Next Article in Journal
Atrophy and Inflammatory Changes in Salivary Glands Induced by Oxidative Stress after Exposure to Drugs and Other Chemical Substances: A Systematic Review
Previous Article in Journal
Lateral Peri-Implantitis: Successful Management via Guided Bone Regeneration at Mandibular First Molar Implant
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Medicina
Volume 59
Issue 9
10.3390/medicina59091690
medicina-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

The Effect of Conjugated Linoleic Acid Supplementation on Densitometric Parameters in Overweight and Obese Women—A Randomised Controlled Trial

by
Małgorzata Jamka
1,
Agata Czochralska-Duszyńska
2,
Edyta Mądry
2,
Aleksandra Lisowska
3,
Katarzyna Jończyk-Potoczna
4,
Judyta Cielecka-Piontek
5,
Paweł Bogdański
6 and
Jarosław Walkowiak
1,*
1
Department of Pediatric Gastroenterology and Metabolic Diseases, Poznan University of Medical Sciences, Szpitalna Str. 27/33, 60-572 Poznań, Poland
2
Department of Physiology, Poznan University of Medical Sciences, Święcickiego Str. 6, 61-781 Poznań, Poland
3
Department of Pediatric Diabetes, Auxology and Obesity, Poznan University of Medical Sciences, Szpitalna Str. 27/33, 60-572 Poznań, Poland
4
Department of Pediatric Radiology, Poznan University of Medical Sciences, Szpitalna Str. 27/33, 60-572 Poznań, Poland
5
Department of Pharmacognosy and Biomaterials, Poznan University of Medical Sciences, Rokietnicka Str. 3, 60-806 Poznań, Poland
6
Department of Treatment of Obesity, Metabolic Disorders and Clinical Dietetics, Poznan University of Medical Sciences, Szamarzewskiego Str. 84, 60-569 Poznań, Poland
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Medicina 2023, 59(9), 1690; https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina59091690
Submission received: 20 August 2023 / Revised: 7 September 2023 / Accepted: 19 September 2023 / Published: 21 September 2023
(This article belongs to the Section Epidemiology & Public Health)
Browse Figure
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Background and Objectives: Conjugated linoleic acid (CLA) can improve bone health in animals, yet the effects on humans have not been consistent. Therefore, this parallel randomised controlled trial aimed to assess the effect of CLA supplementation on bone mineral density (BMD) and content (BMC) in overweight or obese women. Materials and Methods: The study population included 74 women who were divided into the CLA (n = 37) and control (n = 37) groups. The CLA group received six capsules per day containing approximately 3 g of cis-9, trans-11 and trans-10, cis-12 CLA isomers in a 50:50 ratio. The control group received the same number of placebo capsules that contained sunflower oil. BMC and BMD at total body, lumbar spine (L1–L4), and femoral neck were measured before and after a three-month intervention. Results: The comparison of BMC and BMD for the total body, lumbar spine (L1–L4), and femoral neck before and after the intervention showed no differences between the groups. However, a within-group analysis demonstrated a significant increase in BMC (p = 0.0100) and BMD (p = 0.0397) at lumbar spine (L1–L4) in the CLA group. Nevertheless, there were no significant differences between the CLA and placebo groups in changes in all analysed densitometric parameters. Conclusions: Altogether, three-month CLA supplementation in overweight and obese women did not improve bone health, although the short intervention period could have limited our findings, long-term intervention studies are needed. The study protocol was registered in the German Clinical Trials Register database (ID: DRKS00010462, date of registration: 4 May 2016).

1. Introduction

Many naturally occurring food substances possess functional properties [1], such as conjugated linoleic acid (CLA). CLA is a set of various fatty acids, including geometric and positional isomers of linoleic acid. While sharing the same carbon chain length as linoleic acid, CLA differs in double bond arrangement [2]. Instead of methylene-separated carbon atoms, CLA features conjugated double bonds, separated by a one carbon–carbon bond instead of multiple bonds. These conjugated bonds can exist in both cis and trans configurations. Several different isomers of CLA have been identified, including 11-trans and 9-cis or 10-trans and 12-cis [3]. Among them, the 11-trans and 9-cis isomer is the most common in the human diet [2,3]. Anaerobic microorganisms primarily make CLA from ruminants, as CLA is most commonly present in milk products and meat, while eggs and poultry contain less CLA [4].
Positive effects of CLA on human health have been reported [5]. CLA has shown potent anticarcinogenic [6] and antiatherogenic effects [7], may modulate immune activity [8], and improve body composition and anthropometric parameters in overweight or obese subjects [9]. Additionally, it is suggested that the anti-inflammatory effect of CLA may affect bone mass [10,11]. CLA decreases prostaglandin E2 production [12,13,14] and modulates calcium absorption, which also may affect bone health [15]. Indeed, animal studies have observed improvements in bone health after CLA supplementation [16,17]. However, the effects of CLA on bone mass in humans have provided both positive impact of CLA intake on bone mineral density (BMD) [18], but others reported no effect of CLA supplementation on bone health [19,20,21,22] or potential adverse effects on bone mineral content (BMC) [23].
Therefore, the study aimed to assess the effect of three-month CLA supplementation on BMD and BMC in overweight or obese women.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Design

As described previously [9,24,25,26,27], the study was designed as a parallel, double-blind, randomised controlled trial, registered with the German Clinical Trials Register database (ID: DRKS00010462, date of registration: 4 May 2016) [28]. The study protocol was approved by the Poznan University of Medical Sciences Ethics Committee (protocol code: 606/12, date of approval: 14 June 2012; protocol code: 453/13, date of approval: 9 May 2013; protocol code: 358/14, date of approval: 3 April 2014; protocol code: 398/15, date of approval: 9 April 2015). Before enrolling in the study, we obtained written informed consent from all participants. The project was performed according to the Declaration of Helsinki [29]. The manuscript was written according to the consolidated standards of reporting trials (CONSORT, see Table S1, Supplementary Materials) [30].

