PDF
(Download)
|
- Ashwagandha (Withania somnifera, Solanaceae)
- Weight Management
- Chronic Stress
|
Date:
05-31-2016 | HC# 051651-545
|
Re: Ashwagandha Useful for Weight Management in Adults under Chronic Stress
Choudhary
D, Bhattacharyya S, Joshi K. Body weight management in adults under chronic
stress through treatment with ashwagandha root extract: A double-blind,
randomized, placebo-controlled trial. J
Evid Based Complementary Altern Med. April 6, 2016; [epub ahead of print].
doi:
10.1177/2156587216641830.
Stress
causes elevation of the hormone cortisol, which can lead to weight gain; in
part, because it increases hunger. Chronic stress is also correlated with an
increase in food intake and reduced physical activity. Moreover, stress elicits
cravings for high-calorie foods via an activation of the
hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis. Clinical trials have shown that ashwagandha
(Withania somnifera, Solanaceae) root
extract reduces stress as measured by psychological instruments and
physiological markers such as cortisol. The purpose of this randomized,
double-blind, placebo-controlled study was to assess the efficacy of ashwagandha
root extract in improving general well-being, reducing markers of stress, and controlling
weight gain in adults with chronic stress.
Subjects
(n = 52, aged 18-60 years) with symptoms of chronic, routine work stress and a
body mass index (BMI) between 25 and 39.9 kg/m2 were recruited from
outpatient clinics in Pune, India. Included subjects had a Perceived Stress
Scale (PSS) score ≥ 20. Excluded subjects met any of the following criteria: diagnosable
eating disorder, participation in a weight-loss program in the past 3 months,
predisposition to weight gain due to genetic or endocrine conditions, diagnosed
neurologic disorder, unstable medical condition, known allergy/side effects to
ashwagandha, pregnant or lactating, taking medications known to affect weight (e.g.,
corticosteroids, antidepressants, antipsychotics, mood stabilizers, and
antiepileptic drugs), history of alcohol abuse or smoking, and clinically
significant acute unstable hepatic, renal, cardiovascular, or respiratory
disease.
Subjects
received either placebo (inert filler) or 300 mg ashwagandha root extract
(KSM-66 Ashwagandha; supplied by Ixoreal Biomed; Los Angeles, California) standardized
to 5% withanolides, 2x/day for 8 weeks. To aid in blinding, placebo capsules
were stored with a cloth envelope containing ashwagandha root extract for a few
days, so that the smell of the ashwagandha extract permeated the placebo
capsules. The primary outcome measures were the PSS and the Food Cravings Questionnaire-Trait
(FCQ-T). Secondary outcome measures were the Oxford Happiness Questionnaire
(OHQ), the Three-Factor Eating Questionnaire (TFEQ, which measures eating
behavior), serum cortisol levels, body weight, and BMI. Assessments were made
at baseline, 4 weeks, and 8 weeks. Safety was assessed with the Patients'
Global Assessment of Tolerability to Therapy (PGATT) scale at 8 weeks.
At
baseline, there were no significant differences between groups in occupational
status, symptoms of stress, PSS scores, or cortisol levels. One subject in each
group was not compliant with the treatment; therefore, the per-protocol dataset
(n = 50) was used for the efficacy analysis. The intent-to-treat dataset (n = 52)
was used for the safety analysis.
Primary outcomes
The
ashwagandha group had a significant decrease in mean PSS score compared with the
placebo group at 4 weeks and 8 weeks (P = 0.05 and P = 0.0015, respectively).
Also, the ashwagandha group had a significantly greater degree of reduction (percent
mean change from baseline) in PSS score compared with placebo (P = 0.0025 and P
< 0.0001, respectively).
