Background Although preliminary evidence suggests that intermittent calorie restriction (ICR) exerts stronger effects on metabolic parameters, which may link obesity and major chronic diseases, compared with continuous calorie restriction (CCR), there is a lack of well-powered intervention studies. Objective We conducted a randomized controlled trial to test whether ICR, operationalized as the “5:2 diet,” has stronger effects on adipose tissue gene expression, anthropometric and body composition measures, and circulating metabolic biomarkers than CCR and a control regimen. Design One hundred and fifty overweight and obese nonsmokers [body mass index (kg/m2) ≥25 to <40, 50% women], aged 35–65 y, were randomly assigned to an ICR group (5 d without energy restriction and 2 d with 75% energy deficit, net weekly energy deficit ∼20%), a CCR group (daily energy deficit ∼20%), or a control group (no advice to restrict energy) and participated in a 12-wk intervention phase, a 12-wk maintenance phase, and a 26-wk follow-up phase. Results Loge relative weight change over the intervention phase was −7.1% ± 0.7% (mean ± SEM) with ICR, −5.2% ± 0.6% with CCR, and −3.3% ± 0.6% with the control regimen (Poverall < 0.001, PICR vs. CCR = 0.053). Despite slightly greater weight loss with ICR than with CCR, there were no significant differences between the groups in the expression of 82 preselected genes in adipose tissue implicated in pathways linking obesity to chronic diseases. At the final follow-up assessment (week 50), weight loss was −5.2% ± 1.2% with ICR, −4.9% ± 1.1% with CCR, and −1.7% ± 0.8% with the control regimen (Poverall = 0.01, PICR vs. CCR = 0.89). These effects were paralleled by proportional changes in visceral and subcutaneous adipose tissue volumes. There were no significant differences between ICR and CCR regarding various circulating metabolic biomarkers. Conclusion Our results on the effects of the “5:2 diet” indicate that ICR may be equivalent but not superior to CCR for weight reduction and prevention of metabolic diseases. This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT02449148.

Editing of apolipoprotein B (apoB) mRNA requires the catalytic component APOBEC-1 together with "auxiliary" proteins that have not been conclusively characterized so far. Here we report the purification of these additional components of the apoB mRNA editing enzyme-complex from rat liver and the cDNA cloning of the novel APOBEC-1-stimulating protein (ASP). Two proteins copurified into the final active fraction and were characterized by peptide sequencing and mass spectrometry: KSRP, a 75-kDa protein originally described as a splicing regulating factor, and ASP, a hitherto unknown 65-kDa protein. Separation of these two proteins resulted in a reduction of APOBEC-1-stimulating activity. ASP represents a novel type of RNA-binding protein and contains three single-stranded RNA-binding domains in the amino-terminal half and a putative double-stranded RNA-binding domain at the carboxyl terminus. Purified recombinant glutathione S-transferase (GST)-ASP, but not recombinant GST-KSRP, stimulated recombinant GST-APOBEC-1 to edit apoB RNA in vitro. These data demonstrate that ASP is the second essential component of the apoB mRNA editing enzymecomplex. In rat liver, ASP is apparently associated with KSRP, which may confer stability to the editing enzymecomplex with its substrate apoB RNA serving as an additional auxiliary component.