Lifestyle intervention improves prothrombotic coagulation profile in individuals at high-risk for type 2 diabetes

Lifestyle intervention (LI) can prevent type 2 diabetes, but response to LI varies depending on risk subphenotypes. We tested if prediabetic individuals with low risk benefit from conventional LI and individuals with high risk benefit from an intensification of LI in a multi-center randomized controlled intervention over 12 months with 2 years follow up. 1105 prediabetic individuals based on ADA glucose criteria were stratified into a high- and low-risk phenotype, based on previously described thresholds of insulin secretion, insulin sensitivity and liver fat content. Low-risk individuals were randomly assigned to conventional LI according to the DPP protocol or control (1:1), high-risk individuals to conventional or intensified LI with doubling of required exercise (1:1). A total of 908 (82%) participants completed the study. In high-risk individuals, the difference between conventional and intensified LI in post-challenge glucose change was -0.29 mmol/l [CI:-0.54;-0.04], p=0.025. Liver fat (-1.34 percentage points [CI:-2.17;-0.50], p=0.002) and cardiovascular risk (-1.82[CI:-3.13-0.50],p=0.007) underwent larger reductions with intensified than with conventional LI. During a follow up of 3 years, intensified compared to conventional LI had a higher probability to normalize glucose tolerance (p=0.008). In conclusion, it is possible in high-risk individuals with prediabetes to improve glycemic and cardiometabolic outcomes by intensification of LI. Individualized, risk-phenotype-based LI may be beneficial for the prevention of diabetes.

Download Full-text

Different Effects of Lifestyle Intervention in High- and Low-Risk Prediabetes

10.2337/figshare.16613905.v2 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Andreas Fritsche ◽

Robert Wagner ◽

Martin Heni ◽

Kostantinos Kantartzis ◽

Jürgen Machann ◽

...

Keyword(s):

High Risk ◽

Lifestyle Intervention ◽

Low Risk ◽

Liver Fat ◽

Liver Fat Content ◽

Randomized Controlled ◽

The Difference ◽

Prevention Of Diabetes

Lifestyle intervention (LI) can prevent type 2 diabetes, but response to LI varies depending on risk subphenotypes. We tested if prediabetic individuals with low risk benefit from conventional LI and individuals with high risk benefit from an intensification of LI in a multi-center randomized controlled intervention over 12 months with 2 years follow up. 1105 prediabetic individuals based on ADA glucose criteria were stratified into a high- and low-risk phenotype, based on previously described thresholds of insulin secretion, insulin sensitivity and liver fat content. Low-risk individuals were randomly assigned to conventional LI according to the DPP protocol or control (1:1), high-risk individuals to conventional or intensified LI with doubling of required exercise (1:1). A total of 908 (82%) participants completed the study. In high-risk individuals, the difference between conventional and intensified LI in post-challenge glucose change was -0.29 mmol/l [CI:-0.54;-0.04], p=0.025. Liver fat (-1.34 percentage points [CI:-2.17;-0.50], p=0.002) and cardiovascular risk (-1.82[CI:-3.13-0.50],p=0.007) underwent larger reductions with intensified than with conventional LI. During a follow up of 3 years, intensified compared to conventional LI had a higher probability to normalize glucose tolerance (p=0.008). In conclusion, it is possible in high-risk individuals with prediabetes to improve glycemic and cardiometabolic outcomes by intensification of LI. Individualized, risk-phenotype-based LI may be beneficial for the prevention of diabetes.

Download Full-text

Different Effects of Lifestyle Intervention in High- and Low-Risk Prediabetes

10.2337/figshare.16613905 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Andreas Fritsche ◽

Robert Wagner ◽

Martin Heni ◽

Kostantinos Kantartzis ◽

Jürgen Machann ◽

...

