Long-term effects of the Diabetes Prevention Program interventions on cardiovascular risk factors: a report from the DPP Outcomes Study.

Department of Epidemiology, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA The Biostatistics Center, George Washington University, Rockville, MD Department of Family and Preventive Medicine, University of California San Diego, San Diego, CA Division of Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL Division of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN Northwest Lipid Research Labs, University of Washington, Seattle, WA University of Texas Health Sciences Center at San Antonio, San Antonio, TX Medstar Health Research Institute The Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD and Los Angeles Diabetes Center, University of California Los Angeles, Alhambra, CA, USA.
Diabetic Medicine (Impact Factor: 3.24). 07/2012; DOI: 10.1111/j.1464-5491.2012.03750.x
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Aims  Whether long-term cardiovascular risk is reduced by the Diabetes Prevention Program interventions is unknown. The aim of this study was to determine the long-term differences in cardiovascular disease risk factors and the use of lipid and blood pressure medications by the original Diabetes Prevention Program intervention group. Methods  This long-term follow-up (median 10 years, interquartile range 9.0-10.5) of the three-arm Diabetes Prevention Program randomized controlled clinical trial (metformin, intensive lifestyle and placebo), performed on 2766 (88%) of the Diabetes Prevention Program participants (who originally had impaired glucose tolerance), comprised a mean of 3.2 years of randomized treatment, approximately 1-year transition (during which all participants were offered intensive lifestyle intervention) and 5 years follow-up (Diabetes Prevention Program Outcomes Study). During the study, participants were followed in their original groups with their clinical care being provided by practitioners outside the research setting. The study determined lipoprotein profiles and blood pressure and medication use annually. Results  After 10 years' follow-up from Diabetes Prevention Program baseline, major reductions were seen for systolic (2-3 mmHg) and diastolic (5-6 mmHg) blood pressure, and for LDL cholesterol (0.47-0.54 mmol/l) and triglycerides (0.18-0.32 mmol/l) in all groups, with no between-group differences. HDL cholesterol also rose significantly (0.13-0.16 mmol/l) in all groups. Lipid (P < 0.012) and blood pressure (P < 0.09) medication use, however, were lower for the lifestyle group during the Diabetes Prevention Program Outcomes Study. Conclusion  Overall, intensive lifestyle intervention achieved, with less medication, a comparable long-term effect on cardiovascular disease risk factors, to that seen in the metformin and placebo groups. © 2012 The Authors. Diabetic Medicine © 2012 Diabetes UK.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) is the most common endocrine disorder in women. The syndrome is typified by its heterogeneous presentation, which includes hirsutism (a function of hypersecretion of ovarian androgens), menstrual irregularity and infertility (that is due to infrequent or absent ovulation). Furthermore, PCOS predisposes patients to metabolic dysfunction and an increased risk of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). The aetiology of the syndrome has a major genetic component. Obesity exacerbates the insulin resistance that is a feature of PCOS in many women and amplifies the clinical and biochemical abnormalities. In clinical practice, the choice of investigations to be done depends mainly on the presenting symptoms. The approach to management is likewise dependent on the presenting complaint. Symptoms of androgen excess (hirsutism, acne and alopecia) require cosmetic measures, suppression of ovarian androgen function and anti-androgen therapy, alone or in combination. Ovulation rate is improved by diet and lifestyle intervention in overweight individuals but induction of ovulation by, in the first instance, anti-estrogens is usually required. Monitoring of glucose is important in overweight women and/or those with a family history of T2DM. Metformin is indicated for women with impaired glucose tolerance but whether this drug is otherwise useful in women with PCOS remains debatable.
    Nature Reviews Endocrinology 07/2014; · 11.03 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Prediabetes, covering individuals with impaired fasting glycemia, impaired glucose tolerance, or high-risk HbA1c levels, is associated with a ∼20 % increased risk of developing cardiovascular disease (CVD) compared with normoglycemic individuals. It is well-known that lifestyle or pharmacologic interventions can prevent diabetes in prediabetic people; however, the evidence is less clear regarding prevention of CVD. Most diabetes prevention trials have failed to show beneficial effects on CVD morbidity and mortality despite significant improvements of CVD risk factors in individuals with prediabetes. Another challenge is how to estimate CVD risk in prediabetic people. In general, prediction models for CVD do not take glucose levels or prediabetes status into account, thereby underestimating CVD risk in these high-risk individuals. More evidence within risk stratification and management of CVD risk in prediabetes is needed in order to recommend useful and effective strategies for early prevention of CVD.
    Current Diabetes Reports 06/2014; 14(6):493. · 3.38 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Physical inactivity is a significant predictor of several chronic diseases, becoming more prevalent as people age. Since the aging population increases demands on healthcare budgets, effectively stimulating physical activity (PA) against acceptable costs is of major relevance. This study provides insight into long-term health outcomes and cost-effectiveness of a tailored PA intervention among adults aged over fifty.
    BMC Public Health 10/2014; 14(1):1099. · 2.32 Impact Factor