Effects of the egg protein hydrolysate NWT-03 on cognitive function in men and women with the metabolic syndrome: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study

Figures & data

Figure 1. Flowchart of subjects.

Table 1. Baseline subject characteristics.

	Subjects (n = 37)
Men/women (%)	65/35
Age (years)	60.1 ± 10.3
BMI (kg/m^2)	31.9 ± 3.6
Waist circumference (cm)	109.1 ± 11.5
Systolic BP (mmHg)	132 ± 13*
Diastolic BP (mmHg)	86 ± 9
TAG (mmol/L)	1.87 ± 1.07
Total cholesterol (mmol/L)	5.58 ± 0.84
HDL cholesterol (mmol/L)	1.08 ± 0.35
LDL cholesterol (mmol/L)	3.67 ± 0.86
Glucose (mmol/L)	5.85 ± 0.65

Notes: Values are presented as mean ± SD; * significant difference between men and women (P < 0.05); BMI: body mass index; BP: blood pressure; TAG: triacylglycerol; HDL: high-density lipoprotein; LDL: low-density lipoprotein.

Table 2. Average response times (ms) of the anti-cue reaction time test before and after the control and intervention period (n = 37).

	Day 0	Day 27	Delta	Treatment effect (95% CI); P value
Control	519.2 ± 101.8	515.4 ± 92.6	−3.8 ± 56.5	−14.3 (−21.5, −7.1); < 0.001*
Intervention	529.8 ± 102.4	512.0 ± 88.4	−17.8 ± 51.4

Notes: Values are presented as mean ± SD; no significant treatment*period effect, therefore, data of both periods combined; treatment effect (95% CI) corrected for period; * significant treatment effect.

Table 3. Average response times (ms) of the psychomotor vigilance test before and after the control and intervention period (n = 37).

	Day 0	Day 27	Delta	Treatment effect (95% CI); P value
Control	384.8 ± 95.3	392.8 ± 85.1	8.0 ± 67.7	+4.1 (−7.5, 15.8); 0.487
Intervention	377.1 ± 76.8	388.9 ± 95.1	11.8 ± 53.6

Notes: Values are presented as mean ± SD; no significant treatment*period effect, therefore, data of both periods combined; treatment effect (95% CI) corrected for period.

Table 4. Brain-derived neurotrophic factor concentrations (pg/ml) before and after the control and intervention period of all subjects (n = 71) and the subjects that completed all cognitive measurements (n = 40).

		Day 0	Day 27	Delta	Treatment effect (95% CI); P value
n = 71	Control	32642 ± 8833	32197 ± 8714	−445 ± 7071	+1377 (−933, 3687); 0.241
	Intervention	31813 ± 8172	32744 ± 8553	931 ± 6850
n = 40	Control	31923 ± 9232	32348 ± 8013	426 ± 6763	−424 (−3383, 2535); 0.776
	Intervention	31813 ± 7987	31815 ± 8007	2 ± 6529

Notes: Values are presented as mean ± SD; no significant treatment*period effect, therefore, data of both periods combined.

Data availability statement

The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be made available by the authors, without undue reservation.