2.2. Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria

The screening of the potential participants was performed at the Department of Internal Medicine, Metabolic Disorders and Hypertension, Poznan University of Medical Sciences, Poland. The recruitment was carried out from July 2014 to May 2015. The inclusion and exclusion criteria are listed in Table 1.

2.3. Intervention Protocol

The participants were divided into the CLA group and the placebo group. During the intervention period (three months), both groups received six capsules per day, each containing 0.5 g of substrate. Capsules in the CLA group contained 80% CLA (50% of cis-9, trans-11 and 50% of trans-10, cis-12 isomers), while capsules for the placebo group contained sunflower oil. Capsules for the CLA and placebo groups looked identical and were manufactured by the Olimp Laboratories company (Pustynia, Poland). The oils did not differ in energy value. A comparison of fatty acids composition between CLA and sunflower oils is presented in Table 2. The subjects were instructed not to modify their dietary habits or physical activity during the intervention period.

2.4. Outcomes

The primary outcome of the study was the effect of CLA supplementation on the digestion of starch and lipids [27]. Here, we reported the effects of CLA intervention on secondary outcomes, which included the impact on densitometric parameters.

2.5. Anthropometric Parameters

The following anthropometric parameters were assessed: body weight and height, waist and hip circumference, and BMI. All parameters were measured in the fasting state, in underwear and barefoot. The body weight and height were assessed using a scale with a stadiometer (Radwag, Random, Poland). The BMI was calculated [31]. The hip and waist circumferences were assessed using a Seca scale (Hamburg, Germany).

2.6. Densitometric Parameters

All subjects included in the study had their densitometry parameters assessed before and after the intervention using Hologic Discovery Wi (Bedford, MA, USA) equipment. The BMC and BMD at total body, lumbar spine, and femoral neck and fat mass were evaluated. The assessment was performed at the Department of Pediatric Gastroenterology and Metabolic Diseases, Poznan University of Medical Sciences. During the measurements, the subjects were asked to dress in lightweight clothing and to remove their shoes and any metal objects. Before the measurement, subjects avoided physical activity. The measurement was performed in the supine position and was of approximately 15 min duration. The radiation dose ionizing agent ranged from 0.5 mGy to 0.7 mGy. The intra- and inter-individual coefficients of variation for bone mass were less than 1%.

2.7. Randomisation and Blinding

Block randomisation was performed. Participants were assigned to CLA and placebo groups based on a computer-generated randomisation list (allocation ratio: 1:1). The study participants, outcome assessors, and statistician were blind to the allocation of treatment.

2.8. Minimum Sample Size

The sample size was determined using the Statistica 12 PL software (TIBCO Software Inc., Palo Alto, CA, USA). By considering the primary outcome, it was calculated that 74 subjects would need to be enrolled in the study to achieve an 80% power level, with α and β values of 0.05 and 0.2, respectively.

2.9. Statistical Analysis

The statistical analyses were conducted using the Statistica 12 PL software (TIBCO Software Inc., Palo Alto, USA). For each parameter, the mean, standard deviation (SD), median, and interquartile range (IQR) were calculated. The Shapiro–Wilk test was used to determine data compliance with the normal distribution. We considered a p-value of less than 0.05 to indicate statistical significance level. Comparisons between two unpaired groups were determined using t-tests (normal distribution, homogeneous variances), Cochran-Cox (normal distribution, lack of homogeneity of variance) or Mann–Whitney U-test (lack of normal distribution). In addition, a paired sample t-test or the Wilcoxon test were used to assess intragroup change between pre- and post-intervention values in the CLA and placebo groups.

3. Results

3.1. Participants’ Flow

The participant’s flow is shown in Figure 1. A total of 187 subjects reported willingness to participate in the study. Of these, 81 women met the inclusion criteria, though seven subjects refused to participate or withdrew from the study for the following reasons: three due to lack of time, one due to abdominal pain and diarrhoea, one due to suspected ovarian tumour, one due to personal problems, and one due to difficulty cooperating. Finally, 74 Caucasian women were randomized into the CLA (n = 37) and placebo (n = 37) groups. During the intervention, 12 women withdrew from the study: five from the CLA group (three did not come to appointments, one was affected by nausea, one became pregnant) and seven from the placebo group (four missed the appointments, two were affected by nausea, one had a rash). In total, 62 participants were included in the final analysis. The anthropometric characteristics of the study population are presented in Table 3.

3.2. The Effect of CLA Supplementation on Densitometric Parameters

The comparison of BMC and BMD for the total body, lumbar spine (L1–L4), and femoral neck before and after the intervention showed no differences between the groups. However, a within-group analysis demonstrated a significant increase in BMC (p = 0.0100) and BMD (p = 0.0397) at lumbar spine (L1–L4) in the CLA group (Table 4). Nevertheless, the comparison of changes in analysed parameters showed no statistically significant differences between the CLA and placebo groups (Table 5).

