Background: As formula diets have demonstrated to be effective in reducing weight, we hypothesized that in patients with overweight or obesity and accompanied cardiovascular risk factors, combining a liquid formula diet with a lifestyle intervention is superior in reducing weight and improving cardiovascular risk factors than lifestyle intervention alone. Methods: In this multicenter RCT 463 participants with overweight or obesity (BMI: 27-35 kg/m²; at least one additional co-morbidity of the metabolic syndrome) were randomized (1:2) into either a control group with lifestyle intervention only (CON, n=155) or a lifestyle intervention group including a liquid meal replacement (INT, n=308). Both groups used telemonitoring devices (scales and pedometers), received information on healthy diet and were instructed to increase physical activity. Telemonitoring devices automatically transferred data into a personalised online portal and acquired data were discussed. INT obtained a liquid meal replacement substituting three meals/day (~1,200 kcal) within the first week. During weeks 2-4, participants replaced two meals/day and during weeks 5-26 only one meal/day was substituted (1,300-1,500 kcal/day). Follow-up was conducted after 52 weeks. Intention-to-treat analyses were performed. Primary outcome was weight change. Secondary outcomes comprised changes in cardiometabolic risk factors including body composition and laboratory parameters. Results: From the starting cohort 360 (78%, INT: n=244; CON: n=116) and 317 (68%, INT: n=216; CON: n=101) participants completed the 26-weeks intervention phase and the 52-weeks follow-up. The estimated treatment difference (ETD) between both groups was-3.

These results suggest an association of combined angiotensin I-converting enzyme gene I/D polymorphism genotypes, and angiotensinogen gene M235T polymorphism genotypes with left ventricular hypertrophy due to long-term athletic training. A synergistic effect of angiotensin I-converting enzyme gene DD genotype and angiotensinogen gene TT genotype on left ventricular mass in endurance athletes appears to occur.

Lifestyle interventions, including meal replacement, are effective in the prevention and treatment of type-2-diabetes and obesity. Since insulin is the key weight regulator, we hypothesised that the addition of meal replacement to a lifestyle intervention reduces insulin levels more effectively than lifestyle intervention alone. In the international multicentre randomised controlled ACOORH (Almased Concept against Overweight and Obesity and Related Health Risk) trial, overweight or obese persons who meet the criteria for metabolic syndrome (n = 463) were randomised into two groups. Both groups received nutritional advice focusing on carbohydrate restriction and the use of telemonitoring devices. The intervention group substituted all three main meals per day in week 1, two meals per day in weeks 2–4, and one meal per day in weeks 5–26 with a protein-rich, low-glycaemic meal replacement. Data were collected at baseline and after 1, 3, 6 and 12 months. All datasets providing insulin data (n = 446) were included in this predefined subanalysis. Significantly higher reductions in insulin (−3.3 ± 8.7 µU/mL vs. −1.6 ± 9.8 µU/mL), weight (−6.1 ± 5.2 kg vs. −3.2 ± 4.6 kg), and inflammation markers were observed in the intervention group. Insulin reduction correlated with weight reduction and the highest amount of weight loss (−7.6 ± 4.9 kg) was observed in those participants with an insulin decrease > 2 µU/mL. These results underline the potential for meal replacement-based lifestyle interventions in diabetes prevention, and measurement of insulin levels may serve as an indicator for adherence to carbohydrate restriction.

PT may potentially contribute to improving the cognitive performance in T2DM patients. Additional high-quality studies with standardized cognitive assessments are needed to further determine the dose-effect relationships between PA and cognitive performance in T2DM patients.

Although meal replacement can lead to weight reduction, there is uncertainty whether this dietary approach implemented into a lifestyle programme can improve long-term dietary intake. In this subanalysis of the Almased Concept against Overweight and Obesity and Related Health Risk (ACOORH) study (n = 463), participants with metabolic risk factors were randomly assigned to either a meal replacement-based lifestyle intervention group (INT) or a lifestyle intervention control group (CON). This subanalysis relies only on data of participants (n = 119) who returned correctly completed dietary records at baseline, and after 12 and 52 weeks. Both groups were not matched for nutrient composition at baseline. These data were further stratified by sex and also associated with weight change. INT showed a higher increase in protein intake related to the daily energy intake after 12 weeks (+6.37% [4.69; 8.04] vs. +2.48% [0.73; 4.23], p < 0.001) of intervention compared to CON. Fat and carbohydrate intake related to the daily energy intake were more strongly reduced in the INT compared to CON (both p < 0.01). After sex stratification, particularly INT-women increased their total protein intake after 12 (INT: +12.7 g vs. CON: −5.1 g, p = 0.021) and 52 weeks (INT: +5.7 g vs. CON: −16.4 g, p = 0.002) compared to CON. Protein intake was negatively associated with weight change (r = −0.421; p < 0.001) after 12 weeks. The results indicate that a protein-rich dietary strategy with a meal replacement can improve long-term nutritional intake, and was associated with weight loss.