6 research outputs found

    A new era in gut-hormone based pharmacotherapy for people with obesity

    Get PDF

    Does a Ketogenic Diet Have a Place Within Diabetes Clinical Practice? Review of Current Evidence and Controversies

    Get PDF
    Carbohydrate restriction has gained increasing popularity as an adjunctive nutritional therapy for diabetes management. However, controversy remains regarding the long-term suitability, safety, efficacy and potential superiority of a very low carbohydrate, ketogenic diet compared to current recommended nutritional approaches for diabetes management. Recommendations with respect to a ketogenic diet in clinical practice are often hindered by the lack of established definition, which prevents its capacity to be most appropriately prescribed as a therapeutic option for diabetes. Furthermore, with conflicted evidence, this has led to uncertainty amongst clinicians on how best to support and advise their patients. This review will explore whether a ketogenic diet has a place within clinical practice by reviewing current evidence and controversies

    Does a Ketogenic Diet Have a Place Within Diabetes Clinical Practice? Review of Current Evidence and Controversies

    Get PDF
    Carbohydrate restriction has gained increasing popularity as an adjunctive nutritional therapy for diabetes management. However, controversy remains regarding the long-term suitability, safety, efficacy and potential superiority of a very low carbohydrate, ketogenic diet compared to current recommended nutritional approaches for diabetes management. Recommendations with respect to a ketogenic diet in clinical practice are often hindered by the lack of established definition, which prevents its capacity to be most appropriately prescribed as a therapeutic option for diabetes. Furthermore, with conflicted evidence, this has led to uncertainty amongst clinicians on how best to support and advise their patients. This review will explore whether a ketogenic diet has a place within clinical practice by reviewing current evidence and controversies

    Safety and Efficacy of Liraglutide, 3.0 mg, Once Daily vs Placebo in Patients With Poor Weight Loss Following Metabolic Surgery: The BARI-OPTIMISE Randomized Clinical Trial

    Get PDF
    IMPORTANCE: Metabolic surgery leads to weight loss and improved health, but these outcomes are highly variable. Poor weight loss is associated with lower circulating levels of glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1). OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy and safety of the GLP-1 receptor agonist, liraglutide, 3.0 mg, on percentage body weight reduction in patients with poor weight loss and suboptimal GLP-1 response after metabolic surgery. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The Evaluation of Liraglutide 3.0 mg in Patients With Poor Weight Loss and a Suboptimal Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Response (BARI-OPTIMISE) randomized placebo-controlled trial recruited adult patients at least 1 year after metabolic surgery who had experienced 20% or less body weight loss from the day of surgery and a suboptimal nutrient-stimulated GLP-1 response from 2 hospitals in London, United Kingdom, between October 2018 and November 2019. Key exclusion criteria were type 1 diabetes; severe concomitant psychiatric, gastrointestinal, cardiac, kidney or metabolic disease; and use of insulin, GLP-1 receptor analogues, and medication that can affect weight. The study period was 24 weeks followed by a 4-week follow-up period. Last participant follow-up was completed in June 2020. All participants and clinical study personnel were blinded to treatment allocation. Of 154 assessed for eligibility, 70 met trial criteria and were included in the study, and 57 completed follow-up. INTERVENTIONS: Liraglutide, 3.0 mg, once daily or placebo as an adjunct to lifestyle intervention with a 500-kcal daily energy deficit for 24 weeks, on a 1:1 allocation by computer-generated randomization sequence, stratified by surgery type (Roux-en-Y gastric bypass [RYGB] or sleeve gastrectomy [SG]) and type 2 diabetes status. MAIN OUTCOME AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was change in percentage body weight from baseline to the end of the 24-week study period based on an intention-to-treat analysis. Participant safety was assessed through monitoring of biochemical parameters, including kidney and liver function, physical examination, and assessment for adverse events. RESULTS: A total of 70 participants (mean [SD] age, 47.6 [10.7] years; 52 [74%] female) with a poor weight loss response following RYGB or SG were randomized to receive 3.0-mg liraglutide (n = 35) or placebo (n = 35). All participants received at least 1 dose of the trial drug. Eight participants discontinued treatment (4 per group), and 2 in the 3.0-mg liraglutide group and 1 in the placebo group were lost to follow-up. Due to COVID-19 restrictions, 3 participants in the 3.0-mg liraglutide group and 7 in the placebo group were unable to attend their final in-person assessment. Estimated change in mean (SD) percentage body weight from baseline to week 24 was -8.82 (4.94) with liraglutide, 3.0 mg (n = 31), vs -0.54 (3.32) with placebo (n = 26). The mean difference in percentage body weight change for liraglutide, 3.0 mg, vs placebo was -8.03 (95% CI, -10.39 to -5.66; P < .001). Adverse events, predominantly gastrointestinal, were more frequent with liraglutide, 3.0 mg (28 events [80%]), than placebo (20 events [57%]). There were no serious adverse events and no treatment-related deaths. CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: These findings support the use of adjuvant liraglutide, 3.0 mg, for weight management in patients with poor weight loss and suboptimal GLP-1 response after metabolic surgery. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03341429

