Suppr超能文献

预防糖尿病(PREVENT-DM):生活方式干预与二甲双胍的比较效果试验

PREVENT-DM Comparative Effectiveness Trial of Lifestyle Intervention and Metformin.

作者信息

O'Brien Matthew J, Perez Alberly, Scanlan Adam B, Alos Victor A, Whitaker Robert C, Foster Gary D, Ackermann Ronald T, Ciolino Jody D, Homko Carol

机构信息

Division of General Internal Medicine and Geriatrics, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois; Center for Community Health, Institute for Public Health and Medicine, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois; Puentes de Salud Health Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; Department of Preventive Medicine, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois.

Puentes de Salud Health Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; Center for Obesity Research and Education, College of Public Health, Temple University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

出版信息

Am J Prev Med. 2017 Jun;52(6):788-797. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2017.01.008. Epub 2017 Feb 22.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

Although the Diabetes Prevention Program and other clinical trials demonstrated the efficacy of intensive lifestyle interventions (ILI) and metformin to prevent type 2 diabetes, no studies have tested their comparative effects in pragmatic settings. This study was designed to compare the real-world effectiveness of ILI, metformin, and standard care among Hispanic women (Latinas) with prediabetes.

STUDY DESIGN

RCT.

SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Ninety-two Latinas, who had a mean hemoglobin A1c of 5.9%, BMI of 33.3 kg/m, and waist circumference of 97.4 cm (38.3 inches), were recruited from an urban community and randomly assigned to ILI, metformin, or standard care using 1:1:1 allocation. Data were collected from 2013-2015 and analyzed in 2016.

INTERVENTION

The 12-month ILI was adapted from the Diabetes Prevention Program's ILI and delivered by community health workers (promotoras) over 24 sessions. Metformin participants received 850 mg twice daily. Those randomized to standard care continued their regular medical care.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Weight and secondary outcomes (waist circumference, blood pressure, hemoglobin A1c, fasting plasma glucose, insulin, and lipids) were assessed at baseline and 12 months.

RESULTS

ILI participants demonstrated significantly greater mean weight loss (-4.0 kg, 5.0%) than metformin (-0.9 kg, 1.1%) and standard care participants (+0.8 kg, 0.9%) (p<0.001). The difference in weight loss between metformin and standard care was not significant. The ILI group experienced a greater reduction in waist circumference than standard care (p=0.001), and a marginal improvement in hemoglobin A1c compared with metformin and standard care (p=0.063).

CONCLUSIONS

In the first comparative effectiveness trial of diabetes prevention treatments, a 12-month ILI produced significantly greater weight loss than metformin and standard care among Latinas with prediabetes. These data suggest that ILI delivered by promotoras is an effective strategy for preventing diabetes in this high-risk group, which may be superior to metformin. Future pragmatic trials involving larger samples should examine differences in diabetes incidence associated with these treatments.

摘要

引言

尽管糖尿病预防计划及其他临床试验证明了强化生活方式干预(ILI)和二甲双胍在预防2型糖尿病方面的疗效,但尚无研究在实际应用场景中测试它们的比较效果。本研究旨在比较ILI、二甲双胍和标准治疗对患有糖尿病前期的西班牙裔女性(拉丁裔)的实际效果。

研究设计

随机对照试验。

设置/参与者:从一个城市社区招募了92名拉丁裔女性,她们的平均糖化血红蛋白为5.9%,体重指数为33.3kg/m,腰围为97.4厘米(38.3英寸),并以1:1:1的比例随机分配到ILI组、二甲双胍组或标准治疗组。数据收集于2013年至2015年,并于2016年进行分析。

干预措施

为期12个月的ILI改编自糖尿病预防计划的ILI,由社区卫生工作者(健康促进员)分24次进行。二甲双胍组参与者每天服用两次850毫克。随机分配到标准治疗组的参与者继续接受常规医疗护理。

主要观察指标

在基线和12个月时评估体重及次要指标(腰围、血压、糖化血红蛋白、空腹血糖、胰岛素和血脂)。

结果

ILI组参与者的平均体重减轻显著大于二甲双胍组(-0.9千克,1.1%)和标准治疗组(+0.8千克,0.9%)(-4.0千克,5.0%)(p<0.001)。二甲双胍组和标准治疗组之间的体重减轻差异不显著。ILI组的腰围减小幅度大于标准治疗组(p=0.001),与二甲双胍组和标准治疗组相比,糖化血红蛋白有轻微改善(p=0.063)。

结论

在第一项糖尿病预防治疗的比较效果试验中,为期12个月的ILI使患有糖尿病前期的拉丁裔女性体重减轻幅度显著大于二甲双胍组和标准治疗组。这些数据表明,由健康促进员实施的ILI是在这一高危人群中预防糖尿病的有效策略,可能优于二甲双胍。未来涉及更大样本量的实际应用试验应研究这些治疗方法在糖尿病发病率方面的差异。

相似文献

1
PREVENT-DM Comparative Effectiveness Trial of Lifestyle Intervention and Metformin.
Am J Prev Med. 2017 Jun;52(6):788-797. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2017.01.008. Epub 2017 Feb 22.
5
The Healthy Living Partnerships to Prevent Diabetes study: 2-year outcomes of a randomized controlled trial.
Am J Prev Med. 2013 Apr;44(4 Suppl 4):S324-32. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2012.12.015.

引用本文的文献

7
Metabolic disorders in prediabetes: From mechanisms to therapeutic management.
World J Diabetes. 2024 Mar 15;15(3):361-377. doi: 10.4239/wjd.v15.i3.361.
10
Transcultural Lifestyle Medicine in Type 2 Diabetes Care: Narrative Review of the Literature.
Am J Lifestyle Med. 2022 Jun 1;17(4):518-559. doi: 10.1177/15598276221095048. eCollection 2023 Jul-Aug.

本文引用的文献

1
Cardiometabolic Risk Factor Changes Observed in Diabetes Prevention Programs in US Settings: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
PLoS Med. 2016 Jul 26;13(7):e1002095. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1002095. eCollection 2016 Jul.
3
Gender-related affecting factors of prediabetes on its 10-year outcome.
BMJ Open Diabetes Res Care. 2016 May 10;4(1):e000169. doi: 10.1136/bmjdrc-2015-000169. eCollection 2016.
6
A Randomized Comparative Effectiveness Trial for Preventing Type 2 Diabetes.
Am J Public Health. 2015 Nov;105(11):2328-34. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2015.302641. Epub 2015 Sep 17.
7
Prevalence of and Trends in Diabetes Among Adults in the United States, 1988-2012.
JAMA. 2015 Sep 8;314(10):1021-9. doi: 10.1001/jama.2015.10029.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验