Recurrent binge eating episodes, the core feature of Bulimia Nervosa (BN) and Binge Eating Disorder (BED), are frequently comorbid with obesity. Psychological interventions, notably Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CBT), are effective for binge eating reduction in BED or BN but less so for weight loss. Behavioural Weight Loss Therapy (BWLT) shows effectiveness for binge eating reduction and weight loss but the latter appears poorly sustained over time. Our aim was to review evidence for efficacy of psychological therapies for BN/BED associated with overweight or obesity in reducing binge frequency and weight. A systematic search for randomized controlled trials with adult samples who had BN or BED was conducted considering articles in English, French, Spanish and Portuguese with no restrictions for the timeline publication ending in March 2016. A quality appraisal of the trials and meta-analyses comparing BWLT to CBT were done. This review identified 2248 articles for screening and 19 published articles were selected. No trials of BN were identified. This review found CBT was favoured compared to BWLT with regard to short-term binge eating reduction. However, insufficient evidence was found for superiority for BWLT efficacy compared to CBT considering binge eating remission, reduction of binge eating frequency and weight loss. More research is needed to test the efficacy of psychological treatments for BED or BN with co-morbid overweight or obesity, including trials evaluating binge eating remission and weight loss in the long-term.

Background: Bulimia nervosa (BN) and binge eating disorder (BED) are eating disorders (EDs) characterized by recurrent binge eating. They are associated with medical complications, impaired adaptive function and often a high BMI, for which a multidisciplinary treatment approach may be needed. This study explored the efficacy of a novel intervention integrating Cognitive Behavioural Therapy- Enhanced (CBT-E) and weight management for people with recurrent binge eating episodes and high BMI with respect to physical, psychopathological and quality of life outcomes. Methods: Ninety-eight adults diagnosed with BN, BED, or Other Specified/Unspecified Feeding or Eating Disorder (OSFED/UFED) and BMI ≥ 27 to <40 kg/m² were randomized to a multidisciplinary approach, the Healthy APproach to weIght management and Food in Eating Disorders (HAPIFED) or to CBT-E. Metabolic parameters, health-related quality of life, general psychological and ED symptoms and ED diagnostic status outcomes are reported. Data were analyzed with mixed effects models adopting multiple imputed datasets where data were missing. Results: Both HAPIFED and CBT-E showed statistical significance for the time effect, with reduction in stress (p < 0.001), improvement in mental health-related quality of life (p = 0.032), reduction in binge eating severity (p < 0.001), and also in global ED symptoms scores (p < 0.001), with the significant changes found at end of treatment and sustained at 12-month follow-up. However, no statistical significance was found for differences between the interventions in any of the outcomes measured. Despite a high BMI, most participants (> 75%) had blood test results for glucose, insulin, triglycerides and cholesterol within the normal range, and 52% were within the normal range for the physical component of quality of life at baseline with no change during the trial period. Conclusion: Integrating weight and ED management resulted in comparable outcomes to ED therapy alone. Although adding weight management to an ED intervention had no adverse effects on psychological outcomes, it also had no beneficial effect on metabolic outcomes. Therefore, more intense weight management strategies may be required where indicated to improve metabolic outcomes. Safety will need to be concurrently investigated. Trial registration: US National Institutes of Health clinical trial registration number NCT02464345, date of registration 08/06/2015. Changes to the present paper from the published protocol paper (Trials 18:578, 2015) and as reported in the Trial registration (clinicaltrials.gov) are reported in Supplementary File 1.