    Suitability and Allocation of Protein-Containing Foods According to Protein Tolerance in PKU: A 2022 UK National Consensus.

    Get PDF
    Introduction: There is little practical guidance about suitable food choices for higher natural protein tolerances in patients with phenylketonuria (PKU). This is particularly important to consider with the introduction of adjunct pharmaceutical treatments that may improve protein tolerance. Aim: To develop a set of guidelines for the introduction of higher protein foods into the diets of patients with PKU who tolerate >10 g/day of protein. Methods: In January 2022, a 26-item food group questionnaire, listing a range of foods containing protein from 5 to >20 g/100 g, was sent to all British Inherited Metabolic Disease Group (BIMDG) dietitians (n = 80; 26 Inherited Metabolic Disease [IMD] centres). They were asked to consider within their IMD dietetic team when they would recommend introducing each of the 26 protein-containing food groups into a patient’s diet who tolerated >10 g to 60 g/day of protein. The patient protein tolerance for each food group that received the majority vote from IMD dietetic teams was chosen as its tolerance threshold for introduction. A virtual meeting was held using Delphi methodology in March 2022 to discuss and agree final consensus. Results: Responses were received from dietitians from 22/26 IMD centres (85%) (11 paediatric, 11 adult). For patients tolerating protein ≥15 g/day, the following foods were agreed for inclusion: gluten-free pastas, gluten-free flours, regular bread, cheese spreads, soft cheese, and lentils in brine; for protein tolerance ≥20 g/day: nuts, hard cheeses, regular flours, meat/fish, and plant-based alternative products (containing 5−10 g/100 g protein), regular pasta, seeds, eggs, dried legumes, and yeast extract spreads were added; for protein tolerance ≥30 g/day: meat/fish and plant-based alternative products (containing >10−20 g/100 g protein) were added; and for protein tolerance ≥40 g/day: meat/fish and plant-based alternatives (containing >20 g/100 g protein) were added. Conclusion: This UK consensus by IMD dietitians from 22 UK centres describes for the first time the suitability and allocation of higher protein foods according to individual patient protein tolerance. It provides valuable guidance for health professionals to enable them to standardize practice and give rational advice to patients

    Uniformity of Food Protein Interpretation Amongst Dietitians for Patients with Phenylketonuria (PKU): 2020 UK National Consensus Statements.

    Get PDF
    In phenylketonuria (PKU), variable dietary advice provided by health professionals and social media leads to uncertainty for patients/caregivers reliant on accurate, evidence based dietary information. Over four years, 112 consensus statements concerning the allocation of foods in a low phenylalanine diet for PKU were developed by the British Inherited Metabolic Disease Dietitians Group (BIMDG-DG) from 34 PKU treatment centres, utilising 10 rounds of Delphi consultation to gain a majority (≥75%) decision. A mean of 29 UK dietitians (range: 18-40) and 18 treatment centres (range: 13-23) contributed in each round. Statements encompassed all foods/food groups divided into four categories based on defined protein/phenylalanine content: (1) foods high in protein/phenylalanine (best avoided); (2) foods allowed without restriction including fruit/vegetables containing phenylalanine ≤75 mg/100 g and most foods containing protein ≤0.5 g/100 g; (3) foods that should be calculated/weighed as an exchange food if they contain protein exchange ingredients (categorized into foods with a protein content of: >0.1 g/100 g (milk/plant milks only), >0.5 g/100 g (bread/pasta/cereal/flours), >1 g/100 g (cook-in/table-top sauces/dressings), >1.5 g/100 g (soya sauces)); and (4) fruit/vegetables containing phenylalanine >75 mg/100 g allocated as part of the protein/phenylalanine exchange system. These statements have been endorsed and translated into practical dietary management advice by the medical advisory dietitians for the National Society for PKU (NSPKU)
    corecore