16 research outputs found

    Heterogeneity in glucose response curves during an oral glucose tolerance test and associated cardiometabolic risk

    Get PDF
    We aimed to examine heterogeneity in glucose response curves during an oral glucose tolerance test with multiple measurements and to compare cardiometabolic risk profiles between identified glucose response curve groups. We analyzed data from 1,267 individuals without diabetes from five studies in Denmark, the Netherlands and the USA. Each study included between 5 and 11 measurements at different time points during a 2-h oral glucose tolerance test, resulting in 9,602 plasma glucose measurements. Latent class trajectories with a cubic specification for time were fitted to identify different patterns of plasma glucose change during the oral glucose tolerance test. Cardiometabolic risk factor profiles were compared between the identified groups. Using latent class trajectory analysis, five glucose response curves were identified. Despite similar fasting and 2-h values, glucose peaks and peak times varied greatly between groups, ranging from 7-12 mmol/L, and 35-70 min. The group with the lowest and earliest plasma glucose peak had the lowest estimated cardiovascular risk, while the group with the most delayed plasma glucose peak and the highest 2-h value had the highest estimated risk. One group, with normal fasting and 2-h values, exhibited an unusual profile, with the highest glucose peak and the highest proportion of smokers and men. The heterogeneity in glucose response curves and the distinct cardiometabolic risk profiles may reflect different underlying physiologies. Our results warrant more detailed studies to identify the source of the heterogeneity across the different phenotypes and whether these differences play a role in the development of type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease

    Variations in reporting of outcomes in randomized trials on diet and physical activity in pregnancy: A systematic review

    Get PDF
    AIM: Trials on diet and physical activity in pregnancy report on various outcomes. We aimed to assess the variations in outcomes reported and their quality in trials on lifestyle interventions in pregnancy. METHODS: We searched major databases without language restrictions for randomized controlled trials on diet and physical activity-based interventions in pregnancy up to March 2015. Two independent reviewers undertook study selection and data extraction. We estimated the percentage of papers reporting 'critically important' and 'important' outcomes. We defined the quality of reporting as a proportion using a six-item questionnaire. Regression analysis was used to identify factors affecting this quality. RESULTS: Sixty-six randomized controlled trials were published in 78 papers (66 main, 12 secondary). Gestational diabetes (57.6%, 38/66), preterm birth (48.5%, 32/66) and cesarian section (60.6%, 40/66), were the commonly reported 'critically important' outcomes. Gestational weight gain (84.5%, 56/66) and birth weight (87.9%, 58/66) were reported in most papers, although not considered critically important. The median quality of reporting was 0.60 (interquartile range 0.25, 0.83) for a maximum score of one. Study and journal characteristics did not affect quality. CONCLUSION: Many studies on lifestyle interventions in pregnancy do not report critically important outcomes, highlighting the need for core outcome set development

    Impact of maternal education on response to lifestyle interventions to reduce gestational weight gain: Individual participant data meta-Analysis

    Get PDF
    Objectives To identify if maternal educational attainment is a prognostic factor for gestational weight gain (GWG), and to determine the differential effects of lifestyle interventions (diet based, physical activity based or mixed approach) on GWG, stratified by educational attainment. Design Individual participant data meta-Analysis using the previously established International Weight Management in Pregnancy (i-WIP) Collaborative Group database (https://iwipgroup.wixsite.com/collaboration). Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analysis of Individual Participant Data Statement guidelines were followed. Data sources Major electronic databases, from inception to February 2017. Eligibility criteria Randomised controlled trials on diet and physical activity-based interventions in pregnancy. Maternal educational attainment was required for inclusion and was categorised as higher education ( 65tertiary) or lower education ( 64secondary). Risk of bias Cochrane risk of bias tool was used. Data synthesis Principle measures of effect were OR and regression coefficient. Results Of the 36 randomised controlled trials in the i-WIP database, 21 trials and 5183 pregnant women were included. Women with lower educational attainment had an increased risk of excessive (OR 1.182; 95% CI 1.008 to 1.385, p =0.039) and inadequate weight gain (OR 1.284; 95% CI 1.045 to 1.577, p =0.017). Among women with lower education, diet basedinterventions reduced risk of excessive weight gain (OR 0.515; 95% CI 0.339 to 0.785, p = 0.002) and inadequate weight gain (OR 0.504; 95% CI 0.288 to 0.884, p=0.017), and reduced kg/week gain (B-0.055; 95% CI-0.098 to-0.012, p=0.012). Mixed interventions reduced risk of excessive weight gain for women with lower education (OR 0.735; 95% CI 0.561 to 0.963, p=0.026). Among women with high education, diet based interventions reduced risk of excessive weight gain (OR 0.609; 95% CI 0.437 to 0.849, p=0.003), and mixed interventions reduced kg/week gain (B-0.053; 95% CI-0.069 to-0.037,p<0.001). Physical activity based interventions did not impact GWG when stratified by education. Conclusions Pregnant women with lower education are at an increased risk of excessive and inadequate GWG. Diet based interventions seem the most appropriate choice for these women, and additional support through mixed interventions may also be beneficial

