Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2019 Oct 2;2(10):e1913733.
doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.13733.

Effect of Weight Loss via Severe vs Moderate Energy Restriction on Lean Mass and Body Composition Among Postmenopausal Women With Obesity: The TEMPO Diet Randomized Clinical Trial

Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Effect of Weight Loss via Severe vs Moderate Energy Restriction on Lean Mass and Body Composition Among Postmenopausal Women With Obesity: The TEMPO Diet Randomized Clinical Trial

Radhika V Seimon et al. JAMA Netw Open. .

Abstract

Importance: Severely energy-restricted diets are the most effective dietary obesity treatment. However, there are concerns regarding potential adverse effects on body composition.

Objective: To compare the long-term effects of weight loss via severe vs moderate energy restriction on lean mass and other aspects of body composition.

Design, setting, and participants: The Type of Energy Manipulation for Promoting Optimum Metabolic Health and Body Composition in Obesity (TEMPO) Diet Trial was a 12-month, single-center, randomized clinical trial. A total of 101 postmenopausal women, aged 45 to 65 years with body mass index (calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared) from 30 to 40, who were at least 5 years after menopause, had fewer than 3 hours of structured physical activity per week, and lived in the Sydney metropolitan area of New South Wales, Australia, were recruited between March 2013 and July 2016. Data analysis was conducted between October 2018 and August 2019.

Intervention: Participants were randomized to either 12 months of moderate (25%-35%) energy restriction with a food-based diet (moderate intervention) or 4 months of severe (65%-75%) energy restriction with a total meal replacement diet followed by moderate energy restriction for an additional 8 months (severe intervention). Both interventions had a prescribed protein intake of 1.0 g/kg of actual body weight per day, and physical activity was encouraged but not supervised.

Main outcomes and measures: The primary outcome was whole-body lean mass at 12 months after commencement of intervention. Secondary outcomes were body weight, thigh muscle area and muscle function (strength), bone mineral density, and fat mass and distribution, measured at 0, 4, 6, and 12 months.

Results: A total of 101 postmenopausal women were recruited (mean [SD] age, 58.0 [4.2] years; mean [SD] weight, 90.8 [9.1] kg; mean [SD] body mass index, 34.4 [2.5]). Compared with the moderate group at 12 months, the severe group lost more weight (effect size, -6.6 kg; 95% CI, -8.2 to -5.1 kg), lost more whole-body lean mass (effect size, -1.2 kg; 95% CI, -2.0 to -0.4 kg), and lost more thigh muscle area (effect size, -4.2 cm2; 95% CI, -6.5 to -1.9 cm2). However, decreases in whole-body lean mass and thigh muscle area were proportional to total weight loss, and there was no difference in muscle (handgrip) strength between groups. Total hip bone mineral density (effect size, -0.017 g/cm2; 95% CI, -0.029 to -0.005 g/cm2), whole-body fat mass (effect size, -5.5 kg; 95% CI, -7.1 to -3.9 kg), abdominal subcutaneous adipose tissue (effect size, -1890 cm3; 95% CI, -2560 to -1219 cm3), and visceral adipose tissue (effect size, -1389 cm3; 95% CI, -1748 to -1030 cm3) loss were also greater for the severe group than for the moderate group at 12 months.

Conclusions and relevance: Severe energy restriction had no greater adverse effect on relative whole-body lean mass or handgrip strength compared with moderate energy restriction and was associated with 2-fold greater weight and fat loss over 12 months. However, there was significantly greater loss of total hip bone mineral density with severe vs moderate energy restriction. Therefore, caution is necessary when implementing severe energy restriction in postmenopausal women, particularly those with osteopenia or osteoporosis.

