Long-term effects of lifestyle intervention or metformin on diabetes development and microvascular complications over 15-year follow-up: the Diabetes Prevention Program Outcomes Study

Diabetes Prevention Program Research Group, Diabetes Prevention Program Research Group

Abstract

Background: Effective prevention is needed to combat the worldwide epidemic of type 2 diabetes. We investigated the long-term extent of beneficial effects of lifestyle intervention and metformin on diabetes prevention, originally shown during the 3-year Diabetes Prevention Program (DPP), and assessed whether these interventions reduced diabetes-associated microvascular complications.

Methods: The DPP (1996-2001) was a randomised trial comparing an intensive lifestyle intervention or masked metformin with placebo in a cohort selected to be at very high risk of developing diabetes. All participants were offered lifestyle training at the end of the DPP. 2776 (88%) of the surviving DPP cohort were followed up in the DPP Outcomes Study (DPPOS, Sept 1, 2002, to Jan 2, 2014) and analysed by intention to treat on the basis of their original DPP assignment. During DPPOS, the original lifestyle intervention group was offered lifestyle reinforcement semi-annually and the metformin group received unmasked metformin. The primary outcomes were the development of diabetes and the prevalence of microvascular disease. For the assessment of microvascular disease, we used an aggregate microvascular outcome, composed of nephropathy, retinopathy, and neuropathy.

Findings: During a mean follow-up of 15 years, diabetes incidence was reduced by 27% in the lifestyle intervention group (hazard ratio 0·73, 95% CI 0·65-0·83; p<0·0001) and by 18% in the metformin group (0·82, 0·72-0·93; p=0·001), compared with the placebo group, with declining between-group differences over time. At year 15, the cumulative incidences of diabetes were 55% in the lifestyle group, 56% in the metformin group, and 62% in the placebo group. The prevalences at the end of the study of the aggregate microvascular outcome were not significantly different between the treatment groups in the total cohort (placebo 12·4%, 95% CI 11·1-13·8; metformin 13·0%, 11·7-14·5; lifestyle intervention 11·3%, 10·1-12·7). However, in women (n=1887) the lifestyle intervention was associated with a lower prevalence (8·7%, 95% CI 7·4-10·2) than in the placebo (11·0%, 9·6-12·6) and metformin (11·2%, 9·7-12·9) groups, with reductions in the lifestyle intervention group of 21% (p=0·03) compared with placebo and 22% (p=0·02) compared with metformin. Compared with participants who developed diabetes, those who did not develop diabetes had a 28% lower prevalence of microvascular complications (relative risk 0·72, 95% CI 0·63-0·83; p<0·0001).

Interpretation: Lifestyle intervention or metformin significantly reduced diabetes development over 15 years. There were no overall differences in the aggregate microvascular outcome between treatment groups; however, those who did not develop diabetes had a lower prevalence of microvascular complications than those who did develop diabetes. This result supports the importance of diabetes prevention.

Funding: National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases.

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of interest

We declare that we have no conflicts of interest.

Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Diabetes Prevention Program Outcomes Study consort diagram
Figure 2
Figure 2
Cumulative incidence of diabetes by treatment group among the 2776 DPPOS participants. The DPP and DPPOS periods, and the overlap between them, are indicated. Over the entire study, the incidence rates for participants were 7.0%, 5.7% and 5.2% per year for placebo, metformin and lifestyle, respectively, 27% and 18% lower for lifestyle and metformin vs. placebo, respectively (p

Figure 3

Prevalence of aggregate microvascular complication…

Figure 3

Prevalence of aggregate microvascular complication and individual microvascular components by DPPOS end (2012–2013).…

Figure 3
Prevalence of aggregate microvascular complication and individual microvascular components by DPPOS end (2012–2013). Placebo (red solid), metformin (blue dotted pattern), lifestyle (green diagonal stripes). 3A. By treatment group. None of the treatment group differences achieved statistical significance for the aggregate or the microvascular components. The aggregate microvascular is expressed as the average prevalence among the 3 components of nephropathy, retinopathy and neuropathy. 3B. By pre-specified subgroups according to sex and diabetes status. Prevalence was greater in men than in women in each of the three treatment groups. In women, the prevalence of the aggregate microvascular outcome was 22% (relative risk 0.78, p=0.02) lower in the lifestyle intervention group compared with the metformin group and 21% (relative risk 0.79, p=0.03) lower than in the placebo group. There were no significant differences among the treatment groups in men. The prevalence of microvascular disease in participants who did not develop diabetes was 28% lower than that in those who developed diabetes in a treatment group adjusted model (p<0.0001).