    ĐžĐŽĐœĐŸĐșĐŸĐ»Đ”ĐčĐœŃ‹Đ” траĐșŃ‚ĐŸŃ€ĐœĐŸ-Đ»Đ”ĐŽŃĐœŃ‹Đ” ĐŽĐŸŃ€ĐŸĐłĐž: ŃƒŃ‡Đ”Đ±ĐœĐŸĐ” ĐżĐŸŃĐŸĐ±ĐžĐ” ĐŽĐ»Ń Đ»Đ”ŃĐŸŃ‚Đ”Ń…ĐœĐžŃ‡Đ”ŃĐșох ĐČŃƒĐ·ĐŸĐČ

    Get PDF
    ĐšĐœĐžĐłĐ° ŃĐŸĐŽĐ”Ń€Đ¶ĐžŃ‚ ĐŸĐżĐžŃĐ°ĐœĐžĐ” ĐșĐŸĐœŃŃ‚Ń€ŃƒĐșцоĐč ĐŸĐŽĐœĐŸĐżĐŸĐ»ĐŸĐ·ĐœŃ‹Ń… траĐșŃ‚ĐŸŃ€ĐœŃ‹Ń… ŃĐ°ĐœĐ”Đč, расчДт ĐŸŃĐœĐŸĐČĐœŃ‹Ń… ЎДталДĐč ŃĐ°ĐœĐ”Đč, ĐșратĐșОД Ń‚Đ”Ń…ĐœĐžŃ‡Đ”ŃĐșОД ŃƒŃĐ»ĐŸĐČоя ĐżŃ€ĐŸĐ”ĐșŃ‚ĐžŃ€ĐŸĐČĐ°ĐœĐžŃ ĐŸĐŽĐœĐŸĐșĐŸĐ»Đ”ĐčĐœŃ‹Ń… траĐșŃ‚ĐŸŃ€ĐœĐŸ-Đ»Đ”ĐŽŃĐœŃ‹Ń… ĐŽĐŸŃ€ĐŸĐł, праĐČОла ĐżĐŸŃŃ‚Ń€ĐŸĐčĐșĐž Đž эĐșŃĐżĐ»ŃƒĐ°Ń‚Đ°Ń†ĐžĐž Đ»Đ”ĐŽŃĐœŃ‹Ń… ĐŽĐŸŃ€ĐŸĐł Đž ĐŸŃĐœĐŸĐČы ĐŸŃ€ĐłĐ°ĐœĐžĐ·Đ°Ń†ĐžĐž траĐșŃ‚ĐŸŃ€ĐœĐŸĐłĐŸ Ń…ĐŸĐ·ŃĐčстĐČĐ° ĐœĐ° базД ĐŸĐŽĐœĐŸĐșĐŸĐ»Đ”ĐčĐœŃ‹Ń… Đ»Đ”ĐŽŃĐœŃ‹Ń… ĐŽĐŸŃ€ĐŸĐł. ĐšĐœĐžĐłĐ° ĐżŃ€Đ”ĐŽĐœĐ°Đ·ĐœĐ°Ń‡Đ”ĐœĐ° ĐČ ĐșачДстĐČĐ” ŃƒŃ‡Đ”Đ±ĐœĐŸĐłĐŸ ĐżĐŸŃĐŸĐ±ĐžŃ ĐŽĐ»Ń Đ»Đ”ŃĐŸŃ‚Đ”Ń…ĐœĐžŃ‡Đ”ŃĐșох ĐČŃƒĐ·ĐŸĐČ, ĐœĐŸ ĐŒĐŸĐ¶Đ”Ń‚ таĐșжД ŃĐ»ŃƒĐ¶ĐžŃ‚ŃŒ праĐșтОчДсĐșĐžĐŒ ĐżĐŸŃĐŸĐ±ĐžĐ”ĐŒ Đž ĐŽĐ»Ń ĐČŃ‹ŃŃˆĐ”ĐłĐŸ Ń‚Đ”Ń…ĐœĐžŃ‡Đ”ŃĐșĐŸĐłĐŸ ĐżĐ”Ń€ŃĐŸĐœĐ°Đ»Đ° Đ»Đ”ŃĐŸĐ·Đ°ĐłĐŸŃ‚ĐŸĐČĐžŃ‚Đ”Đ»ŃŒĐœŃ‹Ń… ĐżŃ€Đ”ĐŽĐżŃ€ĐžŃŃ‚ĐžĐč НарĐșĐŸĐŒĐ»Đ”ŃĐ° ĐĄĐĄĐĄĐ .0|7|ĐŸŃ€Đ”ĐŽĐžŃĐ»ĐŸĐČОД [c. 7]0|8|ВĐČĐ”ĐŽĐ”ĐœĐžĐ” [c. 8]0|11|Đ’ĐŸĐ·ĐœĐžĐșĐœĐŸĐČĐ”ĐœĐžĐ” Đž разĐČОтОД ĐșĐŸĐœŃŃ‚Ń€ŃƒĐșцоо ĐŸĐŽĐœĐŸĐżĐŸĐ»ĐŸĐ·ĐœŃ‹Ń… ŃĐ°ĐœĐ”Đč [c. 11]1|11|ĐŸĐ”Ń€ĐČŃ‹Đ” ĐŸĐżŃ‹Ń‚Ń‹ [c. 11]1|12|ĐŸŃ€ĐžĐœŃ†ĐžĐż Ń€Đ°Đ±ĐŸŃ‚Ń‹ ĐŸĐŽĐœĐŸĐșĐŸĐ»Đ”ĐčĐœĐŸĐč Đ»Đ”ĐŽŃĐœĐŸĐč ĐŽĐŸŃ€ĐŸĐłĐž Đž Ń‚Đ”ĐŸŃ€Đ”Ń‚ĐžŃ‡Đ”ŃĐșОД ĐŸŃĐœĐŸĐČĐ°ĐœĐžŃ ĐżŃ€ĐŸĐ”ĐșŃ‚ĐžŃ€ĐŸĐČĐ°ĐœĐžŃ ĐŸĐŽĐœĐŸĐżĐŸĐ»ĐŸĐ·ĐœŃ‹Ń… ŃĐ°ĐœĐ”Đč [c. 12]1|17|ĐšĐŸĐœŃŃ‚Ń€ŃƒĐșцоя пДрĐČых ĐŸĐŽĐœĐŸĐżĐŸĐ»ĐŸĐ·ĐœŃ‹Ń… ŃĐ°ĐœĐ”Đč [c. 17]1|17|ĐžĐŽĐœĐŸĐżĐŸĐ»ĐŸĐ·ĐœŃ‹Đ” ŃĐ°ĐœĐž Đ’ĐŸŃŃ‚ĐŸĐșĐŸŃŃ‚Đ°Đ»ŃŒĐ»Đ”ŃĐ° [c. 17]1|19|ОЮĐșĐŸĐżĐŸĐ»ĐŸĐ·ĐœŃ‹Đ” ŃĐ°ĐœĐž ЩНИИМЭ, ĐŒĐŸĐŽĐ”Đ»ŃŒ Б [c. 19]1|21|ĐžĐŽĐœĐŸĐżĐŸĐ»ĐŸĐ·ĐœŃ‹Đ” ŃĐ°ĐœĐž ĐœĐ° базД ĐżĐŸĐșĐŸĐČĐŸĐș траĐșŃ‚ĐŸŃ€ĐœŃ‹Ń… ĐŽĐČŃƒŃ…ĐżĐŸĐ»ĐŸĐ·ĐœŃ‹Ń… ŃĐ°ĐœĐ”Đč ĐŒĐŸĐŽĐ”Đ»Đž Д [c. 21]1|22|ĐžĐŽĐœĐŸĐżĐŸĐ»ĐŸĐ·ĐœŃ‹Đ” ŃĐ°ĐœĐž ĐŻ. И. Đ“ĐžĐœĐ·Đ±ŃƒŃ€ĐłĐ° ĐŒĐŸĐŽĐ”Đ»Đž 1939 Đł. [c. 22]1|33|ĐžĐŽĐœĐŸĐżĐŸĐ»ĐŸĐ·ĐœŃ‹Đ” ŃĐ°ĐœĐž ГЗЯ-2 [c. 33]1|39|Đ’Đ°Ń€ĐžĐ°ĐœŃ‚Ń‹ ŃĐŸĐ”ĐŽĐžĐœĐ”ĐœĐžŃ ĐșĐŸĐœĐžĐșĐ° с ĐżĐŸĐ»ĐŸĐ·ĐŸĐŒ [c. 39]1|39|ĐœĐŸĐŽĐ”Ń€ĐœĐžĐ·ĐžŃ€ĐŸĐČĐ°ĐœĐœŃ‹Đ” ĐŸĐŽĐœĐŸĐżĐŸĐ»ĐŸĐ·ĐœŃ‹Đ” ŃĐ°ĐœĐž ĐœĐ° базД ĐżĐŸĐșĐŸĐČĐŸĐș ŃĐ°ĐœĐ”Đč ĐŒĐŸĐŽĐ”Đ»Đž ĐĄĐČДрЎлДса Đž Đ’ĐŸŃŃ‚ĐŸĐșĐŸŃŃ‚Đ°Đ»ŃŒĐ»Đ”ŃĐ° [c. 39]1|44|БДсĐșĐŸĐœĐžĐșĐŸĐČŃ‹Đ” ĐŸĐŽĐœĐŸĐżĐŸĐ»ĐŸĐ·ĐœŃ‹Đ” ŃĐ°ĐœĐž ĐșĐŸĐœŃŃ‚Ń€ŃƒĐșцоо ĐĄĐžĐ±ĐĐ˜Đ˜Đ›Đ„Đ­ [c. 44]1|46|Đ‘ŃƒŃ„Đ”Ń€ĐœĐŸ-ĐżŃ€ĐžŃ†Đ”ĐżĐœŃ‹Đ” ŃƒŃŃ‚Ń€ĐŸĐčстĐČĐ° траĐșŃ‚ĐŸŃ€Đ° ĐșĐŸĐœŃŃ‚Ń€ŃƒĐșцоо