OBJECTIVE: The study objectives were to examine the association between menopause status and diabetes risk among women with glucose intolerance and to determine if menopause status modifies response to diabetes prevention interventions. METHODS: The study population included women in premenopause (n = 708), women in natural postmenopause (n = 328), and women with bilateral oophorectomy (n = 201) in the Diabetes Prevention Program, a randomized placebo-controlled trial of lifestyle intervention and metforminamong glucose-intolerant adults. Associations between menopause and diabetes risk were evaluated using Cox proportional hazard models that adjusted for demographic variables (age, race/ethnicity, family history of diabetes, history of gestational diabetes mellitus), waist circumference, insulin resistance, and corrected insulin response. Similar models were constructed after stratification by menopause type and hormone therapy use. RESULTS: After adjustment for age, there was no association between natural menopause or bilateral oophorectomy and diabetes risk. Differences by study arm were observed in women who reported bilateral oophorectomy. In the lifestyle arm, women with bilateral oophorectomy had a lower adjusted hazard for diabetes (hazard ratio [HR], 0.19; 95% CI, 0.04-0.94), although observations were too few to determine if this was independent of hormone therapy use. No significant differences were seen in the metformin (HR, 1.29; 95% CI, 0.63-2.64) or placebo arms (HR, 1.37; 95% CI, 0.74-2.55). CONCLUSIONS: Among women at high risk for diabetes, natural menopause was not associated with diabetes risk and did not affect response to diabetes prevention interventions. In the lifestyle intervention, bilateral oophorectomy was associated with a decreased diabetes risk.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: The study objectives were to examine the association between menopause status and diabetes risk among women with glucose intolerance and to determine if menopause status modifies response to diabetes prevention interventions. METHODS: The study population included women in premenopause (n = 708), women in natural postmenopause (n = 328), and women with bilateral oophorectomy (n = 201) in the Diabetes Prevention Program, a randomized placebo-controlled trial of lifestyle intervention and metformin among glucose-intolerant adults. Associations between menopause and diabetes risk were evaluated using Cox proportional hazard models that adjusted for demographic variables (age, race/ethnicity, family history of diabetes, history of gestational diabetes mellitus), waist circumference, insulin resistance, and corrected insulin response. Similar models were constructed after stratification by menopause type and hormone therapy use. RESULTS: After adjustment for age, there was no association between natural menopause or bilateral oophorectomy and diabetes risk. Differences by study arm were observed in women who reported bilateral oophorectomy. In the lifestyle arm, women with bilateral oophorectomy had a lower adjusted hazard for diabetes (hazard ratio [HR], 0.19; 95% CI, 0.04-0.94), although observations were too few to determine if this was independent of hormone therapy use. No significant differences were seen in the metformin (HR, 1.29; 95% CI, 0.63-2.64) or placebo arms (HR, 1.37; 95% CI, 0.74-2.55). CONCLUSIONS: Among women at high risk for diabetes, natural menopause was not associated with diabetes risk and did not affect response to diabetes prevention interventions. In the lifestyle intervention, bilateral oophorectomy was associated with a decreased diabetes risk.
Authors: Abbas E Kitabchi; Marinella Temprosa; William C Knowler; Steven E Kahn; Sarah E Fowler; Steven M Haffner; Reuben Andres; Christopher Saudek; Sharon L Edelstein; Richard Arakaki; Mary Beth Murphy; Harry Shamoon Journal: Diabetes Date: 2005-08 Impact factor: 9.461
Authors: B Andersson; L A Mattsson; L Hahn; P Mårin; L Lapidus; G Holm; B A Bengtsson; P Björntorp Journal: J Clin Endocrinol Metab Date: 1997-02 Impact factor: 5.958
Authors: Steven Haffner; Marinella Temprosa; Jill Crandall; Sarah Fowler; Ronald Goldberg; Edward Horton; Santica Marcovina; Kieren Mather; Trevor Orchard; Robert Ratner; Elizabeth Barrett-Connor Journal: Diabetes Date: 2005-05 Impact factor: 9.461
Authors: K L Margolis; D E Bonds; R J Rodabough; L Tinker; L S Phillips; C Allen; T Bassford; G Burke; J Torrens; B V Howard Journal: Diabetologia Date: 2004-07-14 Impact factor: 10.122
Authors: MaryFran Sowers; Carol Derby; Mary L Jannausch; Javier I Torrens; Richard Pasternak Journal: J Clin Endocrinol Metab Date: 2003-10 Impact factor: 5.958
Authors: J E Manson; E B Rimm; G A Colditz; W C Willett; D M Nathan; R A Arky; B Rosner; C H Hennekens; F E Speizer; M J Stampfer Journal: Ann Epidemiol Date: 1992-09 Impact factor: 3.797
Authors: Deborah Clegg; Andrea L Hevener; Kerrie L Moreau; Eugenia Morselli; Alfredo Criollo; Rachael E Van Pelt; Victoria J Vieira-Potter Journal: Endocrinology Date: 2017-05-01 Impact factor: 4.736
Authors: Kara L Marlatt; Dori R Pitynski-Miller; Kathleen M Gavin; Kerrie L Moreau; Edward L Melanson; Nanette Santoro; Wendy M Kohrt Journal: Obesity (Silver Spring) Date: 2022-01 Impact factor: 5.002
Authors: Judith S Brand; Yvonne T van der Schouw; N Charlotte Onland-Moret; Stephen J Sharp; Ken K Ong; Kay-Tee Khaw; Eva Ardanaz; Pilar Amiano; Heiner Boeing; Maria-Dolores Chirlaque; Françoise Clavel-Chapelon; Francesca L Crowe; Blandine de Lauzon-Guillain; Eric J Duell; Guy Fagherazzi; Paul W Franks; Sara Grioni; Leif C Groop; Rudolf Kaaks; Timothy J Key; Peter M Nilsson; Kim Overvad; Domenico Palli; Salvatore Panico; J Ramón Quirós; Olov Rolandsson; Carlotta Sacerdote; María-José Sánchez; Nadia Slimani; Birgit Teucher; Anne Tjonneland; Rosario Tumino; Daphne L van der A; Edith J M Feskens; Claudia Langenberg; Nita G Forouhi; Elio Riboli; Nicholas J Wareham Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2012-12-10 Impact factor: 19.112