Reconsidering metabolic adaptation in weight loss evidence: insights and potential limitations of tirzepatide-induced fat oxidation
0 
INTRODUCTION
Metabolic adaptation, also referred to as adaptive thermogenesis, has long been proposed as one of the biological mechanisms underlying resistance to sustained weight loss and the high prevalence of weight regain following caloric restrictions. It is characterized by a reduction in energy expenditure that exceeds what would be predicted based on changes in fat mass and fat-free mass and has been documented across a range of dietary and behavioral weight-loss interventions[1-3]. Against this backdrop, pharmacologic therapies capable of decreasing the metabolic adaptation have been viewed as a potential means to improve long-term weight-loss maintenance.
The emergence of incretin-based pharmacotherapies, particularly glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists and newer dual-agonist agents, has transformed obesity management and renewed interest in the physiological mechanisms underpinning pharmacologic weight loss. Tirzepatide, a dual glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide (GIP) and GLP-1 receptor agonist, has demonstrated significant weight-loss efficacy in large, randomized trials involving individuals with obesity, with or without type 2 diabetes[4-6]. While appetite suppression and reduced energy intake are well-established contributors to these effects, whether tirzepatide favorably alters energy expenditure or mitigates metabolic adaptation has remained uncertain.
In this context, Ravussin et al. conducted a translational investigation combining preclinical and clinical approaches to evaluate the mechanisms underlying tirzepatide-induced weight loss[7]. In the preclinical component, mice with diet-induced obesity undergoing calorie restriction were treated with tirzepatide and compared with vehicle-treated and pair-fed controls. In parallel, a randomized, placebo-controlled phase 1 clinical trial enrolled adults with obesity undergoing a structured dietary intervention designed to achieve approximately 10% weight loss over 18 weeks, followed by a short weight-maintenance phase. Energy metabolism was assessed using whole-room indirect calorimetry, alongside measurements of substrate utilization, appetite, and energy intake.
The study demonstrated a clear divergence between preclinical and human findings. In mice, tirzepatide attenuated the expected decline in energy expenditure during caloric restriction, consistent with a reduction in metabolic adaptation. In contrast, in humans, tirzepatide did not alter energy expenditure beyond what would be predicted by changes in body composition. However, it significantly increased fat oxidation and reduced energy intake through appetite suppression. These findings suggest that, in humans, tirzepatide-induced weight loss is driven predominantly by reduced caloric intake and altered substrate utilization rather than preservation of energy expenditure. The study provided critical mechanistic insight by directly assessing energy expenditure, metabolic adaptation, and fat oxidation in both preclinical and human models, adding nuance to our understanding of incretin-based weight-loss pharmacology. At the same time, several methodological considerations warrant discussion, particularly regarding how metabolic adaptation is defined, measured, and timed in pharmacologic weight-loss trials[7].
METABOLIC ADAPTATION: CONCEPT AND CONTROVERSY
Adaptive reductions in energy expenditure during weight loss have been described for decades, particularly in the setting of caloric restriction[1,2]. Seminal work by Rosenbaum and Leibel[1] demonstrated that reductions in resting and non-resting energy expenditure (REE) persist even after accounting for changes in body composition, potentially predisposing individuals to weight regain[1]. The concept of metabolic adaptation is not uniformly defined and remains subject to ongoing debate. Its existence and magnitude are highly sensitive to methodological choices, including prediction models, body composition adjustments, and timing of measurement. Consequently, some have argued that what is described as metabolic adaptation may partially reflect a methodological artifact rather than a discrete physiological mechanism[2,3].
Importantly, the contribution of metabolic adaptation to long-term weight regain remains debated. Some investigators argue that its role may be overstated relative to behavioral, environmental, and neuroendocrine drivers of energy intake[8,9]. Thus, focusing solely on energy expenditure provides an incomplete representation of the physiological response to weight loss. In parallel with changes in energy expenditure, weight loss elicits coordinated hormonal responses that influence appetite regulation. Reductions in circulating leptin, which reflects diminished energy stores, and increases in ghrelin, a hormone that stimulates hunger, have been consistently observed following weight loss. These changes contribute to increased appetite, reduced satiety, and a sustained biological drive to restore lost weight[10,11].