УЛбИ, ĐĄĐŸŃ‚Ń€ĐžĐœŃĐșĐŸĐłĐŸ ĐŒĐ”Ń…Đ»Đ”ŃĐŸĐżŃƒĐœĐșта Đž ĐĄŃ‚Ń€ĐŸĐčĐ»Đ”ŃĐżŃ€ĐŸĐ”Đșта [c. 46]1|48|АĐČŃ‚ĐŸĐŒĐ°Ń‚ĐžŃ‡Đ”ŃĐșая сцДпĐșĐ° траĐșŃ‚ĐŸŃ€ĐœŃ‹Ń… ŃĐ°ĐœĐ”Đč [c. 48]1|49|Đ Đ°ĐŒĐ° ĐŽĐ»Ń пДрДĐČĐŸĐ·ĐșĐž ĐșĐŸŃ€ĐŸŃ‚ŃŒŃ ĐœĐ° ĐŸĐŽĐœĐŸĐżĐŸĐ»ĐŸĐ·ĐœŃ‹Ń… ŃĐ°ĐœŃŃ… [c. 49]1|51|РасчДт ŃĐ°ĐœĐ”Đč [c. 51]1|51|РасчДт ĐżĐŸĐ»ĐŸĐ·Đ° [c. 51]1|58|О Ń„ĐŸŃ€ĐŒĐ” ĐżĐŸĐŽŃ€Đ”Đ·ĐŸĐČ [c. 58]0|61|ĐŸĐŸŃŃ‚Ń€ĐŸĐčĐșĐ° ĐŸĐŽĐœĐŸĐșĐŸĐ»Đ”ĐčĐœŃ‹Ń… Đ»Đ”ĐŽŃĐœŃ‹Ń… ĐŽĐŸŃ€ĐŸĐł [c. 61]1|61|ĐŁŃĐ»ĐŸĐČоя ĐżŃ€ĐžĐŒĐ”ĐœĐ”ĐœĐžŃ, ŃŃ‹Ń€ŃŒĐ”ĐČая база Đž ĐżĐŸŃ€ŃĐŽĐŸĐș ĐŸŃ„ĐŸŃ€ĐŒĐ»Đ”ĐœĐžŃ ŃŃ‚Ń€ĐŸĐžŃ‚Đ”Đ»ŃŒŃŃ‚ĐČĐ° [c. 61]1|62|ĐąĐ”Ń…ĐœĐžŃ‡Đ”ŃĐșОД ŃƒŃĐ»ĐŸĐČоя ĐżŃ€ĐŸĐ”ĐșŃ‚ĐžŃ€ĐŸĐČĐ°ĐœĐžŃ ĐŸĐŽĐœĐŸĐșĐŸĐ»Đ”ĐčĐœŃ‹Ń… Đ»Đ”ĐŽŃĐœŃ‹Ń… ĐŽĐŸŃ€ĐŸĐł [c. 62]1|72|Đ˜Đ·Ń‹ŃĐșĐ°ĐœĐžŃ трасс ĐŸĐŽĐœĐŸĐșĐŸĐ»Đ”ĐčĐœŃ‹Ń… Đ»Đ”ĐŽŃĐœŃ‹Ń… ĐŽĐŸŃ€ĐŸĐł [c. 72]1|73|ĐĄŃ‚Ń€ĐŸĐžŃ‚Đ”Đ»ŃŒĐœŃ‹Đ” Ń€Đ°Đ±ĐŸŃ‚Ń‹ ĐœĐ° ĐŸĐŽĐœĐŸĐșĐŸĐ»Đ”ĐčĐœŃ‹Ń… Đ»Đ”ĐŽŃĐœŃ‹Ń… ĐŽĐŸŃ€ĐŸĐłĐ°Ń… [c. 73]1|85|Đ”ĐŸŃ€ĐŸĐ¶ĐœŃ‹Đ” ĐŸŃ€ŃƒĐŽĐžŃ ĐŽĐ»Ń ŃŃ‚Ń€ĐŸĐžŃ‚Đ”Đ»ŃŒŃŃ‚ĐČĐ° ĐŸĐŽĐœĐŸĐșĐŸĐ»Đ”ĐčĐœŃ‹Ń… Đ»Đ”ĐŽŃĐœŃ‹Ń… ĐŽĐŸŃ€ĐŸĐł [c. 85]1|91|ĐŠĐžŃŃ‚Đ”Ń€ĐœŃ‹ ĐŽĐ»Ń ĐżĐŸĐ»ĐžĐČĐșĐž Đ»Đ”ĐŽŃĐœĐŸĐč ĐŽĐŸŃ€ĐŸĐłĐž [c. 91]1|91|ĐĐ°ŃĐŸŃĐœŃ‹Đ” ŃŃ‚Đ°ĐœŃ†ĐžĐž [c. 