groups assigned to a high-protein diet than in those assigned to a low-protein diet (P=0.003) and 0.95 kg less (95% CI, 0.33 to 1.57) in the groups assigned to a low-glycemic-index diet than in those assigned to a high-glycemic-index diet (P=0.003). The analysis involving participants who completed the intervention produced similar results. The groups did not differ significantly with respect to diet-related adverse events. Conclusions: In this large European study, a modest increase in protein content and a modest reduction in the glycemic index led to an improvement in study completion and maintenance of weight loss. (Funded by the European Commission; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00390637.) N Engl J Med 2010;363:2102-13.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available