4. Discussion

Here, we observed that in overweight and obese women, post-intervention BMC and BMD at lumbar spine (L1–L4) in the CLA group significantly increase compared to pre-intervention values. However, no differences in changes in densitometric parameters between groups were detected.
Excessive body weight is an important factor that may affect bone health. Previously, being overweight or obese was commonly seen as a factor contributing to higher bone density and a reduced risk of osteoporosis and fractures [32,33]. This association was attributed to both mechanical effects and the greater presence of oestrogens in adipose tissue [34]. Nonetheless, other findings indicate that an excess of fat mass may not protect humans from osteoporosis and fractures [35]. Obesity, because of its systemic inflammatory state, can disturb the bone remodelling process, leading to the dysregulation of bone homeostasis and promoting bone loss. Other factors may also play a role in this process, such as oxidative stress, insulin resistance, alterations in gut microbiota, and hormonal changes [36]. Based on these findings, we speculate that the effect of CLA supplementation on bone health might differ in subjects with excessive and normal body weight.
Previously, only a few studies evaluated the effect of CLA supplementation on densitometric parameters in overweight and obese subjects and reported no effect or negative impact on bone health [20,21,22,23]. Gaullier et al. [20] investigated the effect of CLA supplementation in a 3.4 g/d (comprising 37.5% cis-9, trans-11 and 38% trans-10, cis-12 isomers) dose for six months in overweight and obese healthy adults, and reported no effects on BMC. In another study performed by the same authors, over 12-month supplementation with triacylglycerol-bound CLA (50% cis-9, trans-11 and 50% trans-10, cis-12, 3.4 g/d of active isomers) in overweight subjects was not effective in improving bone mass, whereas CLA isomers in the form of free fatty acids (3.6 g/d of active isomers) significantly reduced the bone mineral mass. However, changes within the CLA groups were not significantly different from those within the placebo group [21]. After one year of the intervention, out of the 157 subjects who participated in the research, 134 were enrolled in an open study for the subsequent 12 months; however, there were no differences within CLA groups in bone mineral mass between pre- and postintervention values and between CLA and placebo groups [22]. Additionally, Racine et al. [23] reported that seven months of CLA supplementation (3 g/d of 80% trans-10, cis-12 and cis-9, trans-11 in equal proportion) in overweight and obese children had a negative effect on bone health, and decreased the accrual of the total body BMC.
Studies assessing the impact of CLA supplementation on bone health, which were not only focused on overweight or obese individuals, provided more ambiguous results. Some of these studies reported no effects on bone health [19,37,38,39] while in others, positive effects were observed [19,40,41]. Tarnopolsky et al. [37] examined whether adding creatine monohydrate and CLA (6 g/d, combination of 45% cis-9, trans-11 and 45% trans-10, cis-12 isomers) supplementation to resistance training affected bone mass after six months of intervention in older subjects. The authors observed that the total BMD and lumbar BMD did not change after the intervention; however, hip BMD decreased for men only after training. Similarly, Kreider et al. [19] assessed the impact of CLA supplementation (6 g/d as mixed isomers) in male athletes undertaking resistance training, and showed no statistically significant changes in bone mass. However, this study evaluated a small subject number (n = 23) over a short period (28 d), which could have limited the findings. Brown et al. [38] also observed no change in the BMD and BMC when 18 young, healthy women consumed a CLA-enriched diet (1.17 g/d) over 56 d. Furthermore, Doyle et al. [39] analysed the effect of 3 g/d (50% of cis-9, trans-11 and 50% of trans-10, cis-12 isomers) CLA supplementation in healthy adult men for eight weeks, and reported no discernible impacts on bone formation (osteocalcin and bone-specific alkaline phosphatase) or bone resorption (C-telopeptide-related fraction of type 1 collagen degradation products, N-telopeptide-related fraction of type 1 collagen degradation products, pyridinoline and deoxypyridinoline) markers. On the other hand, Brownbill et al. [18], in a cross-sectional analysis of 136 postmenopausal women, showed that the consumption of CLA was identified as s a significant predictor of Ward’s triangle BMD. Furthermore, women with CLA intake higher than median level exhibited a higher BMD of the forearm. DeGuire et al. [40] recorded that men with red blood cell cis-9, trans-11 CLA status above the median had higher whole-body BMD. This finding was confirmed in a regression analysis, which showed that red blood cell cis-9, trans-11 CLA levels influenced significantly total-body BMD. Moreover, Aryaeian et al. [41] noted that 2 g/d of 9-cis, 11-trans and 10-cis, 12-trans CLA supplementation for 12 weeks had a positive effect on telopeptides C and osteocalcin levels in subjects with rheumatoid arthritis. Furthermore, Pinkoski et al. [42] reported that 5 g/d CLA supplementation combined with resistance training decreased the bone resorption parameters (urinary cross-linked N-telopeptides of type I collagen) after 14 weeks of cross-over intervention.
Several mechanisms have been suggested to clarify the potential positive impacts of CLA on densitometric parameters. First, CLA may decrease prostaglandin E2 production through the cyclooxygenase enzyme system and, therefore, may affect bone health [12,13]. It is widely recognised that prostaglandin E2 plays an important role in regulating bone health [14]. Second, CLA may stimulate calcium absorption to be used in bone formation [15]. CLA may also affect bone health by impacting leptin expression and levels [43]. Leptin affects bone metabolism by stimulating bone marrow stromal cells and inhibiting osteoclast cells [44]. Additionally, CLA mitigates age-related bone loss by reducing inflammatory markers and expression of osteoclast cells [10,11].
In addition to nutritional status, several other factors may be responsible for the potential differences between the results of individual studies analysing the effect of CLA supplementation on bone health. The duration of the intervention, dose of CLA, age, sex, hormonal and health status may determine the effectiveness of CLA supplementation. It was estimated that the bone turnover process may last approximately six months [45]. However, no effect of CLA supplementation was observed both in studies with shorter (<6 months) [19,38,39] and longer (≥6 months) duration periods [20,21,22,37]. Moreover, no effect of CLA supplementation on bone mass was found after using low (≤3 g/d) [38,39] or high (>3 g/d) CLA doses [19,20,21,22,37]. The average intake of CLA from natural sources seems to have a malignant effect as the intake of cis-9, trans-11 isomer was approximated as 151–212 mg/d for Americans and 97.5 mg/day for British populations [46,47]. Therefore, further studies are needed to assess how age, sex, and health status may affect the findings. However, we speculate that CLA supplementation may be more effective in subjects with bone diseases [41] or postmenopausal women [39]. Isomer specificity may also determine the effectiveness of CLA supplementation on bone health. However, most current studies were conducted using CLA isomer mixtures. Only two studies performed on an animal model examined the differences between the cis-9, trans-11 and trans-10, cis-12 isomers, and found no direct effects on bones [48,49]. On the other hand, changes in body composition and anthropometric parameters may affect bone mass, as body weight reduction is associated with declining BMD [50]. However, Gaullier et al. [21] observed that after 12 months of intervention, CLA treatment significantly reduced body mass and body fat in comparison to the placebo group; however, no differences in bone mineral mass were detected. An essential research aspect of using a placebo is selecting an appropriate neutral substance that is inactive and does not affect the health of the patients. In our study, sunflower oil was used, as it shows similar organoleptic properties and energy values compared to CLA. Sunflower oil has also been used as a placebo in several trials [23,41,42]. In other studies, olive oil [19,20,21] or palm/bean oil were used [39].
It is worth noting some of the limitations of this study, including small sample size and a short intervention period. The bone remodelling cycle lasts a minimum of 100 days. Hence, our 90-day observation period may not have been sufficient to conclude how long-term supplementation may affect bones [51]. Moreover, we neither evaluated CLA levels in the blood nor estimated the effect of CLA supplementation on markers of bone formation and resorption. Additionally, we did not assess the subjects’ menopausal status to consider the hormonal influence on bone health. However, we speculate that the effect of CLA supplementation may differ in women depending on their menopausal status. Furthermore, information about tobacco, alcohol and medication use, family history and physical activity levels were not collected. Moreover, vitamin D and parathormone levels were not measured.
On the other hand, this was a well-designed double-blind randomised controlled trial that was performed according to CONSORT guidelines [30], in which we used strict inclusion and exclusion criteria allowing us to recruit a homogenous study population.