91]0|95|Đ­ĐșŃĐżĐ»ŃƒĐ°Ń‚Đ°Ń†ĐžŃ Đ»Đ”ĐŽŃĐœŃ‹Ń… ĐŽĐŸŃ€ĐŸĐł [c. 95]1|95|ĐąĐ”Ń…ĐœĐžŃ‡Đ”ŃĐșая хараĐșтДрОстОĐșĐ° Ń‚ŃĐłĐŸĐČых ĐŒĐ°ŃˆĐžĐœ [c. 95]1|107|Đ­ĐșŃĐżĐ»ŃƒĐ°Ń‚Đ°Ń†ĐžŃ ĐłĐ°Đ·ĐŸĐłĐ”ĐœĐ”Ń€Đ°Ń‚ĐŸŃ€ĐœŃ‹Ń… траĐșŃ‚ĐŸŃ€ĐŸĐČ ĐœĐ° Đ»Đ”ŃĐŸĐČыĐČĐŸĐ·ĐșĐ” ĐżĐŸ Đ»Đ”ĐŽŃĐœŃ‹ĐŒ ĐŽĐŸŃ€ĐŸĐłĐ°ĐŒ [c. 107]1|115|ПраĐČОла ĐČĐŸĐ¶ĐŽĐ”ĐœĐžŃ ĐżĐŸĐ”Đ·ĐŽĐŸĐČ [c. 115]1|117|Đ€ĐŸŃ€ĐŒĐžŃ€ĐŸĐČĐ°ĐœĐžĐ” ŃĐŸŃŃ‚Đ°ĐČĐ° Đž ĐŒĐ°ĐœĐ”ĐČры [c. 117]1|117|ĐĄĐŸĐŽĐ”Ń€Đ¶Đ°ĐœĐžĐ” Đž Ń€Đ”ĐŒĐŸĐœŃ‚ путо Đ»Đ”ĐŽŃĐœĐŸĐč ĐŽĐŸŃ€ĐŸĐłĐž [c. 117]1|119|ĐąĐ”Ń…ĐœĐžĐșĐ° Đ±Đ”Đ·ĐŸĐżĐ°ŃĐœĐŸŃŃ‚Đž про ĐČыĐČĐŸĐ·ĐșĐ” лДса ĐżĐŸ траĐșŃ‚ĐŸŃ€ĐœŃ‹ĐŒ Đ»Đ”ĐŽŃĐœŃ‹ĐŒ ĐŽĐŸŃ€ĐŸĐłĐ°ĐŒ [c. 119]1|121|ĐžŃĐœĐŸĐČĐœŃ‹Đ” праĐČОла ĐżĐŸ Ń‚Đ”Ń…ĐœĐžĐșĐ” Đ±Đ”Đ·ĐŸĐżĐ°ŃĐœĐŸŃŃ‚Đž ĐŽĐ»Ń траĐșŃ‚ĐŸŃ€ĐœĐŸĐłĐŸ Đ»Đ”ŃĐŸŃ‚Ń€Đ°ĐœŃĐżĐŸŃ€Ń‚Đ° [c. 121]0|123|ĐŸŃ€ĐžĐ»ĐŸĐ¶Đ”ĐœĐžŃ [c. 123]1|123|ДДталО ĐŸĐŽĐœĐŸĐżĐŸĐ»ĐŸĐ·ĐœŃ‹Ń… ŃĐ°ĐœĐ”Đč ГЗЯ-1 [c. 123]1|136|ДДталО ĐŒĐŸĐŽĐ”Ń€ĐœĐžĐ·ĐžŃ€ĐŸĐČĐ°ĐœĐœŃ‹Ń… ĐŸĐŽĐœĐŸĐżĐŸĐ»ĐŸĐ·ĐœŃ‹Ń… ŃĐ°ĐœĐ”Đč ĐœĐ° базД ĐżĐŸĐșĐŸĐČĐŸĐș ŃĐ°ĐœĐ”Đč ĐĄĐČДрЎллДса [c. 136]1|141|КратĐșая Ń‚Đ”Ń…ĐœĐžŃ‡Đ”ŃĐșая хараĐșтДрОстОĐșĐ° ĐłŃƒŃĐ”ĐœĐžŃ‡ĐœŃ‹Ń… траĐșŃ‚ĐŸŃ€ĐŸĐČ Đ§Đ”Đ»ŃĐ±ĐžĐœŃĐșĐŸĐłĐŸ траĐșŃ‚ĐŸŃ€ĐœĐŸĐłĐŸ Đ·Đ°ĐČĐŸĐŽĐ° [c. 141]0|143|ОглаĐČĐ»Đ”ĐœĐžĐ” [c. 143

