(1) Background: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the effects of folic acid supplementation on oxidative stress markers. (2) Methods: Online database including PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane were searched up to January 2021, to retrieve randomized controlled trials (RCTs) which examined the effect of folic acid supplementation on markers of oxidative stress. Meta-analyses were carried out using a random-effects model. I² index was used to evaluate the heterogeneity of RCTs. (3) Results: Among the initial 2322 studies that were identified from electronic databases search, 13 studies involving 1013 participants were eligible. Pooled effect size from 13 studies indicated that folic acid supplementation elicits a significant rise in serum concentrations of glutathione (GSH) (WMD: 219.01 umol/L, 95% CI 59.30 to 378.71, p = 0.007) and total antioxidant capacity (TAC) (WMD: 91.70 umol/L, 95% CI 40.52 to 142.88, p < 0.001) but has no effect on serum concentrations of nitric oxide (NO) (WMD: 2.61 umol/L, 95% CI −3.48 to 8.72, p = 0.400). In addition, folic acid supplementation significantly reduced serum concentrations of malondialdehyde (MDA) (WMD: −0.13 umol/L, 95% CI −0.24 to −0.02, p = 0.020). (4) Conclusions: This meta-analysis study suggests that folic acid supplementation may significantly improve markers within the antioxidative defense system by increasing serum concentrations of GSH and TAC and decreasing serum concentrations of MDA.

This systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) compared body compositional changes, including fat mass (FM), body fat percentage (BF%), and fat-free mass (FFM), between different types of high-intensity interval training (HIIT) (cycling vs. overground running vs. treadmill running) as well as to a control (i.e., no exercise) condition. Meta-analyses were carried out using a random-effects model. The I² index was used to assess the heterogeneity of RCTs. Thirty-six RCTs lasting between 3 to 15 weeks were included in the current systematic review and meta-analysis. RCTs that examined the effect of HIIT type on FM, BF%, and FFM were sourced from online databases including PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar up to 21 June 2022. HIIT (all modalities combined) induced a significant reduction in FM (weighted mean difference [WMD]: −1.86 kg, 95% CI: −2.55 to −1.18, p = 0.001) despite a medium between-study heterogeneity (I² = 63.3, p = 0.001). Subgroup analyses revealed cycling and overground running reduced FM (WMD: −1.72 kg, 95% CI: −2.41 to −1.30, p = 0.001 and WMD: −4.25 kg, 95% CI: −5.90 to −2.61, p = 0.001, respectively); however, there was no change with treadmill running (WMD: −1.10 kg, 95% CI: −2.82 to 0.62, p = 0.210). There was a significant reduction in BF% with HIIT (all modalities combined) compared to control (WMD: −1.53%, 95% CI: −2.13, −0.92, p = 0.001). All forms of HIIT also decreased BF%; however, overground running induced the largest overall effect (WMD: −2.80%, 95% CI: −3.89 to −1.71, p = 0.001). All types of HIIT combined also induced an overall significant improvement in FFM (WMD: 0.51 kg, 95% CI: 0.06 to 0.95, p = 0.025); however, only cycling interventions resulted in a significant increase in FFM compared to other exercise modalities (WMD: 0.63 kg, 95% CI: 0.17 to 1.09, p = 0.007). Additional subgroup analyses suggest that training for more than 8 weeks, at least 3 sessions per week, with work intervals less than 60 s duration and separated by ≤90 s active recovery are more effective for eliciting favorable body composition changes. Results from this meta-analysis demonstrate favorable body composition outcomes following HIIT (all modalities combined) with overall reductions in BF% and FM and improved FFM observed. Overall, cycling-based HIIT may confer the greatest effects on body composition due to its ability to reduce BF% and FM while increasing FFM.