Trial registration: anzctr.org.au Identifier: 12612000651886.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of Interest Disclosures: Dr Seimon reported serving on the Nestlé Health Science Optifast VLCD advisory board. Dr Gibson reported receiving payment from the Pharmacy Guild of Australia and from Nestlé Health Science for presentations at conferences. Dr Fernando reported being employed by the University of Sydney as a tutor. Dr Markovic reported serving on the NovoNordisk Obesity advisory board and the Nestlé Health Science Optifast VLCD advisory board; receiving funds for performing a clinical trial from the Australian Egg Corporation, and giving talks on obesity for NovoNordisk. Dr Center reported receiving support and honoraria for educational talks and/or advisory meetings from Amgen, Teva Pharmaceutical Industries, and Bayer and receiving an investigator-sponsored grant from Amgen. Dr Caterson reported being a past president of the World Obesity Federation; receiving funds for performing clinical trials from the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia, SFI, the Australian Egg Corporation, Novo Nordisk, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and Pfizer; giving talks on obesity for Servier Laboratories and Novo Nordisk; chairing the independent steering committee for the ACTION IO Study; and receiving grants from Rhythm Pharmaceuticals. Dr Sainsbury reported owning 50% of the shares in Zuman International, which receives royalties for books she has written and payments for presentations at industry conferences; receiving presentation fees and travel reimbursements from Eli Lilly and Co, the Pharmacy Guild of Australia, Novo Nordisk, the Dietitians Association of Australia, Shoalhaven Family Medical Centres, the Pharmaceutical Society of Australia, and Metagenics; and serving on the Nestlé Health Science Optifast VLCD advisory board from 2016 to 2018. No other disclosures were reported.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.. Trial Flow Diagram
The moderate intervention involved a food-based diet with a 25% to 35% energy restriction for a total of 12 months (52 weeks). The severe intervention involved total diet replacement with 65% to 75% energy restriction for 4 months (16 weeks) or until a body mass index (calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared) of no lower than 20 was reached, whichever came first, followed by moderate energy restriction until 12 months (52 weeks).
Figure 2.
Figure 2.. Weight Changes in Postmenopausal Women With Obesity During the Type of Energy Manipulation for Promoting Optimum Metabolic Health and Body Composition in Obesity (TEMPO) Diet Trial
A, Weight data presented as estimated marginal means, ie, group means after controlling for covariates. B, Weight change at 12 months as percentage change from baseline for each participant in the severe and moderate groups. The dotted line indicates 10% weight loss. For both panels, the severe intervention included 50 participants and the moderate intervention, 51. aP < .001 vs baseline value within group. bP < .05 vs the moderate group at that point.
Figure 3.
Figure 3.. Effect of Severe vs Moderate Energy Restriction on Body Composition in Postmenopausal Women With Obesity
Data are presented as estimated marginal means (ie, group means after controlling for covariates). Baseline values were the covariates in the statistical analysis model. Whiskers indicate SEs of the means. BMD indicates bone mineral density. aP < .05 vs baseline value within group. bP < .05 vs the moderate group at that point.

Comment in

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Knowler WC, Fowler SE, Hamman RF, et al. ; Diabetes Prevention Program Research Group . 10-year follow-up of diabetes incidence and weight loss in the Diabetes Prevention Program Outcomes Study. Lancet. 2009;374(9702):-. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(09)61457-4 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Colagiuri S, Lee CM, Colagiuri R, et al. . The cost of overweight and obesity in Australia. Med J Aust. 2010;192(5):260-264. - PubMed
    1. Anderson JW, Konz EC, Frederich RC, Wood CL. Long-term weight-loss maintenance: a meta-analysis of US studies. Am J Clin Nutr. 2001;74(5):579-584. doi:10.1093/ajcn/74.5.579 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Parretti HM, Jebb SA, Johns DJ, Lewis AL, Christian-Brown AM, Aveyard P. Clinical effectiveness of very-low-energy diets in the management of weight loss: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Obes Rev. 2016;17(3):225-234. doi:10.1111/obr.12366 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Delbridge E, Proietto J. State of the science: VLED (very low energy diet) for obesity. Asia Pac J Clin Nutr. 2006;15(suppl):49-54. - PubMed

Publication types