    Allelic Variants of Melanocortin 3 Receptor Gene (MC3R) and Weight Loss in Obesity: A Randomised Trial of Hypo-Energetic High- versus Low-Fat Diets

    Get PDF
    INTRODUCTION: The melanocortin system plays an important role in energy homeostasis. Mice genetically deficient in the melanocortin-3 receptor gene have a normal body weight with increased body fat, mild hypophagia compared to wild-type mice. In humans, Thr6Lys and Val81Ile variants of the melanocortin-3 receptor gene (MC3R) have been associated with childhood obesity, higher BMI Z-score and elevated body fat percentage compared to non-carriers. The aim of this study is to assess the association in adults between allelic variants of MC3R with weight loss induced by energy-restricted diets. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: This research is based on the NUGENOB study, a trial conducted to assess weight loss during a 10-week dietary intervention involving two different hypo-energetic (high-fat and low-fat) diets. A total of 760 obese patients were genotyped for 10 single nucleotide polymorphisms covering the single exon of MC3R gene and its flanking regions, including the missense variants Thr6Lys and Val81Ile. Linear mixed models and haplotype-based analysis were carried out to assess the potential association between genetic polymorphisms and differential weight loss, fat mass loss, waist change and resting energy expenditure changes. RESULTS: No differences in drop-out rate were found by MC3R genotypes. The rs6014646 polymorphism was significantly associated with weight loss using co-dominant (p = 0.04) and dominant models (p = 0.03). These p-values were not statistically significant after strict control for multiple testing. Haplotype-based multivariate analysis using permutations showed that rs3827103-rs1543873 (p = 0.06), rs6014646-rs6024730 (p = 0.05) and rs3746619-rs3827103 (p = 0.10) displayed near-statistical significant results in relation to weight loss. No other significant associations or gene*diet interactions were detected for weight loss, fat mass loss, waist change and resting energy expenditure changes. CONCLUSION: The study provided overall sufficient evidence to support that there is no major effect of genetic variants of MC3R and differential weight loss after a 10-week dietary intervention with hypo-energetic diets in obese Europeans

