Article

The Doubly Labeled Water Method Produces Highly Reproducible Longitudinal Results in Nutrition Studies

Journal of Nutrition (Impact Factor: 4.23). 02/2014; 144(5). DOI: 10.3945/jn.113.187823
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The doubly labeled water (DLW) method is considered the reference method for the measurement of energy expenditure under free-living conditions. However, the reproducibility of the DLW method in longitudinal studies is not well documented. This study was designed to evaluate the longitudinal reproducibility of the DLW method using 2 protocols developed and implemented in a multicenter clinical trial-the Comprehensive Assessment of Long-term Effects of Reducing Intake of Energy (CALERIE). To document the longitudinal reproducibility of the DLW method, 2 protocols, 1 based on repeated analysis of dose dilutions over the course of the clinical trial (dose-dilution protocol) and 1 based on repeated but blinded analysis of randomly selected DLW studies (test-retest protocol), were carried out. The dose-dilution protocol showed that the theoretical fractional turnover rates for (2)H and (18)O and the difference between the 2 fractional turnover rates were reproducible to within 1% and 5%, respectively, over 4.5 y. The Bland-Altman pair-wise comparisons of the results generated from 50 test-retest DLW studies showed that the fractional turnover rates and isotope dilution spaces for (2)H and (18)O, and total energy expenditure, were highly reproducible over 2.4 y. Our results show that the DLW method is reproducible in longitudinal studies and confirm the validity of this method to measure energy expenditure, define energy intake prescriptions, and monitor adherence and body composition changes over the period of 2.5-4.4 y. The 2 protocols can be adopted by other laboratories to document the longitudinal reproducibility of their measurements to ensure the long-term outcomes of interest are meaningful biologically. This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT00427193.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: William W Wong, Jul 16, 2014
1 Follower
 · 
93 Views
 · 
71 Downloads
  • Journal of Nutrition 02/2014; 144(5). DOI:10.3945/jn.114.191361 · 4.23 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The ability to assess energy expenditure (EE) and estimate physical activity (PA) in free-living individuals is extremely important in the global context of non-communicable diseases including malnutrition, overnutrition (obesity), and diabetes. It is also important to appreciate that PA and EE are different constructs with PA defined as any bodily movement that results in EE and accordingly, energy is expended as a result of PA. However, total energy expenditure, best assessed using the criterion doubly labeled water (DLW) technique, includes components in addition to physical activity energy expenditure, namely resting energy expenditure and the thermic effect of food. Given the large number of assessment techniques currently used to estimate PA in humans, it is imperative to understand the relative merits of each. The goal of this review is to provide information on the utility and limitations of a range of objective measures of PA and their relationship with EE. The measures discussed include those based on EE or oxygen uptake including DLW, activity energy expenditure, physical activity level, and metabolic equivalent; those based on heart rate monitoring and motion sensors; and because of their widespread use, selected subjective measures.
    06/2014; 1. DOI:10.3389/fnut.2014.00005
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objective Alternate day fasting (ADF; 24-h feeding/24-h 25% energy intake at lunchtime), is effective for weight loss, but diet tolerability is questionable. Moving the fast day meal to dinnertime, or dividing it into smaller meals, may improve tolerability. Accordingly, this study compared the effects of ADF with three meal times on body weight and heart disease risk.Methods Obese subjects (n = 74) were randomized to 1 of 3 groups for 8 weeks: 1) ADF-L: lunch, 2) ADF-D: dinner, or 3) ADF-SM: small meals.ResultsBody weight decreased similarly (P < 0.001) in all groups (ADF-L: 3.5 ± 0.4 kg, ADF-D 4.1 ± 0.5 kg, ADF-SM 4.0 ± 0.5 kg). Reductions (P < 0.001) in fat mass and visceral fat were also comparable. Plasma lipids remained unchanged, and low density lipoprotein (LDL) particle size increased (P < 0.05) in all groups (1.3 ± 0.5 Å). Systolic blood pressure decreased (P < 0.05) by ADF-SM only. Fasting glucose, insulin, and HOMA-IR remained unchanged.Conclusion Thus, allowing individuals to consume the fast day meal at dinner or small meals produces similar weight loss and cardio-protection as consuming the meal at lunch. This flexibility in meal timing may increase tolerability and long-term adherence to ADF protocols.
    Obesity 09/2014; 23(4). DOI:10.1002/oby.20909 · 4.39 Impact Factor