Identifying reliable predictors of long-term weight loss (LTWL) could lead to improved weight management. To identify some predictors of LTWL. The DPP (Diabetes Prevention Program) was a randomized controlled trial that compared weight loss with metformin, intensive lifestyle intervention (ILS), or placebo. Its Outcomes Study (DPPOS) observed patients after the masked treatment phase ended. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00004992 and NCT00038727) 27 DPP and DPPOS clinics. Of the 3234 randomly assigned participants, 1066 lost at least 5% of baseline weight in the first year and were followed for 15 years. Treatment assignment, personal characteristics, and weight. After 1 year, 289 (28.5%) participants in the metformin group, 640 (62.6%) in the ILS group, and 137 (13.4%) in the placebo group had lost at least 5% of their weight. After the masked treatment phase ended, the mean weight loss relative to baseline that was maintained between years 6 and 15 was 6.2% (95% CI, 5.2% to 7.2%) in the metformin group, 3.7% (CI, 3.1% to 4.4%) in the ILS group, and 2.8% (CI, 1.3% to 4.4%) in the placebo group. Independent predictors of LTWL included greater weight loss in the first year in all groups, older age and continued metformin use in the metformin group, older age and absence of either diabetes or a family history of diabetes in the ILS group, and higher fasting plasma glucose levels at baseline in the placebo group. Post hoc analysis; examination of nonrandomized subsets of randomized groups after year 1. Among persons with weight loss of at least 5% after 1 year, those originally randomly assigned to metformin had the greatest loss during years 6 to 15. Older age and the amount of weight initially lost were the most consistent predictors of LTWL maintenance. National Institutes of Health.

Evidence of the effectiveness of treatment for obesity delivered in primary care settings in underserved populations is lacking.

Mobile and tablet apps, ubiquitous and pervasive computing, wearable computing and domotics for health.

Exercise is recommended for weight management, yet exercise produces less weight loss than expected, which is called weight compensation. The mechanisms for weight compensation are unclear. The aim of this study was to identify the mechanisms responsible for compensation. In a randomized controlled trial conducted at an academic research center, adults (n = 198) with overweight or obesity were randomized for 24 wk to a no-exercise control group or 1 of 2 supervised exercise groups: 8 kcal/kg of body weight/wk (KKW) or 20 KKW. Outcome assessment occurred at weeks 0 and 24. Energy intake, activity, and resting metabolic rate (RMR) were measured with doubly labeled water (DLW; with and without adjustments for change in RMR), armband accelerometers, and indirect calorimetry, respectively. Appetite and compensatory health beliefs were measured by self-report. A per-protocol analysis included 171 participants (72.5% women; mean ± SD baseline body mass index: 31.5 ± 4.7 kg/m²). Significant (P < 0.01) compensation occurred in the 8 KKW (mean: 1.5 kg; 95% CI: 0.9, 2.2 kg) and 20 KKW (mean: 2.7 kg; 95% CI: 2.0, 3.5 kg) groups, and compensation differed significantly between the exercise groups (P = 0.01). Energy intake by adjusted DLW increased significantly (P < 0.05) in the 8 KKW (mean: 90.7 kcal/d; 95% CI: 35.1, 146.4 kcal/d) and 20 KKW (mean: 123.6 kcal/d; 95% CI: 64.5, 182.7 kcal/d) groups compared with control (mean: −2.3 kcal/d; 95% CI: −58.0, 53.5 kcal/d). Results were similar without DLW adjustment. RMR and physical activity (excluding structured exercise) did not differentially change among the 3 groups. Participants with higher compared with lower compensation reported increased appetite ratings and beliefs that healthy behaviors can compensate for unhealthy behaviors. Furthermore, they increased craving for sweet foods, increased sleep disturbance, and had worsening bodily pain. Compensation resulted from increased energy intake and concomitant increases in appetite, which can be treated with dietary or pharmacological interventions. Compensation was not due to activity or metabolic changes. This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT01264406.

Objective: Dietary supplements and alternative therapies are commercialized as a panacea for obesity/weight gain as a result of the minimal regulatory requirements in demonstrating efficacy. These products may indirectly undermine the value of guideline‐driven obesity treatments. Included in this study is a systematic review of the literature of purported dietary supplements and alternative therapies for weight loss.Methods: A systematic review was conducted to evaluate the efficacy of dietary supplements and alternative therapies for weight loss in participants aged ≥18 years. Searches of Medline (PubMed), Cochrane Library, Web of Science, CINAHL, and Embase (Ovid) were conducted. Risk of bias and results were summarized qualitatively.Results: Of the 20,504 citations retrieved in the database search, 1,743 full‐text articles were reviewed, 315 of which were randomized controlled trials evaluating the efficacy of 14 purported dietary supplements, therapies, or a combination thereof. Risk of bias and sufficiency of data varied widely. Few studies (n = 52 [16.5%]) were classified as low risk and sufficient to support efficacy. Of these, only 16 (31%) noted significant pre/post intergroup differences in weight (range: 0.3‐4.93 kg).Conclusions: Dietary supplements and alternative therapies for weight loss have a limited high‐quality evidence base of efficacy. Practitioners and patients should be aware of the scientific evidence of claims before recommending use.

Data are limited concerning the dietary factors that influence appetite control in older adults. This study examined the effects of food form and portion size on appetite in 43 older adults (age: 72 ± 1 years; BMI: 25.6 ± 0.3 kg/m²). Subjects were assigned to groups based on portion size of the test meal (12.5% (n = 18) vs. 25% (n = 25) of estimated energy need). Subjects randomly consumed, on two separate days, the respective solid or beverage test meal. Appetite sensations and hormonal responses were measured over 4 h. Main effects of food form (P < 0.05) and/or portion size (P < 0.05) were observed for each appetite sensation. Postprandial hunger and desire to eat were greater following beverage vs. solid meal (between 12.5% vs. 25%), whereas fullness was lower after beverage vs. solid meal (P < 0.05). Main effects of food form and/or portion size were observed for glucose, insulin, and ghrelin. Postprandial glucose and insulin concentrations were lower after beverage vs. solid meal (between 12.5% vs. 25%; all comparisons, P < 0.05) whereas beverage meal led to greater 4‐h ghrelin vs. solid meal (P = 0.09). No main effects were observed for glucagon‐like peptide‐1 (GLP‐1) or cholecystokinin (CCK). When adjusting for age, food form remained significant for postprandial hunger and fullness; portion size remained significant for postprandial glucose. Greater hunger and reduced satiety with accompanying glucose, insulin, and ghrelin following the beverage vs. solid meals, and to some extent, in smaller vs. larger portions suggest that appetite control is influenced by food form and portion size in older adults. These findings may enhance the development of appropriate dietary strategies that help to regulate energy balance.