Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27233359›Full record

ArticleBreast cancer research : BCR2016

Intermittent energy restriction induces changes in breast gene expression and systemic metabolism.

Michelle N Harvie, Andrew H Sims, Mary Pegington, Katherine Spence, Adam Mitchell, Andrew A Vaughan, J William Allwood, Yun Xu, Nicolas J W Rattray, Royston Goodacre and 5 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Breast cancer research : BCR, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

31 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 62 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Beneficial effects of intermittent fasting: a narrative review.Journal of Yeungnam medical science · 2023
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Engineered diets to improve cancer outcomes.Current opinion in biotechnology · 2021
    Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

15 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Michelle N HarvieGenesis Breast Cancer Prevention Centre, University Hospital of South Manchester NHS Foundation Trust, Southmoor Road, Manchester, M23 9LT, UK. michelle.harvie@manchester.ac.uk.
Andrew H SimsApplied Bioinformatics of Cancer, University of Edinburgh, Cancer Research UK Centre, Institute of Genetics and Molecular Medicine, Carrington Crescent, Edinburgh, EH4 2XR, UK.
Mary PegingtonGenesis Breast Cancer Prevention Centre, University Hospital of South Manchester NHS Foundation Trust, Southmoor Road, Manchester, M23 9LT, UK.
Katherine SpenceBreast Cancer Now Research Unit, Institute of Cancer Sciences, Academic Health Science Centre, University of Manchester, Wilmslow Road, Manchester, M20 4BX, UK.
Adam MitchellBreast Cancer Now Research Unit, Institute of Cancer Sciences, Academic Health Science Centre, University of Manchester, Wilmslow Road, Manchester, M20 4BX, UK.
Andrew A VaughanManchester Institute of Biotechnology, School of Chemistry, University of Manchester, Princess St, Manchester, M1 7DN, UK.
J William AllwoodManchester Institute of Biotechnology, School of Chemistry, University of Manchester, Princess St, Manchester, M1 7DN, UK.
Yun XuManchester Institute of Biotechnology, School of Chemistry, University of Manchester, Princess St, Manchester, M1 7DN, UK.
Nicolas J W RattrayManchester Institute of Biotechnology, School of Chemistry, University of Manchester, Princess St, Manchester, M1 7DN, UK.
Royston GoodacreManchester Institute of Biotechnology, School of Chemistry, University of Manchester, Princess St, Manchester, M1 7DN, UK.
D Gareth R EvansGenesis Breast Cancer Prevention Centre, University Hospital of South Manchester NHS Foundation Trust, Southmoor Road, Manchester, M23 9LT, UK.
Ellen MitchellGenesis Breast Cancer Prevention Centre, University Hospital of South Manchester NHS Foundation Trust, Southmoor Road, Manchester, M23 9LT, UK.
Debbie McMullenGenesis Breast Cancer Prevention Centre, University Hospital of South Manchester NHS Foundation Trust, Southmoor Road, Manchester, M23 9LT, UK.
Robert B ClarkeBreast Cancer Now Research Unit, Institute of Cancer Sciences, Academic Health Science Centre, University of Manchester, Wilmslow Road, Manchester, M20 4BX, UK.
Anthony HowellGenesis Breast Cancer Prevention Centre, University Hospital of South Manchester NHS Foundation Trust, Southmoor Road, Manchester, M23 9LT, UK.
University of Manchester · GBBreast Cancer Now · GBEdinburgh Cancer Research · GBThe Christie NHS Foundation Trust · GB

Funding

Department of Health RP-PG-0707-10031
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundObservational studies suggest weight loss and energy restriction reduce breast cancer risk. Intermittent energy restriction (IER) reduces weight to the same extent as, or more than equivalent continuous energy restriction (CER) but the effects of IER on normal breast tissue and systemic metabolism as indicators of breast cancer risk are unknown.

methodsWe assessed the effect of IER (two days of 65 % energy restriction per week) for one menstrual cycle on breast tissue gene expression using Affymetrix GeneChips, adipocyte size by morphometry, and systemic metabolism (insulin resistance, lipids, serum and urine metabolites, lymphocyte gene expression) in 23 overweight premenopausal women at high risk of breast cancer. Unsupervised and supervised analyses of matched pre and post IER biopsies in 20 subjects were performed, whilst liquid and gas chromatography mass spectrometry assessed corresponding changes in serum and urine metabolites in all subjects after the two restricted and five unrestricted days of the IER.

resultsWomen lost 4.8 % (±2.0 %) of body weight and 8.0 % (±5.0 %) of total body fat. Insulin resistance (homeostatic model assessment (HOMA)) reduced by 29.8 % (±17.8 %) on the restricted days and by 11 % (±34 %) on the unrestricted days of the IER. Five hundred and twenty-seven metabolites significantly increased or decreased during the two restricted days of IER. Ninety-one percent of these returned to baseline after 5 days of normal eating. Eleven subjects (55 %) displayed reductions in energy restriction-associated metabolic gene pathways including lipid synthesis, gluconeogenesis and glycogen synthesis. Some of these women also had increases in genes associated with breast epithelial cell differentiation (secretoglobulins, milk proteins and mucins) and decreased collagen synthesis (TNMD, PCOLCE2, TIMP4). There was no appreciable effect of IER on breast gene expression in the other nine subjects. These groups did not differ in the degree of changes in weight, total body fat, fat cell size or serum or urine metabolomic markers. Corresponding gene changes were not seen in peripheral blood lymphocytes.

conclusionThe transcriptional response to IER is variable in breast tissue, which was not reflected in the systemic response, which occurred in all subjects. The mechanisms of breast responsiveness/non-responsiveness require further investigation.

trial registrationISRCTN77916487 31/07/2012.

Indexed as

Energy MetabolismGene Expression RegulationAdultBiomarkersBiopsyBody CompositionBody WeightBreast NeoplasmsCaloric RestrictionCluster AnalysisFemaleHormonesHumansInsulin ResistanceLipidsLymphocytesBiomarkersHormonesLipidsEnergy restrictionGene expressionMetabolomics

Identifiers

PMID27233359
PMCPMC4884347
OpenAlexW2394484662

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.