5. Conclusions

A three-month CLA supplementation in overweight and obese women did not affect bone health. However, the short intervention period limited our findings. Therefore, longer studies assessing the effect of CLA supplementation on densitometric parameters are needed.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/medicina59091690/s1, Table S1: CONSORT 2010 checklist of information to include when reporting a randomised trial.

Author Contributions

Conceptualisation: J.W. and E.M.; data curation: M.J., A.C.-D. and J.W.; formal analysis: M.J. and J.W.; supervision: J.W.; funding acquisition: J.W.; investigation: A.C.-D. and E.M.; methodology: E.M., A.L. and J.W.; project administration: J.W.; writing—original draft: M.J. and J.W.; writing—review and editing: A.C.-D., E.M., A.L, K.J.-P., J.C.-P. and P.B. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the Nutricia Foundation, grant number 504-06-01103115-000-15-07588. The APC was funded by the Department of Pediatric Gastroenterology and Metabolic Diseases, Poznan University of Medical Sciences in Poland.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study was conducted according to the guidelines of the Declaration of Helsinki and was approved by the Bioethics Committee of the Poznan University of Medical Sciences in Poland (protocol code: 606/12, date of approval: 14 June 2012; protocol code: 453/13, date of approval: 9 May 2013; protocol code: 358/14, date of approval: 3 April 2014; protocol code: 398/15, date of approval: 9 April 2015).

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

Data Availability Statement

The data presented in this study are available on request from the corresponding author (J.W.). The data cannot be publicly accessed as the result of disagreements among the study participants.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest related to the study. The funders had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript; or in the decision to publish the results.

