PDF
(Download)
|
- IQP-GC-101 (Xanitrol™)
- Weight Loss
|
Date:
07-15-2014 | HC# 061451-500
|
Re: IQP-GC-101 Herbal Blend Reduces Body Weight Compared to Placebo
Chong
P-W, Beah Z-M, Grube B, Riede L. IQP-GC-101 reduces body weight and body fat
mass: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Phytother Res. May 2, 2014; [epub ahead
of print]. doi: 10.1002/ptr.5158.
Successful weight
loss is accomplished by decreasing energy intake and increasing energy
expenditure. Pharmaceutical drug treatments for obesity focus on reducing
caloric intake. This study evaluates IQP-GC-101 (Xanitrol™; InQpharm Europe
Ltd; Hertfordshire, UK), which is hypothesized to reduce weight by inhibiting
fatty acid synthesis and increasing thermogenesis and metabolism. IQP-GC-101 is
a patented herbal blend that contains 650 mg garcinia (Malabar tamarind; Garcinia cambogia) tree extract standardized
to 60% hydroxycitric acid (HCA), 100 mg green tea (Camellia sinensis) leaf extract (15% epigallocatechin-3-gallate and 11% caffeine), 75 mg green coffee
(unroasted Coffea arabica) seed extract (25% chlorogenic acid and 5% caffeine), and 25 mg banaba (Lagerstroemia speciosa) leaf extract (5% corosolic acid).
All 4 of these ingredients have been shown individually to have a role in
weight loss in vivo. The purpose of this randomized, double-blind,
placebo-controlled study was to evaluate the effect of IQP-GC-101 on body
weight and body fat reduction in overweight Caucasians. The study design
followed the guidance of the European Food Safety Authority which requires
evidence of weight loss over a minimum of 12 weeks.
Subjects
(n = 92, aged 18-60 years) were recruited via newspaper advertisement to participate
in this study conducted at 2 centers in Berlin, Germany. Included subjects met
the following criteria: Caucasian, body mass index (BMI) between 25 and 32 kg/m2,
stable body weight for 3 months before study enrollment, accustomed to eating 3
meals/day, committed to adhere to the diet plan, agreed not to use other weight
loss products during the study period, and agreed to use birth control. The
exclusion criteria were as follows: known hypersensitivity to the study
ingredients; current or history of systemic or gastrointestinal diseases that may
confound the outcomes of the study; pregnant or nursing; history of eating
disorder; history of bariatric surgery; use of other weight loss products within
6 weeks before enrollment; change in dosage of estrogen, oral contraceptives, or
thyroid hormone within the 3 months prior to enrollment; concurrent use of
medication that might affect body weight (e.g., systemic corticosteroids or antidepressants);
and smoking cessation within 6 months prior to the start of the study.
The study began with
a 2-week run-in phase where subjects were assessed as to whether they could
comply with the diet and treatment (placebo). Those that could comply were
randomized into the study. All subjects received diet counseling and a diet
plan that provided them with a 500 kcal deficit diet (calculated on the basis
of each individual's body weight, height, age, gender, and activity level). The
diet provided 30% of the ingested energy as fat. A food diary was kept so that diet
compliance could be monitored. Subjects took placebo or IQP-GC-101 3x/day for
12 weeks. The primary outcome measures were mean loss of body weight and body
fat mass after 12 weeks of treatment. Secondary outcome measures were the
change in fat free mass, waist circumference, and hip circumference measured at
baseline and weeks 4, 8, and 12. The Control of Eating Questionnaire (COEQ) was
used to measure hunger, fullness, the desire to eat different types of food,
food cravings, mood, and alertness. Blood was drawn at baseline and at week 12
to assess full blood count, electrolyte levels, liver function,
renal function, lipid metabolism, and carbohydrate metabolism.
At
baseline, both groups were similar in terms of mean age, height, body weight,
and body fat mass. At week 12, the IQP-GC-101 group had significantly greater
weight loss than the placebo group (mean 4.98 lbs vs. 1.23 lbs, P = 0.001). At
week 12, the IQP-GC-101 group had significantly greater body fat loss than the
placebo group (mean 2.47 lb loss vs. 0.81 lb gain, P = 0.001). Accordingly, at
week 12, the IQP-GC-101 group also had a significantly greater decrease in BMI
than the placebo group (mean 0.78 kg/m2 loss vs. 0.22 kg/m2
loss, respectively, P = 0.002). Also, the IQP-GC-101 group had a significantly
greater decrease compared to placebo in waist (mean 2 cm loss vs. 0.69 cm loss,
respectively, P = 0.006) and hip circumference (mean 1.54 cm loss vs 0.64 cm
loss, respectively, P = 0.019). There was no significant difference between
groups on the COEQ or in laboratory parameters. All adverse events (AEs) were
considered to be unrelated to treatment, and both groups had a similar frequency
of AEs. Although adverse reaction reports have associated HCA with
hepatotoxicity, there were no clinically relevant or statistically significant
changes in liver enzyme or bilirubin levels observed in this study.
The
authors conclude that IQP-GC-101 plus a slightly hypocaloric diet safely and significantly
reduced body weight and body fat mass. They state that the degree of
effectiveness in this study was on par with studies of other pharmaceuticals
approved by the FDA for weight loss. All subjects lost weight initially;
however, those in the placebo group stopped losing weight after 4 weeks and had
gained fat mass by week 12. The authors hypothesize that after 4 weeks of loss,
the body started to store fat as a form of homeostasis, and they infer that IQP-GC-101
reduced
lipogenesis, thereby promoting fat oxidation and thermogenesis. A limitation of
this study was that there was no control or monitoring of energy expenditure,
diet compliance, or coffee/tea/caffeine intake. Longer duration studies with
larger sample sizes and more rigorous controls are needed to determine whether
the rate of weight loss is sustained and to better assess safety. Subjects
should also be followed after treatment cessation to evaluate potential rebound
effects.
—Heather S. Oliff,
PhD
|