Cited by 106Diet and metabolism studiesPharmacology and Obesity TreatmentObesity, Physical Activity, Diet

Effectiveness of a Total Meal Replacement Program (OPTIFAST Program) on Weight Loss: Results from the OPTIWIN Study

Open access
Ard, Jamy D., Lewis, Kristina H., Rothberg, Amy, Auriemma, Anthony, Coburn, Sally L., Cohen, Sarah S., Loper, Judy, Matarese, Laura +2 more·2019·Obesity

Abstract

Objective The aim of this study was to test the effectiveness of the OPTIFAST program (OP), a total meal replacement dietary intervention, compared with a food‐based (FB) dietary plan for weight loss. Methods Participants with BMI 30 to 55 kg/m2, age 18 to 70 years old, were randomized to OP or FB dietary and lifestyle interventions for 26 weeks, followed by a weight‐maintenance phase. Outcomes were percent change in body weight (%WL) from baseline to weeks 26 and 52, associated changes in body composition (using dual energy x‐ray absorptiometry), and adverse events. Primary analysis used repeated‐measures multivariable linear mixed models to compare outcomes between groups in a modified intention‐to‐treat fashion (mITT). Results A total of 273 participants (83% of randomized; 135 OP, 138 FB) made up the mITT population. Mean age was 47.1 ± 11.2 years; 82% were female and 71% non‐Hispanic white. Baseline BMI was 38.8 ± 5.9 kg/m2. At 26 weeks, OP %WL was 12.4% ± 0.6% versus 6.0% ± 0.6% in FB (P < 0.001). At 52 weeks, OP %WL was 10.5% ± 0.6% versus 5.5% ± 0.6% in FB (P < 0.001). Fat mass loss was greater for OP; lean mass loss was proportional to total weight loss. There was no difference in serious adverse event rates between groups. Conclusions Compared with an FB approach, OP was more effective with greater sustained weight loss.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/oby.22303

Cites

23 of 23 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Loss of lean body mass with GLP1-RAs is proportionate to total weight loss and corresponds to similar changes seen after substantial weight loss following total dietary replacement programs and bariatric surgery.

    “However, this loss was proportionate to total weight loss and corresponds to similar changes seen following substantial weight loss after total dietary replacement (TDR) programs and bariatric surgery.”

    From The societal implications of using glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists for the treatment of obesity (2025) · cites this paper as [24]

    The Results (‘Changes in body composition’; page not provided) report that lean mass accounted for 23% of weight loss in the OPTIFAST total meal replacement group, supporting the dietary-replacement part of the comparison. The paper does not compare those changes with lean-mass loss from GLP-1 receptor agonists or bariatric surgery. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Nutritional interventions have been shown to support the preservation of lean muscle mass, as a proportion of total weight, during weight loss.

    “Nutritional interventions have been shown to support the preservation of lean muscle mass, as a proportion of total weight, during weight loss [117]”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ard, J. D., Lewis, K. H., Rothberg, A., Auriemma, A., Coburn, S. L., Cohen, S. S., Loper, J., Matarese, L., Pories, W. J., & Periman, S.
Affiliations
  • Wake Forest University Health Sciences (US)
  • Michigan Medicine (US)
  • Alexian Brothers Health System (US)
  • Alaska Premier Health Anchorage Alaska USA
  • EpidStat Institute Ann Arbor Michigan USA
  • The Central Ohio Nutrition Center, Inc. Gahanna Ohio USA
  • East Carolina University (US)
  • Nestlé Health Science (United States) (US)
Corresponding author
Ard, Jamy D.
Venue
Obesity
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2018-11-13
Volume
27
Issue
1
Pages
22-29
ISSN
  • 1930-7381 (ISSN-L)
  • 1930-739X
OpenAlex
W2901884969
Cited by
106
References
23
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 35 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 2
FWCI
5.31
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Obesity (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • The Scholarship East Carolina University's Institutional Repository (East Carolina University) (submittedVersion)
  • Deep Blue (University of Michigan) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Nestlé Health Science
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Diet and metabolism studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Pharmacology and Obesity Treatment
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Obesity, Physical Activity, Diet
Keywords
OPTIFAST, weight loss, dietary intervention, body composition, fat loss, lean body mass, weight maintenance, adverse events
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Obesity, Parenteral Nutrition, Total, Weight Loss, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review