Around 40 % of individuals with eating disorders of recurrent binge eating, namely bulimia nervosa and binge eating disorder, are obese. In contrast to binge eating disorder, currently there is no evidence base for weight management or weight loss psychological therapies in the treatment of bulimia nervosa despite their efficacy in binge eating disorder. Thus, a manualised therapy called HAPIFED (Healthy APproach to weIght management and Food in Eating Disorders) has been developed. HAPIFED integrates the leading evidence-based psychological therapies, cognitive behavioural therapy-enhanced (CBT-E) and behavioural weight loss treatment (BWLT) for binge eating disorder and obesity respectively. The aim of the present study is to detail the protocol for a randomised controlled trial (RCT) of HAPIFED versus CBT-E for people with bulimia nervosa and binge eating disorder who are overweight/obese. A single-blind superiority RCT is proposed. One hundred Brazilian participants aged ≥ 18 years, with a diagnosis of bulimia nervosa or binge eating disorder, BMI > 27 to < 40 kg/m2, will be recruited from both community and clinics and individually randomised to a therapy arm. Five groups of ten participants will receive the experimental intervention (HAPIFED) and the other five groups of ten the control intervention (CBT-E). Both therapies are manualised, and in this RCT will comprise 1 individual session and 29 office-based group sessions over 6 months. Assessment points will be at baseline, end of therapy, and 6 and 12 months after end of therapy. The primary outcome of this intervention will be reduced weight. Secondary outcomes will be improved metabolic indicators of weight management, reduction in eating disorder symptoms including improved control over eating, improved adaptive function, physical and mental health-related quality of life, and reduced levels of depression and anxiety. This study will be the first to investigate a psychological therapy that aims to assist weight management in people with co-morbid overweight or obesity bulimia nervosa as well as with binge eating disorder. It will have the potential to improve health outcomes for the rapidly increasing number of adults with co-morbid obesity and binge eating disorder or bulimia nervosa. US National Institutes of Health clinical trial registration number NCT02464345 , date of registration 1 June 2015.

There is a high prevalence of overweight or obesity in people with eating disorders. However, therapies for eating disorders, namely binge eating disorder and bulimia nervosa, do not address weight management. Conversely, weight loss treatments for people with overweight or obesity do not address psychological aspects related to eating disorders. Thus we developed a new treatment for overweight or obesity with comorbid binge eating disorder or bulimia nervosa, entitled HAPIFED (a Healthy APproach to weIght management and Food in Eating Disorders). This paper describes HAPIFED and reports a case series examining its feasibility and acceptability. Eleven participants with overweight or obesity and binge eating disorder or bulimia nervosa were treated with HAPIFED in two separate groups (with once or twice weekly meetings). Weight, body mass index (BMI) and eating disorder symptoms, as well as depression, anxiety and stress, were assessed at baseline and at the end of the 20-session HAPIFED intervention. Eight of the 11 participants completed the intervention, with diverse results. Six of the 8 participants who completed HAPIFED reduced their weight between baseline and the end of the intervention. Median scores on the Eating Disorder Examination Questionnaire for binge eating, restraint, and concerns about eating or weight and shape, were reduced in the group overall between baseline and the end of the intervention. One participant, who at baseline was inducing vomiting and misusing laxatives in an attempt to lose weight, reduced these behaviors by the end of the intervention. Three participants at baseline were undertaking episodes of compulsive exercise, and they reduced or stopped this behavior, but one participant commenced episodes of compulsive exercise by the end of the intervention. All participants who completed the intervention rated the suitability and success of HAPIFED as 7 or more out of 10 (0 = not at all suitable/successful; 10 = extremely suitable/successful). This case series supports the feasibility and acceptability of HAPIFED as a potential new treatment for overweight or obesity with comorbid binge eating disorder or bulimia nervosa. Clinical trials are necessary to examine the efficacy and effectiveness of HAPIFED. Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (Universal Trial Number): U1111–1149-7766 . Date of registration: 4th November 2013.

The aims of this paper were to compare (1) the proportion of participants diagnosed with threshold or subthreshold Bulimia Nervosa (BN) and Binge Eating Disorder (BED) (clinical utility), and (2) the severity of participants’ clinical features and mental Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) (convergent validity), when diagnosed according to either the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders—5th edition (DSM-5) or the proposed International Classification of Diseases 11th edition (ICD-11) schemes. One hundred and seven adult men and women, with a high Body Mass Index (BMI) were evaluated by interview to confirm their eating disorder diagnoses. All participants completed self-report assessments of current symptoms and mental HRQoL. The majority of participants in either diagnostic scheme were included in the main categories of BN or BED (102/107, 95% in the ICD-11 and 85/107, 79% in the DSM-5). Fewer individuals received a subthreshold other or unspecified diagnosis with the ICD-11 compared to the DSM-5 scheme (5% vs. 21%). No significant differences in demographic, clinical features or mental HRQoL of participants with complete or partial BN or BED were found between diagnostic categories. Compared to the DSM-5, the proposed ICD-11 was not over inclusive, i.e., it did not appear to include people with less severe and potentially less clinically relevant symptoms. These results support the greater clinical utility of the ICD-11 whilst both schemes showed convergent validity.