These appetite-related hormonal responses operate through mechanisms that are distinct from alterations in energy expenditure and play a central role in long-term weight regulation. Incretin-based therapies, including tirzepatide, directly influence these pathways by reducing appetite and lowering energy intake. As a result, the mechanistic findings reported by Ravussin et al., which focus on energy expenditure, capture only one aspect of the physiological response to weight loss[7]. Recognizing the complementary roles of energy expenditure and appetite regulation provides a more complete framework for interpreting the effects of pharmacologic therapies and helps place these findings within the broader context of weight-loss biology. Table 1 summarizes various methods to measure metabolic adaptation followed by specific discussion of the study by Ravussin et al.[7].
Methods for assessing metabolic adaptation: characteristics, advantages, and limitations
| Method | Description | Advantages | Limitations |
| Whole-room indirect calorimetry[12] | Measures 24-h energy expenditure and substrate oxidation under controlled conditions | High precision; allows differentiation between sleeping and waking metabolic rates; considered gold standard | Artificial environment; limited generalizability; sensitive to short-term energy balance |
| RMR assessments[13] | Measures basal energy expenditure using metabolic carts | Widely available; scalable; supported by longitudinal data demonstrating persistent adaptation | Captures only a portion of total daily energy expenditure; sensitive to protocol variability |
| DLW[14] | Assesses total energy expenditure in free-living conditions | Reflects real-world energy expenditure; useful for evaluating adherence and energy balance | Limited temporal resolution; relies on modeling assumptions to estimate metabolic adaptation |
| Dynamic energy balance modeling[15] | Uses mathematical models to estimate expected energy expenditure and weight trajectories | Enables prediction of energy expenditure over time; useful for interpreting longitudinal changes | Dependent on assumptions; indirect estimation; should be combined with empirical measurements |
Collectively, these approaches underscore that “metabolic adaptation” is not a single measurable entity but an emergent property dependent on methodology, timing, and analytical framework.
METHODOLOGICAL FACTORS THAT COULD MASK EFFECTS ON METABOLIC ADAPTATION
Timing of energy expenditure assessment
In the human study by Ravussin et al., whole-room indirect calorimetry was performed after participants had largely stabilized their weight near the end of the intervention period[7]. This design choice was critical. Evidence from human metabolic studies has suggested that metabolic adaptation is most pronounced during active negative energy balance and may partially attenuate once energy balance is restored, even if body weight remains reduced[16].
By assessing energy expenditure after weight stabilization, the study by Ravussin et al. may have preferentially captured a phase in which acute adaptive responses had already diminished, thereby biasing results toward a null effect[7]. Serial measurements during early, mid, and late weight-loss phases would have been better suited to capture dynamic changes in metabolic adaptation.
Incomplete matching of weight loss between groups
Although the protocol aimed to achieve comparable weight loss in the tirzepatide and placebo groups, participants receiving tirzepatide frequently exceeded the targeted range[7]. This created limited overlap in changes in fat mass and fat-free mass between groups. Under such conditions, regression-based adjustment for body composition could become statistically fragile, as models are forced to extrapolate beyond regions of shared data.
A matched-weight-loss or matched-energy-deficit design would have improved interpretability of the findings by ensuring that comparisons of adjusted energy expenditure were made within comparable physiological ranges.
Free-living intake variability
Outside the inpatient assessments, energy intake was not fully controlled[7]. Given the strong relationship between energy balance and respiratory exchange ratio (RER), variability in free-living intake could introduce noise that may obscure subtle drug effects on energy expenditure. Incorporation of doubly labeled water to quantify total energy expenditure and infer true energy intake could mitigate this limitation.
GENERALIZABILITY LIMITS: SEX DISTRIBUTION AND SHORT TIME HORIZON FOR “CHRONIC” ADAPTATION
Twenty-four participants in each arm of the phase 1 placebo-controlled randomized trial were predominantly female, which may have limited both detectability of metabolic adaptation and generalizability of the findings[7]. Sex differences in body composition trajectories, sympathetic nervous system activity, and endocrine responses to weight loss, including leptin, thyroid hormones, and catecholamine signaling, have been documented and could meaningfully influence energy expenditure responses during caloric restriction and pharmacologic therapy[8]. Moreover, the intervention duration of 18 weeks, while appropriate for capturing early mechanistic effects on substrate oxidation and appetite, may be insufficient to address ongoing debates regarding the persistence of metabolic adaptation months to years after weight loss. Longitudinal studies in humans suggest that adaptive reductions in energy expenditure can persist well beyond the active weight-loss phase, particularly when assessed over extended follow-up periods[17].