References

  1. Hite, A.H.; Bernstein, L.H. Functional Foods: Needs, Claims, and Benefits. Nutrition 2012, 28, 338–339. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Campbell, B.; Kreider, R.B. Conjugated Linoleic Acids. Curr. Sports Med. Rep. 2008, 7, 237–241. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Churruca, I.; Fernández-Quintela, A.; Portillo, M.P. Conjugated Linoleic Acid Isomers: Differences in Metabolism and Biological Effects. Biofactors 2009, 35, 105–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Parodi, P. Conjugated Linoleic Acid in Food. In Advances in Conjugated Linoleic Acid Research; Sébédio, J.L., Christie, W.W., Adloff, R., Eds.; AOCS Publishing: Champaign, IL, USA, 2003; Volume 2, pp. 101–122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Dilzer, A.; Park, Y. Implication of Conjugated Linoleic Acid (CLA) in Human Health. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 2012, 52, 488–513. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Zeng, Y.; Liu, P.; Yang, X.; Li, H.; Li, H.; Guo, Y.; Meng, X.; Liu, X. The Dietary C9, T11-Conjugated Linoleic Acid Enriched from Butter Reduces Breast Cancer Progression in vivo. J. Food Biochem. 2020, 44, e13163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Chinnadurai, K.; Kanwal, H.K.; Tyagi, A.K.; Stanton, C.; Ross, P. High Conjugated Linoleic Acid Enriched Ghee (Clarified Butter) Increases the Antioxidant and Antiatherogenic Potency in Female Wistar Rats. Lipids Health Dis. 2013, 12, 121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Rastgoo, S.; Shimi, G.; Shiraseb, F.; Karbasi, A.; Ashtary-Larky, D.; Yousefi, M.; Golalipour, E.; Asbaghi, O.; Zamani, M. The Effects of Conjugated Linoleic Acid Supplementation on Inflammatory Cytokines and Adipokines in Adults: A GRADE-Assessed Systematic Review and Dose-Response Meta-Analysis. Front. Immunol. 2023, 14, 1092077. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Mądry, E.; Malesza, I.J.; Subramaniapillai, M.; Czochralska-Duszyńska, A.; Walkowiak, M.; Miśkiewicz-Chotnicka, A.; Walkowiak, J.; Lisowska, A. Body Fat Changes and Liver Safety in Obese and Overweight Women Supplemented with Conjugated Linoleic Acid: A 12-Week Randomised, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial. Nutrients 2020, 12, 1811. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Rahman, S.M.; Wang, Y.M.; Han, S.Y.; Cha, J.Y.; Fukuda, N.; Yotsumoto, H.; Yanagita, T. Effects of Short-Term Administration of Conjugated Linoleic Acid on Lipid Metabolism in White and Brown Adipose Tissues of Starved/Refed Otsuka Long-Evans Tokushima Fatty Rats. Food Res. Int. 2001, 34, 515–520. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Banu, J.; Bhattacharya, A.; Rahman, M.; Fernandes, G. Beneficial Effects of Conjugated Linoleic Acid and Exercise on Bone of Middle-Aged Female Mice. J. Bone Min. Metab. 2008, 26, 436–445. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Li, Y.; Watkins, B.A. Conjugated Linoleic Acids Alter Bone Fatty Acid Composition and Reduce Ex Vivo Prostaglandin E2 Biosynthesis in Rats Fed N-6 or n-3 Fatty Acids. Lipids 1998, 33, 417–425. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Watkins, B.A.; Seifert, M.F. Conjugated Linoleic Acid and Bone Biology. J. Am. Coll. Nutr. 2000, 19, 478S–486S. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Prentice, A.; Schoenmakers, I.; Ann Laskey, M.; de Bono, S.; Ginty, F.; Goldberg, G.R. Nutrition and Bone Growth and Development. Proc. Nutr. Soc. 2006, 65, 348–360. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Park, Y.; Pariza, M.W.; Park, Y. Cosupplementation of Dietary Calcium and Conjugated Linoleic Acid (CLA) Improves Bone Mass in Mice. J. Food Sci. 2008, 73, C556–C560. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Park, Y.; Kim, J.; Scrimgeour, A.G.; Condlin, M.L.; Kim, D.; Park, Y. Conjugated Linoleic Acid and Calcium Co-Supplementation Improves Bone Health in Ovariectomised Mice. Food Chem. 2013, 140, 280–288. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Lin, G.; Wang, H.; Dai, J.; Li, X.; Guan, M.; Gao, S.; Ding, Q.; Wang, H.; Fang, H. Conjugated Linoleic Acid Prevents Age-Induced Bone Loss in Mice by Regulating Both Osteoblastogenesis and Adipogenesis. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 2017, 490, 813–820. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. Brownbill, R.A.; Petrosian, M.; Ilich, J.Z. Association between Dietary Conjugated Linoleic Acid and Bone Mineral Density in Postmenopausal Women. J. Am. Coll. Nutr. 2005, 24, 177–181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. Kreider, R.; Ferreira, M.; Greenwood, M.; Wilson, M.; Almada, A. Effects of Conjugated Linoleic Acid Supplementation during Resistance Training on Body Composition, Bone Density, Strength, and Selected Hematological Markers. J. Strength. Cond. Res. 2002, 16, 325–334. [Google Scholar]
