Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32047920›Full record

ReviewEndocrinology2020

FGF21 and the Physiological Regulation of Macronutrient Preference.

Cristal M Hill, Emily Qualls-Creekmore, Hans-Rudolf Berthoud, Paul Soto, Sangho Yu, David H McDougal, Heike Münzberg, Christopher D Morrison

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Endocrinology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 57 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
57citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.3field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

57 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 93 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Protein Decoys, Alcohol, and Energy Intake: Testing a Mechanistic-Ecological Model.Obesity reviews : an official journal of the International Association for the Study of Obesity · 2026
    Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. 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

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Cristal M HillPennington Biomedical Research Center, Baton Rouge, LA.
Emily Qualls-CreekmorePennington Biomedical Research Center, Baton Rouge, LA.
Hans-Rudolf BerthoudPennington Biomedical Research Center, Baton Rouge, LA.
Paul SotoPennington Biomedical Research Center, Baton Rouge, LA.
Sangho YuPennington Biomedical Research Center, Baton Rouge, LA.
David H McDougalPennington Biomedical Research Center, Baton Rouge, LA.
Heike MünzbergPennington Biomedical Research Center, Baton Rouge, LA.
Christopher D MorrisonPennington Biomedical Research Center, Baton Rouge, LA.
Pennington Biomedical Research Center · US

Funding

Tracking & Evaluation CoreU54GM104940 · NIGMS · LSU PENNINGTON BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH CTR · PI Peter Todd Katzmarzyk · 2012 to 2026
$69.1M
Research BaseP30DK072476 · NIDDK · LSU PENNINGTON BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH CTR · PI Peter Todd Katzmarzyk · 2005 to 2026
$26.5M
Neural mechanisms controlling food intake and body weight after bariatric surgeryR01DK047348 · NIDDK · LSU PENNINGTON BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH CTR · PI BERTHOUD, HANS-RUDOLF · 1994 to 2018
$5.0M
FGF21 is an endocrine signal of protein restrictionR01DK105032 · NIDDK · LSU PENNINGTON BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH CTR · PI MORRISON, CHRISTOPHER D · 2016 to 2019
$1.4M
Neuronal FGF21 Signaling in the Detection of Dietary Protein RestrictionF32DK115137 · NIDDK · LSU PENNINGTON BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH CTR · PI HILL, CRISTAL MONIQUE · 2017 to 2019
$185k
NIDDK NIH HHS F32 DK115137NIDDK NIH HHS P30 DK072476NIDDK NIH HHS R01 DK047348NIDDK NIH HHS R01 DK105032NIGMS NIH HHS U54 GM104940
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The ability to respond to variations in nutritional status depends on regulatory systems that monitor nutrient intake and adaptively alter metabolism and feeding behavior during nutrient restriction. There is ample evidence that the restriction of water, sodium, or energy intake triggers adaptive responses that conserve existing nutrient stores and promote the ingestion of the missing nutrient, and that these homeostatic responses are mediated, at least in part, by nutritionally regulated hormones acting within the brain. This review highlights recent research that suggests that the metabolic hormone fibroblast growth factor 21 (FGF21) acts on the brain to homeostatically alter macronutrient preference. Circulating FGF21 levels are robustly increased by diets that are high in carbohydrate but low in protein, and exogenous FGF21 treatment reduces the consumption of sweet foods and alcohol while alternatively increasing the consumption of protein. In addition, while control mice adaptively shift macronutrient preference and increase protein intake in response to dietary protein restriction, mice that lack either FGF21 or FGF21 signaling in the brain fail to exhibit this homeostatic response. FGF21 therefore mediates a unique physiological niche, coordinating adaptive shifts in macronutrient preference that serve to maintain protein intake in the face of dietary protein restriction.

Indexed as

Dietary CarbohydratesDietary ProteinsFeeding BehaviorAnimalsBrainFibroblast Growth FactorsHomeostasisNutrientsDietary CarbohydratesDietary Proteinsfibroblast growth factor 21Fibroblast Growth FactorsNutrientsfeeding behaviorfood choicehomeostasismacronutrientnutrient sensingprotein

Identifiers

PMID32047920
PMCPMC7053867
OpenAlexW3005797782

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.