Future studies should aim for more balanced sex representation and incorporate longer follow-up arms (e.g., 52-78 weeks) to distinguish acute, energy-balance-dependent adaptations from longer-term, potentially persistent metabolic changes. Inclusion of continued-treatment and post-discontinuation phases would further clarify whether observed adaptations are reversible, treatment-dependent, or sustained after pharmacologic withdrawal.
METHODOLOGICAL HETEROGENEITY IN ASSESSING METABOLIC ADAPTATION
A critical consideration in interpreting studies of metabolic adaptation is the substantial heterogeneity in how this phenomenon is defined and measured. Metabolic adaptation is not directly observable but is inferred as the difference between measured energy expenditure and that predicted from changes in fat mass and fat-free mass[1-3]. However, the physiological signal captured by this deviation depends heavily on the component of energy expenditure assessed, the modeling assumptions applied, and the timing of measurement.
Some studies have relied on REE, whereas others assessed sleeping metabolic rate (SMR) or total daily energy expenditure (TDEE) measured by doubly labeled water[1,2,10]. These metrics captured distinct physiological processes. REE and SMR primarily reflect basal cellular metabolism, whereas TDEE integrates physical activity and non-exercise activity thermogenesis. As a result, reductions in spontaneous activity during weight loss may be misclassified as metabolic adaptation in some experimental designs but not others[12,18].
The whole-room indirect calorimetry employed by Ravussin et al. represents a methodological strength, allowing simultaneous and tightly controlled assessment of energy expenditure, substrate oxidation, and energy intake[7]. However, this approach may be less sensitive to detecting subtle or delayed adaptations that emerge during weight-maintenance phases rather than during active weight loss. These considerations highlight the need for standardized definitions and longitudinal assessment frameworks when evaluating metabolic adaptation in pharmacologic weight-loss trials.
TIRZEPATIDE AND THE INCRETIN-BASED WEIGHT-LOSS PARADIGM
Tirzepatide uniquely combines agonism at both the GIP and GLP-1 receptors, offering theoretical advantages over GLP-1 receptor agonism alone through complementary effects on appetite regulation, insulin secretion, and lipid metabolism. Clinical trials from the SURMOUNT program have consistently demonstrated substantial and sustained weight loss, with mean reductions exceeding 20% at higher doses in individuals with obesity[4-6].
Despite these clinical outcomes, the physiological mechanisms underpinning tirzepatide-induced weight loss in humans have not been fully elucidated. Specifically, whether tirzepatide counteracts metabolic adaptation, a long-standing goal in obesity pharmacotherapy, has remained an open question.
KEY CONTRIBUTIONS OF THE STUDY BY RAVUSSIN ET AL. (2025)[7]
Ravussin et al. addressed this question through a carefully designed investigation combining preclinical and clinical approaches[7]. In mice with obesity undergoing calorie restriction, tirzepatide attenuated the expected reduction in energy expenditure and shifted substrate utilization toward increased fat oxidation, as evidenced by reductions in RER. These findings suggested mitigation of metabolic adaptation in the preclinical setting.
In contrast, the human component of the study employing whole-room indirect calorimetry revealed no measurable effect of tirzepatide on metabolic adaptation in adults with obesity. Despite significant increases in fat oxidation and reductions in appetite and energy intake, SMR declined proportionally to changes in body composition. This divergence between species represents one of the most informative aspects of the study.
CONTEXTUALIZING TIRZEPATIDE WITHIN THE BROADER GLP-1 THERAPEUTIC LANDSCAPE
The absence of measurable mitigation of metabolic adaptation with tirzepatide in humans is consistent with mechanistic data from trials of GLP-1 receptor agonists, suggesting that this finding reflects a broader characteristic of incretin-based pharmacotherapy.
Studies of semaglutide demonstrated that weight loss was driven predominantly by reductions in energy intake, with REE declining proportionally to losses in fat-free mass and no consistent evidence of preserved basal metabolism after adjustment for body composition[19,20]. Similarly, investigations of liraglutide indicated that reductions in energy expenditure largely mirror changes in lean mass, with no durable preservation of resting metabolism beyond predicted values[21,22]. Weight regain following treatment discontinuation reflects the persistence of underlying physiological mechanisms that promote weight restoration, including energy expenditure adaptations[20]. However, this does not indicate that metabolic adaptation is a primary driver of weight loss during active treatment. Instead, pharmacologic therapies such as tirzepatide may temporarily override these processes through sustained effects on appetite and energy intake, with weight regain occurring when this modulation disappears.
