IMPORTANCEThe efficacy and safety of time-restricted eating have not been explored in large randomized clinical trials.OBJECTIVE To determine the effect of 16:8-hour time-restricted eating on weight loss and metabolic risk markers. INTERVENTIONSParticipants were randomized such that the consistent meal timing (CMT) group was instructed to eat 3 structured meals per day, and the time-restricted eating (TRE) group was instructed to eat ad libitum from 12:00 PM until 8:00 PM and completely abstain from caloric intake from 8:00 PM until 12:00 PM the following day. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTSThis 12-week randomized clinical trial including men and women aged 18 to 64 years with a body mass index (BMI, calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared) of 27 to 43 was conducted on a custom mobile study application. Participants received a Bluetooth scale. Participants lived anywhere in the United States, with a subset of 50 participants living near San Francisco, California, who underwent in-person testing. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURESThe primary outcome was weight loss. Secondary outcomes from the in-person cohort included changes in weight, fat mass, lean mass, fasting insulin, fasting glucose, hemoglobin A 1c levels, estimated energy intake, total energy expenditure, and resting energy expenditure.RESULTS Overall, 116 participants (mean [SD] age, 46.5 [10.5] years; 70 [60.3%] men) were included in the study. There was a significant decrease in weight in the TRE (−0.94 kg; 95% CI, −1.68 to −0.20; P = .01), but no significant change in the CMT group (−0.68 kg; 95% CI, -1.41 to 0.05, P = .07) or between groups (−0.26 kg; 95% CI, −1.30 to 0.78; P = .63). In the in-person cohort (n = 25 TRE, n = 25 CMT), there was a significant within-group decrease in weight in the TRE group (−1.70 kg; 95% CI, −2.56 to −0.83; P < .001). There was also a significant difference in appendicular lean mass index between groups (−0.16 kg/m 2 ; 95% CI, −0.27 to −0.05; P = .005). There were no significant changes in any of the other secondary outcomes within or between groups. There were no differences in estimated energy intake between groups.CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Time-restricted eating, in the absence of other interventions, is not more effective in weight loss than eating throughout the day.TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: NCT03393195 and NCT03637855

Obesity and components of energy imbalance, i.e., excessive energy intake and suboptimal levels of physical activity, are established risk factors for cancer incidence. Accumulating evidence suggests that these factors also may be important after the diagnosis of cancer and influence the course of disease, as well as overall health, well-being, and survival. Lifestyle and medical interventions that effectively modify these factors could potentially be harnessed as a means of cancer control. However, for such interventions to be maximally effective and sustainable, broad sweeping scientific discoveries ranging from molecular and cellular advances, to developments in delivering interventions on both individual and societal levels are needed. This review summarizes key discussion topics that were addressed in a recent Institute of Medicine Workshop entitled, “The Role of Obesity in Cancer Survival and Recurrence”; discussions included: 1) mechanisms associated with obesity and energy balance that influence cancer progression; 2) complexities of studying and interpreting energy balance in relation to cancer recurrence and survival; 3) associations between obesity and cancer risk, recurrence, and mortality; 4) interventions that promote weight loss, increased physical activity, and negative energy balance as a means of cancer control; and 5) future directions.