  20. Gaullier, J.M.; Halse, J.; Høivik, H.O.; Syvertsen, C.; Nurminiemi, M.; Hassfeld, C.; Einerhand, A.; O’Shea, M.; Gudmundsen, O. Six Months Supplementation with Conjugated Linoleic Acid Induces Regional-Specific Fat Mass Decreases in Overweight and Obese. Br. J. Nutr. 2007, 97, 550–560. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Gaullier, J.M.; Halse, J.; Høye, K.; Kristiansen, K.; Fagertun, H.; Vik, H.; Gudmundsen, O. Conjugated Linoleic Acid Supplementation for 1 y Reduces Body Fat Mass in Healthy Overweight Humans. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 2004, 79, 1118–1125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Gaullier, J.M.; Halse, J.; Høye, K.; Kristiansen, K.; Fagertun, H.; Vik, H.; Gudmundsen, O. Supplementation with Conjugated Linoleic Acid for 24 Months Is Well Tolerated by and Reduces Body Fat Mass in Healthy, Overweight Humans. J. Nutr. 2005, 135, 778–784. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Racine, N.M.; Watras, A.C.; Carrel, A.L.; Allen, D.B.; McVean, J.J.; Clark, R.R.; O’Brien, A.R.; O’Shea, M.; Scott, C.E.; Schoeller, D.A. Effect of Conjugated Linoleic Acid on Body Fat Accretion in Overweight or Obese Children. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 2010, 91, 1157–1164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Madry, E.; Chudzicka-Strugala, I.; Grabańska-Martyńska, K.; Malikowska, K.; Grebowiec, P.; Lisowska, A.; Bogdański, P.; Walkowiak, J. Twelve Weeks CLA Supplementation Decreases the Hip Circumference in Overweight and Obese Women. A Double-Blind, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Trial. Acta Sci. Pol. Technol. Aliment. 2016, 15, 107–113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Łochocka, K.; Glapa, A.; Nowak, J.K.; Duś-Żuchowska, M.; Grabańska, K.; Bogdański, P.; Fidler, E.; Mądry, E.; Walkowiak, J. Clinical Outcomes of Conjugated Linoleic Acid Supplementation in the Overweight and the Obese: A Study Protocol. JMS 2014, 83, 318–321. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Dus-Zuchowska, M.; Madry, E.; Krzyzanowska, P.; Bogdanski, P.; Walkowiak, J. Twelve-Week-Conjugated Linoleic Acid Supplementation Has No Effects on the Selected Markers of Atherosclerosis in Obese and Overweight Women. Food Nutr. Res. 2016, 60, 32776. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Walkowiak, J.; Malikowska, K.; Glapa, A.; Bogdański, P.; Fidler-Witoń, E.; Szulińska, M.; Chudzicka-Strugała, I.; Miśkiewicz-Chotnicka, A.; Mądry, E.; Lisowska, A. Conjugated Linoleic Acid Does Not Affect Digestion and Absorption of Fat and Starch-a Randomized, Double-Blinded, Placebo-Controlled Parallel Study. J. Breath. Res. 2017, 12, 016010. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Metabolic Consequences of Conjugated Linoleic Acid Supplementation in Overweight and Obese Subjects; German Clinical Trials Register: Cologne, Germany, 2023; Available online: https://drks.de/search/en/trial/DRKS00010462 (accessed on 22 April 2023).
  29. Sawicka-Gutaj, N.; Gruszczyński, D.; Guzik, P.; Mostowska, A.; Walkowiak, J. Publication Ethics of Human Studies in the Light of the Declaration of Helsinki—A Mini-Review. JMS 2022, 91, e700. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Moher, D.; Hopewell, S.; Schulz, K.F.; Montori, V.; Gøtzsche, P.C.; Devereaux, P.J.; Elbourne, D.; Egger, M.; Altman, D.G. CONSORT 2010 Explanation and Elaboration: Updated Guidelines for Reporting Parallel Group Randomised Trials. BMJ 2010, 340, c869. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. World Health Organization. Obesity and Overweight; World Health Organization: Geneva, Switzerland, 2016.
  32. Qiao, D.; Li, Y.; Liu, X.; Zhang, X.; Qian, X.; Zhang, H.; Zhang, G.; Wang, C. Association of Obesity with Bone Mineral Density and Osteoporosis in Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Public Health 2020, 180, 22–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Turcotte, A.F.; O’Connor, S.; Morin, S.N.; Gibbs, J.C.; Willie, B.M.; Jean, S.; Gagnon, C. Association Between Obesity and Risk of Fracture, Bone Mineral Density and Bone Quality in Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. PLoS ONE 2021, 16, e0252487. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Piñar-Gutierrez, A.; García-Fontana, C.; García-Fontana, B.; Muñoz-Torres, M. Obesity and Bone Health: A Complex Relationship. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2022, 23, 8303. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Johansson, H.; Kanis, J.A.; Odén, A.; McCloskey, E.; Chapurlat, R.D.; Christiansen, C.; Cummings, S.R.; Diez-Perez, A.; Eisman, J.A.; Fujiwara, S.; et al. A Meta-Analysis of the Association of Fracture Risk and Body Mass Index in Women. J. Bone Min. Res. 2014, 29, 223–233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Forte, Y.S.; Renovato-Martins, M.; Barja-Fidalgo, C. Cellular and Molecular Mechanisms Associating Obesity to Bone Loss. Cells 2023, 12, 521. