Evidence mapPaperPMID 41146360Full record

ArticleBMC nutrition2025

A randomised controlled trial of short-term Intermittent Energy Restriction [IER] versus Continuous Energy Restriction [CER] on body fat stores and measures of insulin resistance in women with obesity at increased risk of breast cancer.

Michelle Harvie, Pete Coe, Claire Higham, Nina Peach, Anthony Howell, D Gareth Evans, Stephen Williams, Kath Sellers, Lee Malcomson, Mary Pegington and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC nutrition, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Michelle HarvieDivision of Cancer Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK. michelle.harvie@manchester.ac.uk.
Pete CoeDivision of Cancer Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Claire HighamDivision of Cancer Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Nina PeachNightingale/Prevent Breast Cancer Centre, Wythenshawe Hospital, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, M23 9LT, UK.
Anthony HowellDivision of Cancer Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
D Gareth EvansNightingale/Prevent Breast Cancer Centre, Wythenshawe Hospital, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, M23 9LT, UK.
Stephen WilliamsDivision of Informatics, Imaging and Data Science, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Kath SellersNightingale/Prevent Breast Cancer Centre, Wythenshawe Hospital, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, M23 9LT, UK.
Lee MalcomsonDivision of Cancer Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Mary PegingtonDivision of Cancer Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Andrew G RenehanDivision of Cancer Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.

Funding

NIHR Manchester Biomedical Research Centre NIHR203308Pancreatic Cancer UK A16887prevent breast cancer GA14-003
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWeight loss and energy restriction are potential strategies for reducing cancer risk, particularly if they reduce ectopic body fat and improve insulin resistance. This randomised study compared the effects of intermittent energy restriction [IER] to continuous energy restriction [CER] on hepatic, pancreatic and intramuscular fat, and insulin resistance.

methodPremenopausal women with obesity [n = 28] were randomised to 8 weeks of 25% energy restriction: IER [2 days/week 600 kcal/2511kj and 5 days/week Mediterranean diet] versus CER [7 days/week Mediterranean diet]. Changes in body weight, hepatic, pancreatic and calf intramuscular fat fractions [magnetic resonance spectroscopy] and insulin resistance [HOMA and oral glucose tolerance test], body fat and fat free mass [bioelectrical impedance], resting metabolic rate [RMR, indirect calorimetry] and lipids (total, LDL, HDL cholesterol and tryglycerides) were assessed during the energy restricted and normal eating days of IER compared to CER.

results9 IER and 11 CER participants completed the trial. IER and CER had comparable reductions in body weight mean [SD]: IER − 6.7[1.4] kg CER − 6.2[2.9] kg, and reductions in hepatic fat fraction mean [SD]: IER − 74.1[22.0]% CER − 51.4[34.8]%, pancreatic fat fraction mean [SD]: IER − 41.1[35.4]% CER − 30.8[25.4]% and calf intramuscular fat fraction mean [SD]: IER − 8.9[27.4]% CER − 2.3[24.1]%. Fasting measures of insulin resistance [HOMA IR, HOMA-β and fasting insulin] reduced in the CER group and with IER when assessed immediately after the two low energy days but were not maintained during normal eating days. There were no changes in 2-hour glucose in either group. The IER and CER groups had comparable reductions in FFM IER − 1.2[1.4] kg CER − 1.2[1.0] kg and RMR IER − 380[594] kj CER − 594[670] kj. Both groups had reductions in total and HDL cholesterol and triglyceride and maintained LDL.

conclusionsIER and CER have comparable reductions in weight and ectopic fat stores, fat free mass and RMR and lipids. The clinical significance of the failure to maintain beneficial insulin sensitivity across the week with IER is not known and requires further study.

trial registrationISRCTN 10,803,394 Registration date 12/01/2015.

Indexed as

Cancer riskFat free mass, lipidsHepatic fatInsulin resistanceIntramuscular fatMetabolic rateObesityPancreatic fat

Identifiers

PMID41146360
PMCPMC12557943

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.