Literature DB >> 24081228

Estimating the range of obesity treatment response variability in humans: methods and illustrations.

Kathryn A Kaiser1, Gary L Gadbury.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND/AIMS: The rising prevalence of human obesity worldwide has focused research on a variety of interventions that result in highly varied degrees of weight loss (WL). The advent of genomic testing has quantified estimates of both the contribution of genetic factors to the development of obesity as well as racial/ethnic variation of risk alleles across subpopulations. More recent studies have examined genetic associations with effectiveness of WL interventions, but to date are unable to explain a large proportion of the variance observed.
METHODS: We describe and provide two illustrations of statistical methods to estimate upper and lower bounds of WL treatment response heterogeneity (TRH) in the absence of genotypic data, using published summary statistics and a raw data set from WL studies.
RESULTS: Thirty-two studies had some evidence of a positive mean treatment effect with respect to the control intervention. Twelve of these 32 studies reported WL TRH. Of these 12, 3 demonstrated an estimated proportion of >5% of the sampled population having an outcome opposite the mean effect. In the raw data set, bounds estimations for change in waist circumference revealed tighter ranges in men than women.
CONCLUSION: Future studies may be able to take advantage of multiple approaches, including the method we describe, to identify and quantify the presence of TRH in studies of WL or related outcomes.
© 2013 S. Karger AG, Basel.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24081228      PMCID: PMC3906849          DOI: 10.1159/000351738

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hum Hered        ISSN: 0001-5652            Impact factor:   0.444


  16 in total

1.  Evaluating subject-treatment interaction when comparing two treatments.

Authors:  G L Gadbury; H K Iyer; D B Allison
Journal:  J Biopharm Stat       Date:  2001-11       Impact factor: 1.051

2.  Twins and virtual twins: bases of relative body weight revisited.

Authors:  N L Segal; D B Allison
Journal:  Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord       Date:  2002-04

Review 3.  Post-operative behavioural management in bariatric surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  A Rudolph; A Hilbert
Journal:  Obes Rev       Date:  2013-01-07       Impact factor: 9.213

4.  Bariatric surgery and long-term cardiovascular events.

Authors:  Lars Sjöström; Markku Peltonen; Peter Jacobson; C David Sjöström; Kristjan Karason; Hans Wedel; Sofie Ahlin; Åsa Anveden; Calle Bengtsson; Gerd Bergmark; Claude Bouchard; Björn Carlsson; Sven Dahlgren; Jan Karlsson; Anna-Karin Lindroos; Hans Lönroth; Kristina Narbro; Ingmar Näslund; Torsten Olbers; Per-Arne Svensson; Lena M S Carlsson
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2012-01-04       Impact factor: 56.272

5.  Treatment Heterogeneity and Individual Qualitative Interaction.

Authors:  Robert S Poulson; Gary L Gadbury; David B Allison
Journal:  Am Stat       Date:  2012-06-12       Impact factor: 8.710

Review 6.  Surgery for obesity.

Authors:  Jill L Colquitt; Joanna Picot; Emma Loveman; Andrew J Clegg
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2009-04-15

7.  The genetic epidemiology of thinness.

Authors:  C M Bulik; D B Allison
Journal:  Obes Rev       Date:  2001-05       Impact factor: 9.213

Review 8.  Gene-environment interaction and obesity.

Authors:  Lu Qi; Young Ae Cho
Journal:  Nutr Rev       Date:  2008-12       Impact factor: 7.110

Review 9.  Weight-loss outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis of weight-loss clinical trials with a minimum 1-year follow-up.

Authors:  Marion J Franz; Jeffrey J VanWormer; A Lauren Crain; Jackie L Boucher; Trina Histon; William Caplan; Jill D Bowman; Nicolas P Pronk
Journal:  J Am Diet Assoc       Date:  2007-10

Review 10.  Genetic determinants of common obesity and their value in prediction.

Authors:  Ruth J F Loos
Journal:  Best Pract Res Clin Endocrinol Metab       Date:  2012-04       Impact factor: 4.690

View more
  5 in total

1.  Baseline characteristics associated with different BMI trajectories in weight loss trials: a case for better targeting of interventions.

Authors:  M Batterham; L C Tapsell; K E Charlton
Journal:  Eur J Clin Nutr       Date:  2015-04-01       Impact factor: 4.016

2.  Persistent confusion in nutrition and obesity research about the validity of classic nonparametric tests in the presence of heteroscedasticity: evidence of the problem and valid alternatives.

Authors:  Cynthia M Kroeger; Keisuke Ejima; Bridget A Hannon; Tanya M Halliday; Bryan McComb; Margarita Teran-Garcia; John A Dawson; David B King; Andrew W Brown; David B Allison
Journal:  Am J Clin Nutr       Date:  2021-03-11       Impact factor: 7.045

3.  Biobehavioural approaches to prevention and treatment: A call for implementation science in obesity research.

Authors:  Kathryn A Kaiser; Tiffany L Carson; Emily J Dhurandhar; William H Neumeier; Michelle I Cardel
Journal:  Obes Sci Pract       Date:  2020-01-22

4.  Empirical versus theoretical power and type I error (false-positive) rates estimated from real murine aging research data.

Authors:  Irene Alfaras; Keisuke Ejima; Camila Vieira Ligo Teixeira; Clara Di Germanio; Sarah J Mitchell; Samuel Hamilton; Luigi Ferrucci; Nathan L Price; David B Allison; Michel Bernier; Rafael de Cabo
Journal:  Cell Rep       Date:  2021-08-17       Impact factor: 9.423

5.  Three-Year Follow-Up of Participants from a Self-Weighing Randomized Controlled Trial.

Authors:  Lua Wilkinson; Carly R Pacanowski; David Levitsky
Journal:  J Obes       Date:  2017-09-19
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.