Previous studies have indicated that curcumin supplementation may be beneficial for cardiometabolic health; however, current evidence regarding the effects of its nanorange formulations, popularly known as “nano-curcumin”, remains unclear. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to determine the impact of nano-curcumin supplementation on risk factors for cardiovascular disease. PubMed, Scopus, Embase, and ISI web of science were systematically searched up to May 2021 using relevant keywords. All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the effects of nano-curcumin supplementation on cardiovascular disease risk factors were included. Meta-analysis was performed using random-effects models, and subgroup analysis was performed to explore variations by dose and baseline risk profiles. According to the results of this study, nano-curcumin supplementation was associated with improvements in the glycemic profile by decreasing fasting blood glucose (FBG) (WMD: −18.14 mg/dL; 95% CI: −29.31 to −6.97; p = 0.001), insulin (WMD: −1.21 mg/dL; 95% CI: −1.43 to −1.00; p < 0.001), and HOMA-IR (WMD: −0.28 mg/dL; 95% CI: −0.33 to −0.23; p < 0.001). Interestingly, nano-curcumin supplementation resulted in increases in high-density lipoprotein (HDL) (WMD: 5.77 mg/dL; 95% CI: 2.90 to 8.64; p < 0.001). In terms of other lipid profile markers (triglyceride (TG), total cholesterol (TC), and low-density lipoprotein (LDL)), subgroup analyses showed that nano-curcumin supplementation had more favorable effects on lipid profiles in individuals with dyslipidemia at baseline. Nano-curcumin supplementation also showed favorable anti-inflammatory effects by decreasing C-reactive protein (CRP) (WMD: −1.29 mg/L; 95% CI: −2.15 to −0.44; p = 0.003) and interleukin-6 (IL-6) (WMD: −2.78 mg/dL; 95% CI: −3.76 to −1.79; p < 0.001). Moreover, our results showed the hypotensive effect of nano-curcumin, evidenced by a decrease in systolic blood pressure (SBP). In conclusion, our meta-analysis suggests that nano-curcumin supplementation may decline cardiovascular disease risk by improving glycemic and lipid profiles, inflammation, and SBP. Future large-scale investigations with longer durations are needed to expand on our findings.

This systematic review and meta-analysis compared the effects of different rates of weight loss (WL), but equivalent total WL, on body composition and resting metabolic rate (RMR). Studies examining gradual vs. rapid WL on body composition and RMR in participants with overweight/obesity published up to October 2019 were identified through PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Embase, SCOPUS, and Ovid databases. Meta-analysis was carried out using a fixed or random-effects model as appropriate. Although the magnitude of WL was similar (mean difference: 0.03 kg, 95% CI [-0.65, 0.71]), gradual WL promoted greater reductions in fat mass (FM) (-1 kg, 95% CI [-1.70, -0.29]) and body fat percentage (BFP) (-0.83%, 95% CI [-1.49, -0.17]). Gradual WL significantly preserved RMR compared with rapid WL (97.39 kcal, 95% CI [76.76, 118.01]). However, there was no significant difference in waist and hip circumferences, waist-to-hip ratio (WHR), and fat-free mass (FFM) between gradual and rapid WL. The present systematic review and meta-analysis indicates beneficial effects of gradual WL, as compared to rapid WL, on FM, BFP, and RMR in individuals with overweight/obesity. However, FFM changes and anthropometric indices did not significantly differ following different rates of WL.

Background: Chronic inflammation associated with breast cancer (BC) poses a major challenge in care management and may be ameliorated by physical activity. This randomized controlled trial assessed the effects of a 12-week high-intensity interval training (HIIT) and moderate-intensity continuous training (MICT) on inflammatory markers, body composition, and physical fitness in BC survivors (BCS). Methods: Forty BCS (age = 57 ± 1 years; body mass [BM] = 74.8 ± 1.5 kg; VO_2peak = 20.8 ± 2.1 mL·kg⁻¹·min⁻¹) were randomly assigned to three groups: HIIT (n = 15), MICT (n = 15), or control (CON; n = 15). The intervention groups (HIIT and MICT) performed their respective exercise protocols on a cycle ergometer 3 days/week for 12 weeks while the CON group maintained their current lifestyle. Baseline and post-intervention assessments included body composition (BM, fat mass (FM), lean mass (LM)), physical fitness (VO_2peak, lower body strength (LBS), upper body strength (UBS)), and serum concentrations of tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α), interleukin-6 (IL-6), interleukin-8 (IL-8), interleukin-10 (IL-10), leptin, and adiponectin. Results: Both intervention groups significantly (p < 0.05) decreased BM (HIIT = −1.8 kg, MICT = −0.91 kg), FM (HIIT = −0.81 kg, MICT = −0.18 kg), TNF-α (HIIT = −1.84 pg/mL, MICT = −0.99 pg/mL), IL-6 (HIIT = −0.71 pg/mL, MICT = −0.36 pg/mL), leptin (HIIT = −0.35 pg/mL, MICT = −0.16 pg/mL) and increased VO_2peak (HIIT = 0.95 mL·kg⁻¹·min⁻¹, MICT = 0.67 mL·kg⁻¹·min⁻¹), LBS (HIIT = 2.84 kg, MICT = 1.53 kg), UBS (HIIT = 0.53 kg, MICT = 0.53 kg), IL-10 (HIIT = 0.63 pg/mL, MICT = 0.38 pg/mL), and adiponectin (HIIT = 0.23 ng/mL, MICT = 0.1 ng/mL) compared to baseline. The changes in BM, FM, TNF-α, leptin, and LBS were significantly greater in HIIT compared to all other groups. Conclusions: Our findings indicate that compared to the often-recommended MICT, HIIT may be a more beneficial exercise therapy for the improvement of inflammation, body composition and LBS in BCS; and consequently, merits long-term study