While some individuals can defy the lure of temptation, many others find appetizing food irresistible. The goal of this study was to investigate the neuropsychological mechanisms that increase individuals' vulnerability to cue-induced eating. Using ERPs, a direct measure of brain activity, we showed that individuals with larger late positive potentials in response to food-related cues than to erotic images are more susceptible to cue-induced eating and, in the presence of a palatable food option, eat more than twice as much as individuals with the opposite brain reactivity profile. By highlighting the presence of individual brain reactivity profiles associated with susceptibility to cue-induced eating, these findings contribute to the understanding of the neurobiological basis of vulnerability to obesity.

Postmenopausal breast cancer is the most common obesity-related cancer death among women in the U.S. Insulin resistance, which worsens in the setting of obesity, is associated with higher breast cancer incidence and mortality. Maladaptive eating patterns driving insulin resistance represent a key modifiable risk factor for breast cancer. Emerging evidence suggests that time-restricted feeding paradigms (TRF) improve cancer-related metabolic risk factors; however, more flexible approaches could be more feasible and effective. In this exploratory, secondary analysis, we identified participants following a low-glucose eating pattern (LGEP), defined as consuming energy when glucose levels are at or below average fasting levels, as an alternative to TRF. Results show that following an LGEP regimen for at least 40% of reported eating events improves insulin resistance (HOMA-IR) and other cancer-related serum biomarkers. The magnitude of serum biomarkers changes observed here has previously been shown to favorably modulate benign breast tissue in women with overweight and obesity who are at risk for postmenopausal breast cancer. By comparison, the observed effects of LGEP were similar to results from previously published TRF studies in similar populations. These preliminary findings support further testing of LGEP as an alternative to TRF and a postmenopausal breast cancer prevention strategy. However, results should be interpreted with caution, given the exploratory nature of analyses.