    The trans-ancestral genomic architecture of glycemic traits

    Get PDF
    Glycemic traits are used to diagnose and monitor type 2 diabetes and cardiometabolic health. To date, most genetic studies of glycemic traits have focused on individuals of European ancestry. Here we aggregated genome-wide association studies comprising up to 281,416 individuals without diabetes (30% non-European ancestry) for whom fasting glucose, 2-h glucose after an oral glucose challenge, glycated hemoglobin and fasting insulin data were available. Trans-ancestry and single-ancestry meta-analyses identified 242 loci (99 novel; P < 5 x 10(-8)), 80% of which had no significant evidence of between-ancestry heterogeneity. Analyses restricted to individuals of European ancestry with equivalent sample size would have led to 24 fewer new loci. Compared with single-ancestry analyses, equivalent-sized trans-ancestry fine-mapping reduced the number of estimated variants in 99% credible sets by a median of 37.5%. Genomic-feature, gene-expression and gene-set analyses revealed distinct biological signatures for each trait, highlighting different underlying biological pathways. Our results increase our understanding of diabetes pathophysiology by using trans-ancestry studies for improved power and resolution. A trans-ancestry meta-analysis of GWAS of glycemic traits in up to 281,416 individuals identifies 99 novel loci, of which one quarter was found due to the multi-ancestry approach, which also improves fine-mapping of credible variant sets.Peer reviewe

    Gestational weight gain outside the Institute of Medicine recommendations and adverse pregnancy outcomes: analysis using individual participant data from randomised trials

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: High Body Mass Index (BMI) and gestational weight gain (GWG) affect an increasing number of pregnancies. The Institute of Medicine (IOM) has issued recommendations on the optimal GWG for women according to their pre-pregnancy BMI (healthy, overweight or obese). It has been shown that pregnant women rarely met the recommendations; however, it is unclear by how much. Previous studies also adjusted the analyses for various women's characteristics making their comparison challenging. // METHODS: We analysed individual participant data (IPD) of healthy women with a singleton pregnancy and a BMI of 18.5 kg/m2 or more from the control arms of 36 randomised trials (16 countries). Adjusted odds ratios (aOR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were used to describe the association between GWG outside (above or below) the IOM recommendations (2009) and risks of caesarean section, preterm birth, and large or small for gestational age (LGA or SGA) infants. The association was examined overall, within the BMI categories and by quartile of GWG departure from the IOM recommendations. We obtained aOR using mixed-effects logistic regression, accounting for the within-study clustering and a priori identified characteristics. // RESULTS: Out of 4429 women (from 33 trials) meeting the inclusion criteria, two thirds gained weight outside the IOM recommendations (1646 above; 1291 below). The median GWG outside the IOM recommendations was 3.1 kg above and 2.7 kg below. In comparison to GWG within the IOM recommendations, GWG above was associated with increased odds of caesarean section (aOR 1.50; 95%CI 1.25, 1.80), LGA (2.00; 1.58, 2.54), and reduced odds of SGA (0.66; 0.50, 0.87); no significant effect on preterm birth was detected. The relationship between GWG below the IOM recommendation and caesarean section or LGA was inconclusive; however, the odds of preterm birth (1.94; 1.31, 2.28) and SGA (1.52; 1.18, 1.96) were increased. // CONCLUSIONS: Consistently with previous findings, adherence to the IOM recommendations seem to help achieve better pregnancy outcomes. Nevertheless, even in the context of clinical trials, women find it difficult to adhere to them. Further research should focus on identifying ways of achieving a healthier GWG as defined by the IOM recommendations
    corecore