Emerging data from dual and multi-agonist therapies incorporating glucagon receptor activity demonstrate enhanced fat oxidation and thermogenic signaling in preclinical models[23-25]. However, increases in whole-body energy expenditure are highly context-dependent and have not been consistently observed under thermoneutral conditions or replicated in human studies[26]. This pattern closely parallels the species divergence observed by Ravussin et al. and reinforces the translational limitations of rodent models for predicting human energy homeostasis[7].
FAT OXIDATION AS A CENTRAL HUMAN MECHANISM
One of the most consistent findings across both preclinical and clinical components of the study by
CLINICAL AND RESEARCH IMPLICATIONS
Collectively, these findings challenge the long-standing assumption that effective pharmacologic weight loss must involve preservation of REE or mitigation of metabolic adaptation. From a clinical perspective, the data supports reframing patient and clinician expectations: substantial and durable weight loss can be achieved through mechanisms centered on appetite suppression and altered substrate utilization, even in the absence of measurable effects on metabolic adaptation.
From a research standpoint, the study underscores the need for longer-term mechanistic investigations, particularly during weight-maintenance phases, and for standardized definitions and measurement approaches for metabolic adaptation across trials.
CONCLUSION
Ravussin et al. did not demonstrate a measurable effect of tirzepatide on metabolic adaptation in humans[7]. This finding should be interpreted within the context of the study design and its inherent methodological constraints. As discussed, factors such as the timing of energy expenditure assessment during a weight-stable phase, incomplete matching of weight loss between treatment groups, and reliance on regression-based adjustments may have limited their ability to detect subtle or transient changes in energy expenditure. As a result, the absence of a detectable effect should not be interpreted as definitive evidence that tirzepatide does not influence metabolic adaptation.
Instead, these findings suggest that, under the specific experimental conditions studied, tirzepatide-induced weight loss was strongly associated with reductions in energy intake and increases in fat oxidation. Whether tirzepatide exerts additional effects on metabolic adaptation during earlier phases of weight loss or under alternative study designs remains uncertain. A more cautious interpretation acknowledges that multiple physiological mechanisms, including both energy intake and expenditure pathways, may contribute to the overall treatment effect, and that the relative contribution of each mechanism cannot be fully resolved based on the current evidence.
Consequently, the risk of weight regain may become more apparent following treatment discontinuation, when these counter-regulatory mechanisms are no longer pharmacologically suppressed. Importantly, this does not imply that such therapies are ineffective but rather highlights the potential need for continued treatment or adjunctive strategies to support long-term weight maintenance.
DECLARATIONS
Authors’ contributions
Contributed to the development of the manuscript, reviewed and approved the final version, and agreed to be accountable for all aspects of the work: Alashqar MT, Nahata MC
Availability of data and materials
Not applicable.
AI and AI-assisted tools statement
Not applicable.
Financial support and sponsorship
Not applicable.
Conflicts of interest
All authors declared that there are no conflicts of interest.
Ethical approval and consent to participate
Not applicable.
Consent for publication
Not applicable.
Copyright
© The Author(s) 2026.
REFERENCES
2. Redman LM, Smith SR, Burton JH, Martin CK, Il’yasova D, Ravussin E. Metabolic slowing and reduced oxidative damage with sustained caloric restriction support the rate of living and oxidative damage theories of aging. Cell Metab. 2018;27:805-15.e4.
3. Johannsen DL, Knuth ND, Huizenga R, Rood JC, Ravussin E, Hall KD. Metabolic slowing with massive weight loss despite preservation of fat-free mass. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2012;97:2489-96.
4. Venniyoor A. Tirzepatide once weekly for the treatment of obesity. N Engl J Med. 2022;387:1433-4.
5. Wadden TA, Chao AM, Machineni S, et al. Tirzepatide after intensive lifestyle intervention in adults with overweight or obesity: the SURMOUNT-3 phase 3 trial. Nat Med. 2023;29:2909-18.
6. Aronne LJ, Sattar N, Horn DB, et al; SURMOUNT-4 Investigators. Continued treatment with tirzepatide for maintenance of weight reduction in adults with obesity: the SURMOUNT-4 randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2024;331:38-48.
7. Ravussin E, Sanchez-Delgado G, Martin CK, et al. Tirzepatide did not impact metabolic adaptation in people with obesity, but increased fat oxidation. Cell Metab. 2025;37:1060-74.e4.