Figure 4

The role of HbA1c and…

Figure 4

The role of HbA1c and diabetes duration on microvascular disease and its components…

Figure 4
The role of HbA1c and diabetes duration on microvascular disease and its components were assessed in separate GEE models which included 2 interactions terms for treatment group*glycemia measure and microvascular component*glycemia measure. The interactions of HbA1c with the individual microvascular components were significantly different (p Figure 4A. Aggregate Figure 4B. Nephropathy Figure 4C. Retinopathy Figure 4D. Neuropathy Figure 4E. Aggregate Figure 4F. Nephropathy Figure 4G. Retinopathy Figure 4H. Neuropathy
Figure 3
Figure 3
Prevalence of aggregate microvascular complication and individual microvascular components by DPPOS end (2012–2013). Placebo (red solid), metformin (blue dotted pattern), lifestyle (green diagonal stripes). 3A. By treatment group. None of the treatment group differences achieved statistical significance for the aggregate or the microvascular components. The aggregate microvascular is expressed as the average prevalence among the 3 components of nephropathy, retinopathy and neuropathy. 3B. By pre-specified subgroups according to sex and diabetes status. Prevalence was greater in men than in women in each of the three treatment groups. In women, the prevalence of the aggregate microvascular outcome was 22% (relative risk 0.78, p=0.02) lower in the lifestyle intervention group compared with the metformin group and 21% (relative risk 0.79, p=0.03) lower than in the placebo group. There were no significant differences among the treatment groups in men. The prevalence of microvascular disease in participants who did not develop diabetes was 28% lower than that in those who developed diabetes in a treatment group adjusted model (p<0.0001).
Figure 4
Figure 4
The role of HbA1c and diabetes duration on microvascular disease and its components were assessed in separate GEE models which included 2 interactions terms for treatment group*glycemia measure and microvascular component*glycemia measure. The interactions of HbA1c with the individual microvascular components were significantly different (p Figure 4A. Aggregate Figure 4B. Nephropathy Figure 4C. Retinopathy Figure 4D. Neuropathy Figure 4E. Aggregate Figure 4F. Nephropathy Figure 4G. Retinopathy Figure 4H. Neuropathy

