4.3 Article

Cortisol, hunger, and desire to binge eat following a cold stress test in obese women with binge eating disorder

期刊

PSYCHOSOMATIC MEDICINE
卷 66, 期 6, 页码 876-881

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/01.psy.0000143637.63508.47

关键词

stress responsivity; central fat; eating disorder; pain; obesity; DST

资金

  1. NCRR NIH HHS [M01 RROO64529] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NIDDK NIH HHS [DK 07559, R03 DK068392, DK 54318, R03 DK068392-02] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: Increased basal cortisol levels have been found in bulimia nervosa. After stress, increased cortisol levels have been associated with increased food intake in healthy women. Therefore, we assessed cortisol, hunger, and desire to binge eat after a cold pressor test (CPT) among women with binge eating disorder (BED). Methods: Twenty-two obese (body mass index [BMI] = 36.7 +/- 6.5 SD) females (I I non-BED, I I BED) completed the Zung depression scale and underwent the CPT, hand submerged in ice water for 2 minutes. Over 60 minutes, periodic ratings of hunger and desire to binge eat were obtained, just before blood draws for cortisol, as well as insulin. On a separate day, participants bad a 1-mg oral dexamethasone suppression test (DST). Results: The BED group had higher depression scores than the non-BED (p = .04), but depression was not a significant covariate for the cortisol response or to DST. After controlling for contraceptive use (n = 3), the BED group had higher basal cortisol than the non-BED group (p = .03), but cortisol did not differ after DST (p = .40). The BED group had nearly significant greater cortisol AUC after the CPT (p = .057) after controlling for insulin AUC and contraceptive use (p = .057). The BED group also had greater AUC for hunger (p = .03) and desire to binge eat (p = .02) after the CPT. Conclusion: These findings support our hypothesis of a hyperactive HPA-axis in BED, which may contribute to greater hunger and binge eating.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据