Trial reportThe American journal of clinical nutrition2025
The effects of consumption of interesterified fats rich in palmitic acid compared with stearic acid on intermediary markers of cardiometabolic disease risk: a randomized controlled trial in healthy adults.
Trial report in The American journal of clinical nutrition, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04418102 (The InterSat Study), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
The InterSat Study: Interesterified Fats: Health Effects of Commercially Relevant Palmitic Versus Stearic Acid Rich Interesterified Fats
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Impact of Heated Versus Unheated Cooking Oil on Postprandial Vascular Function and Metabolism.Lipids · 2026Trial
- Interesterified fats rich in palmitic and stearic acids have comparable effects on selected inflammatory related biomarkers.European journal of nutrition · 2026Trial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundInteresterified (IE) fats rich in palmitic acid (16:0) and stearic acid (18:0) are widely used hard fats. Comparative effects of commercially relevant palmitic or stearic acid-rich IE fat blends on cardiometabolic disease (CMD) risk markers remain unclear. It was hypothesized that functionally matched palmitic and stearic acid-rich fats would have equivalent effects on plasma total:high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol ratio within a predefined equivalence margin of ±0.09.
objectivesThis study aimed to compare the effects of diets enriched in palmitic or stearic acid, delivered as commercially relevant IE fats and incorporated at realistic levels of dietary intake, on plasma lipid concentrations and other CMD risk markers in healthy participants.
methodsIn a randomized, crossover trial at 2 centers, 51 healthy participants (aged 35-65 y) consumed diets with either palmitic acid-rich or stearic acid-rich IE fats (10% energy intake) for 6 wk per arm, with a 4-wk washout. IE fats were incorporated into muffins and margarine spreads. The primary outcome was total:HDL cholesterol ratio; secondary outcomes included HDL and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and fasting and postprandial triacylglycerol, lipoproteins, apolipoproteins, insulin sensitivity, vascular endothelial function, inflammation markers, and fasting liver fat (via proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy, subgroup). Linear mixed models were used to assess intervention effects.
resultsForty-seven participants (51% female, mean age 52 ± 8 y; body mass index 25.2 ± 2.8 kg/m
conclusionsCommercially relevant palmitic acid-rich IE fats consumed at 10% energy for a 6-wk period do not adversely affect total:HDL cholesterol ratio or other CMD risk markers compared with stearic acid-rich fats. Long-term effects could not be determined from this trial. This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT04418102.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.