From the Human Nutrition Unit, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Institut d'Investigació Sanitaria Pere Virgili, Universitat Rovira i Virgili, C/ Sant Llorenç, Reus, Spain (MJ-F, JS-S, NI-J, AD-L, MG-F, PH-A, RB, and MB); the Centros de Investigación Biomédica en Redobn Physiopathology of Obesity and Nutrition, Instituto de Salut Carlos III, Madrid, Spain (MJ-F, JS-S, NI-J, AD-L, MG-F, RB, and MB); and the Nutrition Unit, Internal Medicine Service, Hospital Universitari Sant Joan, Reus, Spain (AR-S).
Am J Clin Nutr. 2014 Jul;100(1):27-35. doi: 10.3945/ajcn.113.081216. Epub 2014 Apr 30.
Low-glycemic index (GI) diets have been proven to have beneficial effects in such chronic conditions as type 2 diabetes, ischemic heart disease, and some types of cancer, but the effect of low-GI diets on weight loss, satiety, and inflammation is still controversial.
We assessed the efficacy of 2 moderate-carbohydrate diets and a low-fat diet with different GIs on weight loss and the modulation of satiety, inflammation, and other metabolic risk markers.
The GLYNDIET study is a 6-mo randomized, parallel, controlled clinical trial conducted in 122 overweight and obese adults. Participants were randomly assigned to one of the following 3 isocaloric energy-restricted diets for 6 mo: 1) a moderate-carbohydrate and high-GI diet (HGI), 2) a moderate-carbohydrate and low-GI diet (LGI), and 3) a low-fat and high-GI diet (LF).
At weeks 16 and 20 and the end of the intervention, changes in body mass index (BMI; in kg/m(2)) differed significantly between intervention groups. Reductions in BMI were greater in the LGI group than in the LF group, whereas in the HGI group, reductions in BMI did not differ significantly from those in the other 2 groups (LGI: -2.45 ± 0.27; HGI: -2.30 ± 0.27; LF: -1.43 ± 0.27; F = 4.616, P = 0.012; pairwise comparisons: LGI compared with HGI, P = 1.000; LGI compared with LF, P = 0.016; HGI compared with LF, P = 0.061). The decrease in fasting insulin, homeostatic model assessment of insulin resistance, and homeostatic model assessment of β cell function was also significantly greater in the LGI group than in the LF group (P < 0.05). Despite this tendency for a greater improvement with a low-GI diet, the 3 intervention groups were not observed to have different effects on hunger, satiety, lipid profiles, or other inflammatory and metabolic risk markers.
A low-GI and energy-restricted diet containing moderate amounts of carbohydrates may be more effective than a high-GI and low-fat diet at reducing body weight and controlling glucose and insulin metabolism. This trial was registered at Current Controlled Trials (www.controlled-trials.com) as ISRCTN54971867.
低升糖指数（GI）饮食已被证明对 2 型糖尿病、缺血性心脏病和某些类型的癌症等慢性疾病具有有益效果，但低 GI 饮食对体重减轻、饱腹感和炎症的影响仍存在争议。
我们评估了两种中碳水化合物饮食和一种低脂肪饮食对减肥以及饱腹感、炎症和其他代谢风险标志物的调节作用。
GLYNDIET 研究是一项为期 6 个月的随机、平行、对照临床试验，在 122 名超重和肥胖成年人中进行。参与者被随机分配到以下 3 种等热量限制饮食中的 1 种，持续 6 个月：1）高 GI 的中碳水化合物饮食（HGI），2）低 GI 的中碳水化合物饮食（LGI）和 3）高 GI 的低脂肪饮食（LF）。
在第 16、20 周和干预结束时，干预组之间的体重指数（BMI；kg/m2）变化差异有统计学意义。LGI 组的 BMI 降低幅度大于 LF 组，而 HGI 组的 BMI 降低幅度与其他两组无显著差异（LGI：-2.45±0.27；HGI：-2.30±0.27；LF：-1.43±0.27；F=4.616，P=0.012；两两比较：LGI 与 HGI 比较，P=1.000；LGI 与 LF 比较，P=0.016；HGI 与 LF 比较，P=0.061）。LGI 组的空腹胰岛素、胰岛素抵抗评估的稳态模型和β细胞功能的稳态模型评估也显著低于 LF 组（P＜0.05）。尽管低 GI 饮食有更大的改善趋势，但 3 种干预组在饥饿感、饱腹感、血脂谱或其他炎症和代谢风险标志物方面并未观察到不同的效果。
低 GI 和能量限制饮食中含有适量的碳水化合物可能比高 GI 和低脂肪饮食更能有效降低体重并控制葡萄糖和胰岛素代谢。本试验在当前对照试验（www.controlled-trials.com）中注册，编号为 ISRCTN54971867。