Keyword(s):

High Risk ◽

Lifestyle Intervention ◽

Low Risk ◽

Liver Fat ◽

Liver Fat Content ◽

Randomized Controlled ◽

The Difference ◽

Prevention Of Diabetes

Lifestyle intervention (LI) can prevent type 2 diabetes, but response to LI varies depending on risk subphenotypes. We tested if prediabetic individuals with low risk benefit from conventional LI and individuals with high risk benefit from an intensification of LI in a multi-center randomized controlled intervention over 12 months with 2 years follow up. 1105 prediabetic individuals based on ADA glucose criteria were stratified into a high- and low-risk phenotype, based on previously described thresholds of insulin secretion, insulin sensitivity and liver fat content. Low-risk individuals were randomly assigned to conventional LI according to the DPP protocol or control (1:1), high-risk individuals to conventional or intensified LI with doubling of required exercise (1:1). A total of 908 (82%) participants completed the study. In high-risk individuals, the difference between conventional and intensified LI in post-challenge glucose change was -0.29 mmol/l [CI:-0.54;-0.04], p=0.025. Liver fat (-1.34 percentage points [CI:-2.17;-0.50], p=0.002) and cardiovascular risk (-1.82[CI:-3.13-0.50],p=0.007) underwent larger reductions with intensified than with conventional LI. During a follow up of 3 years, intensified compared to conventional LI had a higher probability to normalize glucose tolerance (p=0.008). In conclusion, it is possible in high-risk individuals with prediabetes to improve glycemic and cardiometabolic outcomes by intensification of LI. Individualized, risk-phenotype-based LI may be beneficial for the prevention of diabetes.

Download Full-text

1915-P: Targeting Remission of Type 2 Diabetes Using a Digital Education and Behavior Change Program Improves Insulin Sensitivity and Liver Fat Content in Type 2 Diabetes

Diabetes ◽

10.2337/db19-1915-p ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 68 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 1915-P

Author(s):

DOMINIK PESTA ◽

OANA P. ZAHARIA ◽

YULIYA KUPRIYANOVA ◽

JONG-HEE HWANG ◽

DANIEL F. MARKGRAF ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Type 2 Diabetes ◽

Insulin Sensitivity ◽

Behavior Change ◽

Fat Content ◽

Liver Fat ◽

Liver Fat Content ◽

Digital Education ◽

And Behavior ◽

Behavior Change Program

Download Full-text

Effects of insulin therapy on liver fat content and hepatic insulin sensitivity in patients with type 2 diabetes

AJP Endocrinology and Metabolism ◽

10.1152/ajpendo.00133.2006 ◽

2007 ◽

Vol 292 (3) ◽

pp. E829-E835 ◽

Cited By ~ 79

Author(s):

Leena Juurinen ◽

Mirja Tiikkainen ◽

Anna-Maija Häkkinen ◽

Antti Hakkarainen ◽

Hannele Yki-Järvinen

Keyword(s):

Type 2 Diabetes ◽

Insulin Sensitivity ◽

Insulin Therapy ◽

Fat Content ◽

Fat Free Mass ◽

Liver Fat ◽

Whole Body ◽

Liver Fat Content ◽

Hepatic Insulin Sensitivity

We determined whether insulin therapy changes liver fat content (LFAT) or hepatic insulin sensitivity in type 2 diabetes. Fourteen patients with type 2 diabetes (age 51 ± 2 yr, body mass index 33.1 ± 1.4 kg/m2) treated with metformin alone received additional basal insulin for 7 mo. Liver fat (proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy), fat distribution (MRI), fat-free and fat mass, and whole body and hepatic insulin sensitivity (6-h euglycemic hyperinsulinemic clamp combined with infusion of [3-3H]glucose) were measured. The insulin dose averaged 75 ± 10 IU/day (0.69 ± 0.08 IU/kg, range 24–132 IU/day). Glycosylated hemoglobin A1c (Hb A1c) decreased from 8.9 ± 0.3 to 7.4 ± 0.2% ( P < 0.001). Whole body insulin sensitivity increased from 2.21 ± 0.38 to 3.08 ± 0.40 mg/kg fat-free mass (FFM)·min ( P < 0.05). This improvement could be attributed to enhanced suppression of hepatic glucose production (HGP) by insulin (HGP 1.04 ± 0.28 vs. 0.21 ± 0.19 mg/kg FFM·min, P < 0.01). The percent suppression of HGP by insulin increased from 72 ± 8 to 105 ± 11% ( P < 0.01). LFAT decreased from 17 ± 3 to 14 ± 3% ( P < 0.05). The change in LFAT was significantly correlated with that in hepatic insulin sensitivity ( r = 0.56, P < 0.05). Body weight increased by 3.0 ± 1.1 kg ( P < 0.05). Of this, 83% was due to an increase in fat-free mass ( P < 0.01). Fat distribution and serum adiponectin concentrations remained unchanged while serum free fatty acids decreased significantly. Conclusions: insulin therapy improves hepatic insulin sensitivity and slightly but significantly reduces liver fat content, independent of serum adiponectin.