8. Gabery S, Salinas CG, Paulsen SJ, et al. Semaglutide lowers body weight in rodents via distributed neural pathways. JCI Insight. 2020;5:133429.
9. Redman LM, Heilbronn LK, Martin CK, et al; Pennington CALERIE Team. Metabolic and behavioral compensations in response to caloric restriction: implications for the maintenance of weight loss. PLoS One. 2009;4:e4377.
10. Sumithran P, Prendergast LA, Delbridge E, et al. Long-term persistence of hormonal adaptations to weight loss. N Engl J Med. 2011;365:1597-604.
11. Cummings DE, Weigle DS, Frayo RS, et al. Plasma ghrelin levels after diet-induced weight loss or gastric bypass surgery. N Engl J Med. 2002;346:1623-30.
12. Ravussin E, Lillioja S, Anderson TE, Christin L, Bogardus C. Determinants of 24-hour energy expenditure in man. Methods and results using a respiratory chamber. J Clin Invest. 1986;78:1568-78.
13. Fothergill E, Guo J, Howard L, et al. Persistent metabolic adaptation 6 years after “The Biggest Loser” competition. Obesity. 2016;24:1612-9.
14. Schoeller DA. Recent advances from application of doubly labeled water to measurement of human energy expenditure. J Nutr. 1999;129:1765-8.
15. Hall KD. Predicting metabolic adaptation, body weight change, and energy intake in humans. Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab. 2010;298:E449-66.
16. Martins C, Gower BA, Hunter GR. Metabolic adaptation delays time to reach weight loss goals. Obesity. 2022;30:400-6.
17. Leibel RL, Rosenbaum M, Hirsch J. Changes in energy expenditure resulting from altered body weight. N Engl J Med. 1995;332:621-8.
18. Magkos F. On adaptive thermogenesis: just another weight-loss tale? Am J Clin Nutr. 2020;112:1157-9.
19. Blundell J, Finlayson G, Axelsen M, et al. Effects of once-weekly semaglutide on appetite, energy intake, control of eating, food preference and body weight in subjects with obesity. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2017;19:1242-51.
20. O’Neil PM, Birkenfeld AL, McGowan B, et al. Efficacy and safety of semaglutide compared with liraglutide and placebo for weight loss in patients with obesity: a randomised, double-blind, placebo and active controlled, dose-ranging, phase 2 trial. Lancet. 2018;392:637-49.
21. Astrup A, Rössner S, Van Gaal L, et al; NN8022-1807 Study Group. Effects of liraglutide in the treatment of obesity: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Lancet. 2009;374:1606-16.
22. Pi-Sunyer X, Astrup A, Fujioka K, et al; SCALE Obesity and Prediabetes NN8022-1839 Study Group. A randomized, controlled trial of 3.0 mg of liraglutide in weight management. N Engl J Med. 2015;373:11-22.
23. Finan B, Ma T, Ottaway N, et al. Unimolecular dual incretins maximize metabolic benefits in rodents, monkeys, and humans. Sci Transl Med. 2013;5:209ra151.
24. Finan B, Yang B, Ottaway N, et al. A rationally designed monomeric peptide triagonist corrects obesity and diabetes in rodents. Nat Med. 2015;21:27-36.
25. Kim T, Nason S, Holleman C, et al. Glucagon receptor signaling regulates energy metabolism via hepatic farnesoid X receptor and fibroblast growth factor 21. Diabetes. 2018;67:1773-82.
26. Corbin KD, Carnero EA, Allerton TD, et al. Glucagon-like peptide-1/glucagon receptor agonism associates with reduced metabolic adaptation and higher fat oxidation: a randomized trial. Obesity. 2023;31:350-62.
Cite This Article
Open Access
How to Cite
Download Citation
Export Citation File:
Type of Import
Tips on Downloading Citation
Citation Manager File Format
Type of Import
Direct Import: When the Direct Import option is selected (the default state), a dialogue box will give you the option to Save or Open the downloaded citation data. Choosing Open will either launch your citation manager or give you a choice of applications with which to use the metadata. The Save option saves the file locally for later use.
Indirect Import: When the Indirect Import option is selected, the metadata is displayed and may be copied and pasted as needed.
About This Article
Copyright
Data & Comments
Data
0
Comments
Comments must be written in English. Spam, offensive content, impersonation, and private information will not be permitted. If any comment is reported and identified as inappropriate content by OAE staff, the comment will be removed without notice. If you have any queries or need any help, please contact us at [email protected].