References

    1. [Accessed August 21, 2014]; .
    1. Dall TW, Yang W, Halder P, Pang B, Massoudi M, Wintfeld N, Semilla AP, Franz J, Hogan PF. The economic burden of elevated blood glucose levels in 2012: diagnosed and undiagnosed diabetes, gestational diabetes mellitus, and prediabetes. Diabetes Care. 2014;37:3172.
    1. Diabetes Prevention Program Research Group. The Diabetes Prevention Program. Design and methods for a clinical trial in the prevention of type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care. 1999;22:623–634.
    1. Diabetes Prevention Program Research Group. Reduction in the incidence of type 2 diabetes with lifestyle intervention or metformin. N Engl J Med. 2002;346:393–403.
    1. Pan XR, Li GW, Hu YH, et al. Effects of diet and exercise in preventing NIDDM in people with impaired glucose tolerance: the Da Qing IGT and Diabetes Study. Diabetes Care. 1997;20:537–44.
    1. Tuomilehto J, Lindström J, Eriksson JG, et al. Prevention of type 2 diabetes mellitus by changes in lifestyle among subjects with impaired glucose tolerance. N Engl J Med. 2001;344:1343–50.
    1. Whittemore R. A systematic review of the translational research on the Diabetes Prevention Program. Transl Behav Med. 2011;1:460–91.
    1. Diabetes Prevention Program Research Group. 10-year follow-up of diabetes incidence and weight loss in the diabetes prevention program outcomes study. Lancet. 2009;14:1677–1686.
    1. Diabetes Prevention Program Research Group. The diabetes prevention program (DPP): Description of lifestyle intervention. Diabetes Care. 2002;25:2165–2171.
    1. Diabetes Prevention Program Research Group. Effect of withdrawal from metformin on the development of diabetes in the Diabetes Prevention Program. Diabetes Care. 2003;26:977–980.
    1. Venditti EM, Bray GA, Carrion-Petersen ML, Delahanty LM, Edelstein SL, Hamman RF, Hoskin MA, Knowler WC, Ma Y Diabetes Prevention Program Research Group. First versus repeat treatment with a lifestyle intervention program: attendance and weight loss outcomes. Int J Obes. 2008;32:1537–44.
    1. Levey AS, Stevens LA, Schmid CH, et al. Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration: A new equation to estimate glomerular filtration rate. Ann Int Med. 2009;150:604–612.
    1. Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study Research Group. Fundus photographic risk factors for progression of diabetic retinopathy. ETDRS Report Number 12. Ophthalmology. 1991;83:823–33.
    1. Olaleye D, Perkins B, Bril V. Evaluation of three screening tests and a risk assessment model for diagnosing peripheral neuropathy in the diabetes clinic. Diabetes Research and Clinical Practice. 2001;54:115–128.
    1. Lachin JM. Biostatistical methods: the assessment of relative risks. Chapter 9 New York: John Wiley; 2000.
    1. Zeger SL, Liang KY. Longitudinal data analysis for discrete and continuous outcomes. Biometrics. 1986;42:121–130.
    1. Lefkopoulou M, Ryan L. Global tests for multiple binary outcomes. Biometrics. 1993;49:975–988.
    1. Pan W. Sample size and power Calculations with Correlated Binary Data. Controlled Clinical Trials. 2001;22:211–227.
    1. Diggle PJ, Liang K-Y, Zeger SL. Analysis of longitudinal data. New York: Oxford University Press; 1994.
    1. Hamman RF, Horton E, Barrett-Connor E, Bray GA, Christophi C, Crandall J, Florez J, Fowler S, Goldberg R, Kahn SE, Knowler WC, Lachin J, Murphy M, Venditti E. Factors Affecting the Decline in Incidence of Diabetes in the Diabetes Prevention Program Outcome Study (DPPOS) Diabetes. 2015;64:989–98.
    1. American Diabetes Association. Economic costs of diabetes in the US in 2012. Diabetes Care. 2013;36:1033–46.
    1. Harjutsalo V, Maric C, Forsblom C, Thorn L, Waden J, Groop PH FinnDiane Study Group. Sex-related differences in the long-term risk of microvascular complications by age at onset of type 1 diabetes. Diabetologia. 2011;54:1992–99.
    1. Look AHEAD Research Group. Effect of a long-term behavioural weight loss intervention on nephropathy in overweight or obese adults with type 2 diabetes: a secondary analysis of the Look AHEAD randomized clinical trial. Lancet Diabetes and Endocrinology. 2014;2:801–809.
    1. Nelson RG, Kunzelman CL, Pettitt DJ, Saad MF, Bennett PH, Knowler WC. Albuminuria in type 2 (non-insulin-dependent) diabetes and impaired glucose tolerance in Pima Indians. Diabetologia. 1989;32:870–876.
    1. Stratton IM, Adler AI, Neil AW, Matthews DR, Manley SE, Cull CA, Hadden D, Turner RC, Homan RR on behalf of the UK Prospective Diabetes Study Group. . Association of glycaemia with macrovascular and microvascular complications of type 2 diabetes (UKPDS 35): prospective observational study. BMJ. 2000;321:405–12.
    1. Li G, Zhang P, Wang J, An Y, Gong Q, Gregg EW, Yang W, Zhang B, Shuai Y, Hong J, Engelgau MM, Li H, Roglic G, Hu Y, Bennett PH. Cardiovascular mortality, all-cause mortality, and diabetes incidence after lifestyle intervention for people with impaired glucose tolerance in the Da Qing diabetes prevention study: A 23-year follow-up study. Lancet Diabetes and Endocrinology. 2014;2:474–480.
    1. DPP Research Group. Impact of intensive lifestyle and metformin therapy on cardiovascular disease risk factors. Diabetes Care. 2005;28:888–894.
    1. Diabetes Prevention Program Research Group. Metformin and intensive lifestyle intervention on the prevention of the metabolic syndrome. Ann Int Med. 2005;142:611–619.
    1. Brown JS, Wing R, Barrett-Connor E, Nyberg LM, Kusek JW, Orchard TJ, Ma Y, Vittinghoff E, Kanaya AM Diabetes Prevention Program Research Group. Lifestyle intervention is associated with lower prevalence of urinary incontinence: The Diabetes Prevention Program. Diabetes Care. 2006;29:385–90.
    1. Florez H, Pan Q, Ackermann RT, Marrero DG, Barrett-Connor E, Delahanty L, Kriska A, Saudek CD, Goldberg RB, Rubin RR Diabetes Prevention Program Research Group. Impact of lifestyle intervention and metformin on health-related quality of life: the diabetes prevention program randomized trial. J Gen Intern Med. 2012;27:1594–601.
    1. Diabetes Prevention Program Research Group. The 10-year cost-effectiveness of lifestyle intervention or metformin for diabetes prevention. Diabetes Care. 2012;35(4):723–730.
    1. Geiss LS, Wang J, Cheng YJ, Thompson TJ, Barker L, Li Y, Albright AL, Gregg EW. Prevalence and incidence trends for diagnosed diabetes among adults aged 20 to 79 years, United States, 1980–2012. JAMA. 2014;312:1218–26.

Source: PubMed

Sponzoři a spolupracovníci

Zdravotní podmínky

Drogové intervence

3
Předplatit