The
FCQ-T consists of 9 components. At 8 weeks, the mean score for the FCQ Planning
component for the ashwagandha group was significantly lower than the placebo
group (P = 0.0406), and the percent change from baseline was significantly
greater (P = 0.0087). The mean score for the FCQ Positive Reinforcement component
for the ashwagandha group was significantly lower than the placebo group at 4
weeks (P = 0.0589) and 8 weeks (P = 0.0287), and the percent change from
baseline was significantly greater for the ashwagandha group at 4 weeks (P = 0.0067)
and 8 weeks (P < 0.0001). For the ashwagandha group, there were no
significant differences in the mean scores for the FCQ Negative Reinforcement, Lack
of Control, or Emotion components compared to placebo; however, the percent
change from baseline for these components was significant at both 4 and 8 weeks
as follows: Negative Reinforcement (P = 0.008 and P = 0.0083, respectively),
Lack of Control (P = 0.0443 and P = 0.047, respectively), and Emotion (P = 0.0352
and P = 0.068, respectively). The percent change from baseline for the FCQ Environment
component was significantly greater for the ashwagandha group at 8 weeks (P = 0.039).
There were no significant differences between treatment groups for the FCQ Thoughts
about Food, Physiological, or Guilt components.
Secondary outcomes
The
mean OHQ score was significantly improved in the ashwagandha group compared
with the placebo group (P = 0.0087) at 8 weeks, and the percent change from
baseline was significantly greater for the ashwagandha group at both 4 weeks (P
= 0.0342) and 8 weeks (P < 0.0001). Mean serum cortisol levels were
significantly lower in the ashwagandha group compared with the placebo group at
8 weeks (P = 0.0132), and the percent reduction in cortisol was significantly
greater for the ashwagandha group at both 4 weeks (P = 0.0328) and 8 weeks (P =
0.0019). Both groups had a mean reduction in weight over time and the
difference between groups was not significant. However, the ashwagandha group
had a significantly greater percent decrease in weight from baseline compared
with the placebo group at 4 weeks (P = 0.0503) and at 8 weeks (P = 0.0148). BMI
did not significantly differ between groups; however, the percent mean
reduction from baseline BMI was significantly greater for the ashwagandha group
at 4 weeks (P = 0.0429) and at 8 weeks (P = 0.0096).
There
were no significant differences between treatment groups for the mean scores of
the 3 TFEQ components; however, the percent change from baseline was
significantly greater for the ashwagandha group at both 4 and 8 weeks in the "Uncontrolled
Eating" (P = 0.0542 and P = 0.0247, respectively) and "Emotional
Eating" (P = 0.0207 and P = 0.0135, respectively) components.
There
were no significant differences between groups in any vital sign. A total of 96%
of the subjects in both groups reported excellent tolerability to treatment on
the PGATT. Two subjects reported adverse events of giddiness, heaviness of
head, blurring of vision, and/or hyperacidity. However, the authors do not
report which treatment groups these subjects were in or whether the events were
considered related to treatment.
Overall,
in this population, ashwagandha significantly improved psychological stress
(PSS score) and physiological stress (serum cortisol levels), as well as well-being
and happiness (OHQ). These data support other clinical research that shows that
ashwagandha improves stress and anxiety. Ashwagandha significantly improved several
components of food cravings (FCQ-T) and eating behavior (TFEQ). The mean
percent reductions in body weight and BMI were significantly greater in the
ashwagandha group. These data support the hypothesis that the antistress
activity of ashwagandha results in reduced food cravings, better eating
behaviors, and weight loss. The authors conclude that ashwagandha "can be
useful for body-weight management in patients experiencing chronic stress.
However, further studies are required to bolster the potential of ashwagandha
to prevent weight gain caused by long-term chronic stress." The authors recommend
that future studies also measure serum levels of hormones involved in appetite
regulation such as leptin and ghrelin.
The
authors acknowledge that the data are preliminary because of the short study
duration and small sample size; otherwise, the study was generally well
designed and executed. This article fulfilled most of the Consolidated
Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) guidelines. Deficiencies included
sample size calculations, baseline data for body weight and BMI, recruitment
dates, assessment of blinding, and discussion of potential sources of bias. The
authors declare no conflict of interest.
—Heather S. Oliff,
PhD
|