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Tarnopolsky, M.; Zimmer, A.; Paikin, J.; Safdar, A.; Aboud, A.; Pearce, E.; Roy, B.; Doherty, T. Creatine Monohydrate and Conjugated Linoleic Acid Improve Strength and Body Composition Following Resistance Exercise in Older Adults. PLoS ONE 2007, 2, e991. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Brown, A.W.; Trenkle, A.H.; Beitz, D.C. Diets High in Conjugated Linoleic Acid from Pasture-Fed Cattle Did Not Alter Markers of Health in Young Women. Nutr. Res. 2011, 31, 33–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Doyle, L.; Jewell, C.; Mullen, A.; Nugent, A.P.; Roche, H.M.; Cashman, K.D. Effect of Dietary Supplementation with Conjugated Linoleic Acid on Markers of Calcium and Bone Metabolism in Healthy Adult Men. Eur. J. Clin. Nutr. 2005, 59, 432–440. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  40. DeGuire, J.R.; Makarem, N.; Vanstone, C.A.; Morin, S.; Duque, G.; Weiler, H.A. Conjugated Linoleic Acid Is Related to Bone Mineral Density but Does Not Affect Parathyroid Hormone in Men. Nutr. Res. 2012, 32, 911–920. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Aryaeian, N.; Shahram, F.; Djalali, M. CLA Has a Useful Effect on Bone Markers in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis. Lipids 2016, 51, 1397–1405. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Pinkoski, C.; Chilibeck, P.D.; Candow, D.G.; Esliger, D.; Ewaschuk, J.B.; Facci, M.; Farthing, J.P.; Zello, G.A. The Effects of Conjugated Linoleic Acid Supplementation during Resistance Training. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc. 2006, 38, 339–348. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Kang, K.; Pariza, M.W. Trans-10, Cis-12-Conjugated Linoleic Acid Reduces Leptin Secretion from 3T3-L1 Adipocytes. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 2001, 287, 377–382. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Ducy, P.; Amling, M.; Takeda, S.; Priemel, M.; Schilling, A.F.; Beil, F.T.; Shen, J.; Vinson, C.; Rueger, J.M.; Karsenty, G. Leptin Inhibits Bone Formation through a Hypothalamic Relay: A Central Control of Bone Mass. Cell 2000, 100, 197–207. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  45. Heaney, R.P. The Bone-remodeling Transient: Implications for the Interpretation of Clinical Studies of Bone Mass Change. J. Bone Min. Res. 1994, 9, 1515–1523. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Mushtaq, S.; Heather Mangiapane, E.; Hunter, K.A. Estimation of Cis-9, Trans-11 Conjugated Linoleic Acid Content in UK Foods and Assessment of Dietary Intake in a Cohort of Healthy Adults. Br. J. Nutr. 2010, 103, 1366–1374. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Ritzenthaler, K.L.; McGuire, M.K.; Falen, R.; Shultz, T.D.; Dasgupta, N.; McGuire, M.A. Estimation of Conjugated Linoleic Acid Intake by Written Dietary Assessment Methodologies Underestimates Actual Intake Evaluated by Food Duplicate Methodology. J. Nutr. 2001, 131, 1548–1554. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  48. Weiler, H.A.; Fitzpatrick, S.; Fitzpatrick-Wong, S.C. Dietary Conjugated Linoleic Acid in the Cis-9, Trans-11 Isoform Reduces Parathyroid Hormone in Male, but Not Female, Rats. J. Nutr. Biochem. 2008, 19, 762–769. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  49. Weiler, H.; Austin, S.; Fitzpatrick-Wong, S.; Nitschmann, E.; Bankovic-Calic, N.; Mollard, R.; Aukema, H.; Ogborn, M. Conjugated Linoleic Acid Reduces Parathyroid Hormone in Health and in Polycystic Kidney Disease in Rats. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 2004, 79, 1186S–1189S. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Avenell, A.; Richmond, P.; Lean, M.; Reid, D. Bone Loss Associated with a High Fibre Weight Reduction Diet in Postmenopausal Women. Eur. J. Clin. Nutr. 1994, 48, 561–566. [Google Scholar]
  51. Kenkre, J.S.; Bassett, J. The bone remodelling cycle. Ann. Clin. Biochem. 2018, 55, 308–327. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Medicina 59 01690 g001
Figure 1. CONSORT 2010 participants flow diagram.
Figure 1. CONSORT 2010 participants flow diagram.
Medicina 59 01690 g001
Table 1. Inclusion and exclusion criteria to the study.
Table 1. Inclusion and exclusion criteria to the study.
Inclusion CriteriaExclusion Criteria
  • Sex: women
  • Age ≥ 18 years old
  • BMI ≥ 25 kg/m2
  • Stable body weight during the last three months (±3 kg)
  • History of chronic diseases (e.g., celiac disease, type 2 diabetes mellitus, and hepatic and pancreatic)
  • Pregnant and breastfeeding women
  • Subjects who previously took CLA supplementation or dietary supplements which interfered with fat digestion or absorption
BMI—body mass index; CLA—conjugated linoleic acid.
Table 2. Content of fatty acids in capsules containing placebo and CLA.
Table 2. Content of fatty acids in capsules containing placebo and CLA.
CLA [%]Placebo [%]
Cis-9, trans-11 isomer400