Download Full-text

Risk-stratified lifestyle intervention to prevent type 2 diabetes

10.1101/2021.01.26.21249582 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Andreas Fritsche ◽

Robert Wagner ◽

Martin Heni ◽

Kostantinos Kantartzis ◽

Jürgen Machann ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Type 2 Diabetes ◽

High Risk ◽

Glucose Tolerance ◽

Lifestyle Intervention ◽

Fat Content ◽

Low Risk ◽

Liver Fat ◽

List Type ◽

Liver Fat Content

AbstractBackgroundLifestyle intervention (LI) can successfully prevent type 2 diabetes, but response to LI strongly varies depending on risk subphenotypes. We tested if individuals with prediabetes and a high-risk phenotype benefit from an intensification of LI.Methods and findingsWe conducted a risk stratified multicenter randomized controlled intervention study over 12 months with additional 2 year follow up. In eight University Hospitals in Germany, 1105 individuals (female 59%, age 58±11 years, BMI 31.1±6.0 kg/m2 (mean±SD)) with impaired fasting glucose and/or impaired glucose tolerance were included between May 2012 and May 2016 in the study. Participants were stratified into 2 groups; a high- and low-risk phenotype, based on insulin secretion, insulin sensitivity and liver fat content. Low-risk individuals were randomly assigned to conventional LI or control (1:1), high-risk individuals to conventional or intensified LI (1:1), each over one year. Intensified LI included doubling of physical exercise and time of counselling. The primary endpoint was change in post-challenge glucose levels, assessed by frequently sampled oral glucose tolerance tests. Secondary endpoints included changes in liver fat content, assessed by magnetic resonance spectroscopy. A total of 908 (82%) participants completed the study after 12 months of LI. In high-risk individuals, the mean difference estimate between conventional and intensified LI in change in post-challenge glucose levels from baseline was −0.290 mmol/l [CI: −0.544;−0.036], p=0.025. Liver fat content was more reduced by intensified LI than by conventional LI (mean difference estimate: −1.34 percentage points [CI: −2.17;−0.50], p=0.002), and cardiovascular risk decreased stronger with intensified LI than with conventional LI (mean difference estimate −1.82 [CI: −3.13−0.50], p=0.007). In low-risk individuals, conventional LI was not superior to control in reducing postprandial glucose, liver fat or cardiovascular risk. During the total observation period of 3 years, high-risk participants with intensified LI had a higher probability to normalize glucose tolerance compared to conventional LI (p=0.003). The limitations of this study include a relative short duration of LI, a non-completer rate of 18% and an underrepresentation of low risk individuals.ConclusionsIn high-risk individuals with prediabetes it is possible to improve glycemic and cardiometabolic outcomes by intensification of the commonly recommended conventional LI. Our results show that individualized, risk-phenotype-based LI can be implemented for the prevention of diabetes.RegistrationNCT01947595Author summaryWhy Was This Study Done?Clinical trials in individuals with prediabetes have shown that the onset of type 2 diabetes can be delayed or prevented with lifestyle intervention.Among individuals with prediabetes, there is a large variability in the response to lifestyle intervention.It is unknown whether an intensification of intervention is able to improve the beneficial response.What Did the Researchers Do and Find?The present multicenter, risk stratified randomized and controlled intervention trial in 1105 German individuals with prediabetes prospectively confirms the existence of a high-risk prediabetes phenotypeThe intensification of lifestyle intervention in high-risk individuals improves the glycemic outcome after 1 year of lifestyle intervention, and additionally results in a higher frequency of regression to normal glucose tolerance after 3 years of follow up..Intensification of lifestyle intervention results in a larger reduction of liver fat content and stronger improves cardiometabolic outcomes in high-risk individuals.What Do These Findings Mean?Strategies for the prevention of type 2 diabetes should include risk stratification and individualised interventions.Our results highlight a dose-effect relationship for lifestyle intervention and suggest that “one size fits NOT all” in the field of diabetes prevention.It remains to be clarified whether low risk individuals benefit from lifestyle intervention, as there was a low number of individuals in this risk group in the current study.

Download Full-text