Trans-10, cis-12 isomer400
Palmitic acid (C16:0)3.64.8
Stearic acid (C18:0)1.12.1
Oleic acid (C18:1)12.910.2
Linoleic acid (C18:2)1.261.2
α-linolenic acid (C18:3)0.821.7
Arachidic acid (C20:0)0.40
CLA—conjugated linoleic acid.
Table 3. Anthropometric characteristics of the study population.
Table 3. Anthropometric characteristics of the study population.
CLA Group
(n = 37)		Placebo Group
(n = 37)		p
Mean ± SDMedian (IQR)Mean ± SDMedian (IQR)
Age [years]51.8 ± 10.254 (43–59)51.7 ± 11.454 (45–61)0.9914
Weight [kg]90.9 ± 12.290.0 (80.1–99.6)93.3 ± 12.291.6 (85.4–101.0)0.3546
Height [cm]163 ± 4163 (160–166)163 ± 6163 (159–167)0.7067
BMI [kg/m2]34.38 ± 4.2834.00 (30.70–37.58)34.99 ± 4.0435.36 (31.75–38.62)0.5049
Waist circumference [cm]118.4 ± 10.7116.0 (110.0–127.0)119.6 ± 10.0119.0 (111.5–125.5)0.5983
Hip circumference [cm]108.5 ± 7.0108.0 (104.0–114.0)109.1 ± 9.0109.0 (103.0–115.0)0.8298
Fat mass [%]45.0 ± 4.344.9 (42.2–48.6)43.8 ± 4.443.3 (41.3–46.9)0.2489
BMI—body mass index; CLA—conjugated linoleic acid; IQR—interquartile range.
Table 4. Comparison of densitometric parameters between CLA and placebo groups before the intervention.
Table 4. Comparison of densitometric parameters between CLA and placebo groups before the intervention.
Pre-InterventionPost-Interventionp 1p 2
CLA Group
(n = 32)		Placebo Group
(n = 30)		pCLA Group
(n = 32)		Placebo Group
(n = 30)		p
Mean ± SDMedian (IQR)Mean ± SDMedian (IQR)Mean ± SDMedian (IQR)Mean ± SDMedian (IQR)
Total bodyBMD [g/cm2]1.16 ± 0.081.17
(1.11–1.22)		1.16 ± 0.111.15
(1.07–1.24)		0.97881.16 ± 0.071.17
(1.11–1.22)		1.17 ± 0.111.14
(1.09–1.22)		0.91610.74350.6733
BMC [g]2370.72 ± 247.842333.13
(2201.23–2534.94)		2428.63 ± 407.932365.75
(2168.07–2589.96)		0.82842376.10 ± 242.482340.67
(2242.62–2519.77)		2432.90 ± 415.992349.77
(2204.44–2627.32)		0.77430.98510.5577
Lumbar spine
(L1–L4)		BMD [g/cm2]1.03 ± 0.151.04
(0.94–1.08)		1.06 ± 0.201.04
(0.91–1.13)		0.77431.06 ± 0.151.06
(0.98–1.12)		1.03 ± 0.161.05
(0.93–1.12)		0.55330.03970.9018
BMC [g]58.82 ± 9.3759.46
(52.87–63.06)		61.28 ± 13.5958.89
(51.13–67.51)		0.599860.14 ± 9.7160.10
(53.03–66.18)		61.45 ± 14.7559.45
(53.41–67.55)		0.75300.01000.4284
Femoral neckBMD [g/cm2]0.87 ± 0.120.87
(0.82–0.92)		0.86 ± 0.140.85
(0.76–0.91)		0.75560.87 ± 0.110.87
(0.83–0.93)		0.87 ± 0.130.84
(0.78–0.93)		0.98910.47740.3223
BMC [g]4.22 ± 0.634.24
(3.87–4.56)		4.28 ± 0.834.07
(3.72–4.72)		0.74284.23 ± 0.584.40
(3.80–4.60)		4.23 ± 0.794.16
(3.84—4.71)		0.98220.88250.1722
BMC—bone mineral content; BMD—bone mineral density; CLA—conjugated linoleic acid; IQR—interquartile range; SD—standard deviation; 1 CLA group: pre- vs. post-intervention; 2 Placebo group: pre- vs. post-intervention.
Table 5. Comparison of differences in densitometric parameters between CLA and placebo groups.
Table 5. Comparison of differences in densitometric parameters between CLA and placebo groups.
CLA Group
(n = 32)		Placebo Group
(n = 30)		p
Mean ± SDMedian (IQR)Mean ± SDMedian (IQR)
Total bodyΔ BMD [g/cm2]0.00 ± 0.040.00
(−0.02–0.01)		0.00 ± 0.020.00
(−0.01–0.01)		0.5614
Δ BMC [g]5.37 ± 69.555.02
(−38.94–35.21)		4.27 ± 61.1610.83
(−33.52–37.70)		0.6096
Lumbar spine (L1–L4)Δ BMD [g/cm2]0.03 ± 0.060.01
(−0.01–0.04)		−0.02 ± 0.13−0.01
(−0.03–0.03)		0.1201
Δ BMC [g]1.32 ± 2.730.97
(−0.24–2.02)		0.18 ± 4.890.33
(−1.11–2.39)		0.3514
Femoral neckΔ BMD [g/cm2]0.00 ± 0.060.00
(−0.03–0.02)		0.01 ± 0.030.01
(−0.01–0.02)		0.2358
Δ BMC [g]0.01 ± 0.280.03
(−0.09–0.14)		−0.06 ± 0.230.00
(−0.19–0.07)		0.3225
BMC—bone mineral content; BMD—bone mineral density; CLA—conjugated linoleic acid; IQR—interquartile range; SD—standard deviation.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Jamka, M.; Czochralska-Duszyńska, A.; Mądry, E.; Lisowska, A.; Jończyk-Potoczna, K.; Cielecka-Piontek, J.; Bogdański, P.; Walkowiak, J. The Effect of Conjugated Linoleic Acid Supplementation on Densitometric Parameters in Overweight and Obese Women—A Randomised Controlled Trial. Medicina 2023, 59, 1690. https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina59091690

AMA Style

Jamka M, Czochralska-Duszyńska A, Mądry E, Lisowska A, Jończyk-Potoczna K, Cielecka-Piontek J, Bogdański P, Walkowiak J. The Effect of Conjugated Linoleic Acid Supplementation on Densitometric Parameters in Overweight and Obese Women—A Randomised Controlled Trial. Medicina. 2023; 59(9):1690. https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina59091690

Chicago/Turabian Style

Jamka, Małgorzata, Agata Czochralska-Duszyńska, Edyta Mądry, Aleksandra Lisowska, Katarzyna Jończyk-Potoczna, Judyta Cielecka-Piontek, Paweł Bogdański, and Jarosław Walkowiak. 2023. "The Effect of Conjugated Linoleic Acid Supplementation on Densitometric Parameters in Overweight and Obese Women—A Randomised Controlled Trial" Medicina 59, no. 9: 1690. https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina59091690

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop