Literature DB >> 26608511

Comparison of Adipose Distribution Indices with Gold Standard Body Composition Assessments in the EMPA-REG H2H SU Trial: A Body Composition Sub-Study.

Ian J Neeland1, Darren K McGuire2, Björn Eliasson3, Martin Ridderstråle4, Cordula Zeller5, Hans J Woerle6, Uli C Broedl6, Odd Erik Johansen7.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Excess adiposity contributes to cardiometabolic disease. Although adipose depots can be measured using imaging, implementation remains limited in practice. Data comparing surrogate indices of total and visceral adiposity with gold standard measurements in the context of a clinical trial population are lacking. We explored the relationships between adipose distribution indices and imaging assessments of body composition using baseline data from the EMPA-REG H2H SU™ trial.
METHODS: 118 participants from the Phase III trial of empagliflozin 25 mg vs. glimepiride 1-4 mg enrolled in a dedicated sub-study underwent assessment of total fat and fat-free mass by dual x-ray absorptiometry (n = 93) and abdominal visceral (VAT) and subcutaneous adipose tissue by magnetic resonance imaging (n = 99). Correlations with waist circumference (WC), estimated total body fat (eTBF), index of central obesity (ICO), and visceral adiposity index (VAI) were assessed.
RESULTS: eTBF was highly representative of total body fat (Spearman's ρ = 0.73, P < 0.001) but not associated with VAT. WC and ICO were strongly, and VAI to a lesser degree, correlated with VAT (ρ = 0.66, P < 0.001; ρ = 0.52, P < 0.001; ρ = 0.24, P = 0.02, respectively).
CONCLUSION: These findings support the use of eTBF and WC or ICO as surrogate indices for total body fat and VAT, respectively, in the absence of gold standard imaging methodology.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Body fat distribution; Empagliflozin; Obesity; Sodium glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitor; Visceral adipose tissue

Year:  2015        PMID: 26608511      PMCID: PMC4674478          DOI: 10.1007/s13300-015-0146-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Diabetes Ther            Impact factor:   2.945


Introduction

Total body fat content, as measured by dual X-ray absorptiometry (DXA), is highly correlated with multiple metabolic risk factors [1]. Intra-abdominal (visceral) adipose tissue (VAT) also influences cardiometabolic risk factors independent of total body fat and is a major risk factor for many of the cardiometabolic complications of obesity [2-6]. Although various adipose depots can be accurately measured using dedicated imaging techniques, implementation of these modalities remain limited in clinical practice due to high cost, radiation exposure, and prolonged scan time. Multiple surrogate indices of total and visceral adiposity have been developed that do not require advanced imaging, have been validated with metabolic outcomes, and are more readily applied in the clinical setting [7-9]. Furthermore, the individual parameters used to derive these indices can be applied across a broad spectrum of populations. Empagliflozin (EMPA) is a potent and selective sodium glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor [10]. In a Phase III, randomized, double-blind trial (EMPA-REG H2H SU™, ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01167881) in 1549 patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D), EMPA 25 mg daily as add-on to metformin for 104 weeks led to sustained reductions in Glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c), body weight [MMRM-adjusted mean change from baseline −4.6 (95% CI −5.0, −4.2) kg, P < 0.0001], and blood pressure compared with glimepiride 1–4 mg [11]. In an embedded, dedicated body composition sub-study, reductions in trunk fat, limb fat, total fat mass, VAT [adjusted mean change from baseline −22.2 (95% CI −37.1, −7.4) cm3, P = 0.004], and abdominal subcutaneous adipose tissue [SAT; adjusted mean change from baseline −40.0 (95% CI −58.9, −21.1) cm3, P < 0.0001] were demonstrated with EMPA compared with glimepiride [11]. EMPA has also been shown to reduce body weight and surrogate indices of total and visceral adiposity at 12 and 24 weeks among 3300 patients with T2D enrolled in five clinical trials [12]. Data comparing adipose distribution indices with gold standard body composition measurements within the context of an extensively phenotyped clinical trial population with highly standardized assessments are lacking. We aimed to explore the relationships between adipose distribution indices and direct imaging assessments of body composition using baseline data from the EMPA-REG H2H SU trial.

Methods

The EMPA-REG H2H SU trial was a double-blind, randomized, active-control trial of EMPA 25 mg daily vs. glimepiride 1–4 mg daily as add-on to metformin among adults with T2D and HbA1c concentrations of 7–10% for 104 weeks. All patients at sites choosing to contribute to a dedicated body composition sub-study were offered participation and signed separate informed consent forms. Whole body DXA and regional magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans (involving one axial slice from T1 sequence with and without fat suppression at the level of L4–L5 intervertebral disc) were performed [11]. Scans were obtained in a standardized manner and assessed by an independent reviewer. Using Spearman’s rank correlation coefficients, we assessed the correlations between gold standard body composition assessments—total fat mass and fat-free mass based on DXA and abdominal VAT and SAT based on MRI—and indices of total and visceral adiposity at baseline. Indices assessed included waist circumference (WC, cm); estimated total body fat [eTBF; Young man’s Christian association (YMCA) formula] [13, 14]: 100 × (−98.42 + [4.15 × WC (in)]−[0.082 × weight (lbs.)])/weight for men and 100 × (−76.76 + [4.15 × WC]−[0.082 × weight])/weight for women; index of central obesity (ICO): WC/height [9]; and visceral adiposity index (VAI) [15]: (WC (cm)/[39.68 + (1.88 × BMI)]) × (TG/1.03) × (1.31/HDL-C) for men; (WC/[36.58 + (1.89 × BMI)]) × (TG/0.81) × (1.52/HDL-C) for women, where BMI is body mass index (kg/m2), TG is triglycerides (mmol/L) and HDL-cholesterol is high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (mmol/L). Correlations (positive or negative) were classified as negligible if 0.0–0.3, mild if 0.3–0.5, moderate if 0.5–0.7, and high if 0.7–0.9 [16]. For all statistical testing, a 2-sided P value <0.05 was considered statistically significant. All statistical analyses were performed using SAS version 9.2 software (SAS Corporation, Cary, NC).

Compliance with Ethics Guidelines

All procedures followed were in accordance with the ethical standards of the responsible committee on human experimentation (institutional and national) and with the Helsinki Declaration of 1964, as revised in 2013. Informed consent was obtained from all the patients for being included in the study.

Results

Baseline characteristics of 118 patients with a baseline DXA (n = 93) or MRI (n = 99) scan are shown in Table 1. Patients with a baseline scan had a mean age of 55.6 years and were predominantly female and white. Body weight, WC, eTBF, ICO, and VAI were similar between DXA and MRI scanned groups.
Table 1

Baseline characteristics of the study population with a baseline DXA or MRI scan

Baseline characteristicsPatients with a DXA scan (n = 93)Patients with an MRI scan (n = 99)
Age (years)55.6 (10.8)55.6 (10.1)
Male (%)39 (41.9)46 (46.5)
Race (%)
 White74 (79.6)81 (81.8)
 Asian17 (18.3)14 (14.1)
 Black2 (2.2)4 (4.0)
Time since T2D diagnosis (years)
 ≤112 (12.9)9 (9.1)
 >1–535 (37.6)45 (45.5)
 >5–1027 (29.0)23 (23.2)
 >1019 (20.4)22 (22.2)
HbA1c (%)8.19 (1.02)8.20 (0.99)
Fasting glucose (mg/dL)159.3 (45.9)161.7 (47.2)
Triglycerides (mg/dL)183.0 (116.1)a 216.3 (259.6)d
HDL cholesterol (mg/dL)46.4 (10.6)a 45.2 (10.6)d
LDL cholesterol (mg/dL)96.0 (31.3)a 97.4 (32.0)e
Total cholesterol (mg/dL)177.8 (38.9)a 181.5 (43.7)d
AST (U/L)26.7 (19.4)a 26.6 (17.8)d
ALT (U/L)34.1 (25.6)a 34.9 (25.4)d
Body weight (kg)84.1 (15.2)87.4 (16.3)
Body mass index (kg/m2)31.9 (4.9)32.4 (4.9)
Waist circumference (cm)103.9 (12.1)106.1 (12.3)
Est total body fat (%)37.4 (9.9)37.1 (9.6)
Index of central obesity0.64 (0.08)0.65 (0.08)
Visceral adiposity index3.3 (3.1)a 4.4 (8.5)d
Total fat mass (%)38.4 (8.4)38.9 (8.0)b
Fat-free mass (kg)50.8 (10.7)50.7 (11.2)b
Visceral fat mass (cm2)164.1 (81.3)b 174.0 (80.7)
Abdominal subcutaneous fat mass (cm2)338.4 (107.6)c 342.2 (111.4)

Data are mean (standard deviation) or n (%).

DXA dual x-ray absorptiometry, MRI magnetic resonance imaging, T2D Type 2 diabetes, HbA1c glycosylated hemoglobin, HDL high-density lipoprotein, LDL low-density lipoprotein, AST Aspartate transaminase, ALT Alanine transaminase

Subjects with data available: a n = 92; b n = 74; c n = 73; d n = 98; e n = 97

Baseline characteristics of the study population with a baseline DXA or MRI scan Data are mean (standard deviation) or n (%). DXA dual x-ray absorptiometry, MRI magnetic resonance imaging, T2D Type 2 diabetes, HbA1c glycosylated hemoglobin, HDL high-density lipoprotein, LDL low-density lipoprotein, AST Aspartate transaminase, ALT Alanine transaminase Subjects with data available: a n = 92; b n = 74; c n = 73; d n = 98; e n = 97 WC was mildly correlated with percent total body fat (Spearman’s ρ = 0.31, P = 0.002) and fat-free mass (Spearman’s ρ = 0.44, P < 0.001) but moderately correlated with VAT (Spearman’s ρ = 0.66, P < 0.001, Fig. 1a) and SAT (Spearman’s ρ = 0.55, P < 0.001). eTBF was highly correlated with total body fat (Spearman’s ρ = 0.73, P < 0.001, Fig. 1b) and moderately correlated with SAT (Spearman’s ρ = 0.51, P < 0.001), but not significantly associated with VAT. ICO was moderately correlated with total body fat (Spearman’s ρ = 0.61, P < 0.001), VAT (Spearman’s ρ = 0.52, P < 0.001, Fig. 1c), and SAT (Spearman’s ρ = 0.67, P < 0.001), but not with fat-free mass. VAI was negligibly correlated with VAT (Spearman’s ρ = 0.24, P = 0.02, Fig. 1d) and was not significantly associated with SAT.
Fig. 1

Correlations between a waist circumference and VAT; b estimated total body fat and total fat mass by DXA; c index of central obesity and VAT; and d visceral adiposity index and VAT. DXA dual x-ray absorptiometry, VAT visceral adipose tissue

Correlations between a waist circumference and VAT; b estimated total body fat and total fat mass by DXA; c index of central obesity and VAT; and d visceral adiposity index and VAT. DXA dual x-ray absorptiometry, VAT visceral adipose tissue

Discussion

In this post hoc analysis using a subset of the 1549 patients with T2D randomized to treatment with EMPA vs. glimepiride in the EMPA-REG H2H SU trial with baseline DXA or MRI, we found that eTBF (using sex-specific equations incorporating weight and WC) was highly representative of total body fat mass by DXA, but not associated with visceral adiposity by MRI. By contrast, WC and ICO had the strongest relation to regional abdominal adiposity with VAT and SAT. Surprisingly, VAI was not highly correlated with MRI-based assessment of VAT. These findings support the use of eTBF for non-imaging estimations of total body fat and the use of WC or ICO as surrogate indices for abdominal VAT and SAT for both clinical and research purposes in the absence of gold standard methodology. The eTBF index used in this study derives from the popularly termed YMCA formula, referencing the community fitness organization for which these formulas were once likely utilized in a training handbook. The origin of the eTBF index can be traced to the research of Wilmore and Behnke who used anthropometric measurements from multiple body sites to estimate body composition variables from regression equations among healthy college student volunteers [13, 14]. eTBF is relatively simple to calculate and is one of many anthropometry-based estimated body fat formulas currently in use. Our finding that eTBF was strongly correlated with total body fat by DXA, but not significantly associated with VAT by MRI (despite incorporation of WC as a derivation variable), supports its use as a surrogate for total body fat, but not abdominal adiposity, in the absence of DXA imaging. Whether eTBF is a better predictor of total body fat compared with other methods of body fat quantification remains to be seen. WC has traditionally been considered one of the most valid indices of regional adipose tissue distribution with excellent correlation with VAT by abdominal imaging (correlation coefficient = 0.77 among 151 metabolically healthy men and women) [17]. It also has a strong association with cardiovascular disease risk and mortality [18]. As a result, the American Heart Association/National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute has incorporated WC as a surrogate marker of abdominal/central obesity in their diagnostic definition of the metabolic syndrome [19]. ICO, the index of WC to height, has also been extensively studied and may be superior to WC in predicting multiple cardiovascular risk factors in both sexes and different ethnic groups [20]. However, WC is limited as a surrogate for the VAT phenotype. First, the correlation between WC and VAT is highly variable among different racial groups, prompting the International Diabetes Federation to define different cutoffs for abnormal WC in Asian populations [21]. Nevertheless, we still observed a strong correlation between WC and VAT in our population with a significant proportion of Asian patients. Second, WC measurement includes both VAT and abdominal SAT compartments. These two depots are anatomically and physiologically distinct, especially within the obese population, and are differentially associated with markers of cardiometabolic risk [3]. Nevertheless, our findings demonstrate strong correlations between WC and ICO and VAT among an ethnically diverse population with T2D, supporting their use when direct imaging assessments are not available. VAI is a mathematical model-derived index based on both anthropometric and laboratory-based correlates of excess adiposity. It has been shown to positively associate with peripheral glucose utilization during euglycemic hyperinsulinemic clamp and (expectedly given its derivation) is correlated with cardiovascular risk [15]. However, we found that the correlation between VAI and VAT as assessed by MRI was negligible, suggesting it does not sufficiently reflect the anatomic burden of VAT to warrant its use as a surrogate for clinical or research purposes. Further research should confirm these findings in varying populations with different demographic and clinical phenotypes. Several study limitations merit comment. First, we are unable to report on the association of waist-hip ratio with direct imaging phenotypes as hip circumference was not measured in our study. Second, subgroup analyses by sex and age were not performed due to a limited sample size and the concern that multiple subgroup analyses on a limited patient sample may substantially increase the probability of false-positive findings [22]. Further research should focus on validating these indices within larger, more diverse populations, including age- and sex-specific analyses given their strong influence on adipose distribution.

Conclusions

In conclusion, using baseline data from the EMPA-REG H2H SU trial, we found strong correlations between the adipose distribution indices of eTBF (YMCA formula) and total body fat by DXA and between WC and ICO and abdominal VAT and SAT by MRI. These findings support their use as surrogate measurements for clinical and research purposes in the absence of gold standard direct imaging assessments of body fat composition. Analyses of the recently reported EMPA-REG OUTCOME™ trial (NCT01131676) [23] demonstrating decreased cardiovascular mortality of EMPA compared with placebo in a high-cardiovascular risk patient population may establish whether changes in such indices after EMPA treatment are associated with improved clinical outcomes. Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material. Supplementary material 1 (PDF 222 kb)
  23 in total

1.  Body fat distribution and incident cardiovascular disease in obese adults.

Authors:  Ian J Neeland; Aslan T Turer; Colby R Ayers; Jarett D Berry; Anand Rohatgi; Sandeep R Das; Amit Khera; Gloria L Vega; Darren K McGuire; Scott M Grundy; James A de Lemos
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2015-05-19       Impact factor: 24.094

2.  Dysfunctional adiposity and the risk of prediabetes and type 2 diabetes in obese adults.

Authors:  Ian J Neeland; Aslan T Turer; Colby R Ayers; Tiffany M Powell-Wiley; Gloria L Vega; Ramin Farzaneh-Far; Scott M Grundy; Amit Khera; Darren K McGuire; James A de Lemos
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2012-09-19       Impact factor: 56.272

3.  Relation of regional fat distribution to left ventricular structure and function.

Authors:  Ian J Neeland; Sachin Gupta; Colby R Ayers; Aslan T Turer; J Eduardo Rame; Sandeep R Das; Jarett D Berry; Amit Khera; Darren K McGuire; Gloria L Vega; Scott M Grundy; James A de Lemos; Mark H Drazner
Journal:  Circ Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2013-08-08       Impact factor: 7.792

4.  Visceral Adiposity Index: a reliable indicator of visceral fat function associated with cardiometabolic risk.

Authors:  Marco C Amato; Carla Giordano; Massimo Galia; Angela Criscimanna; Salvatore Vitabile; Massimo Midiri; Aldo Galluzzo
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  2010-01-12       Impact factor: 17.152

Review 5.  Indices of abdominal obesity are better discriminators of cardiovascular risk factors than BMI: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Crystal Man Ying Lee; Rachel R Huxley; Rachel P Wildman; Mark Woodward
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2008-03-21       Impact factor: 6.437

6.  Waist circumference and abdominal sagittal diameter: best simple anthropometric indexes of abdominal visceral adipose tissue accumulation and related cardiovascular risk in men and women.

Authors:  M C Pouliot; J P Després; S Lemieux; S Moorjani; C Bouchard; A Tremblay; A Nadeau; P J Lupien
Journal:  Am J Cardiol       Date:  1994-03-01       Impact factor: 2.778

7.  Combining body mass index with measures of central obesity in the assessment of mortality in subjects with coronary disease: role of "normal weight central obesity".

Authors:  Thais Coutinho; Kashish Goel; Daniel Corrêa de Sá; Rickey E Carter; David O Hodge; Charlotte Kragelund; Alka M Kanaya; Marianne Zeller; Jong Seon Park; Lars Kober; Christian Torp-Pedersen; Yves Cottin; Luc Lorgis; Sang-Hee Lee; Young-Jo Kim; Randal Thomas; Véronique L Roger; Virend K Somers; Francisco Lopez-Jimenez
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2013-02-05       Impact factor: 24.094

8.  Harmonizing the metabolic syndrome: a joint interim statement of the International Diabetes Federation Task Force on Epidemiology and Prevention; National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; American Heart Association; World Heart Federation; International Atherosclerosis Society; and International Association for the Study of Obesity.

Authors:  K G M M Alberti; Robert H Eckel; Scott M Grundy; Paul Z Zimmet; James I Cleeman; Karen A Donato; Jean-Charles Fruchart; W Philip T James; Catherine M Loria; Sidney C Smith
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2009-10-05       Impact factor: 29.690

9.  Associations of visceral and abdominal subcutaneous adipose tissue with markers of cardiac and metabolic risk in obese adults.

Authors:  Ian J Neeland; Colby R Ayers; Anand K Rohatgi; Aslan T Turer; Jarett D Berry; Sandeep R Das; Gloria L Vega; Amit Khera; Darren K McGuire; Scott M Grundy; James A de Lemos
Journal:  Obesity (Silver Spring)       Date:  2013-05-19       Impact factor: 5.002

10.  The SGLT2 Inhibitor Empagliflozin for the Treatment of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: a Bench to Bedside Review.

Authors:  Janet B McGill
Journal:  Diabetes Ther       Date:  2014-04-12       Impact factor: 2.945

View more
  8 in total

1.  Metformin and second- or third-generation sulphonylurea combination therapy for adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

Authors:  Kasper S Madsen; Pernille Kähler; Lise Katrine Aronsen Kähler; Sten Madsbad; Filip Gnesin; Maria-Inti Metzendorf; Bernd Richter; Bianca Hemmingsen
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2019-04-18

2.  Empagliflozin reduces body weight and indices of adipose distribution in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

Authors:  Ian J Neeland; Darren K McGuire; Robert Chilton; Susanne Crowe; Søren S Lund; Hans J Woerle; Uli C Broedl; Odd Erik Johansen
Journal:  Diab Vasc Dis Res       Date:  2016-03       Impact factor: 3.291

3.  Effect of SGLT2 inhibitors on body composition, fluid status and renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system in type 2 diabetes: a prospective study using bioimpedance spectroscopy.

Authors:  Anja Schork; Janine Saynisch; Andreas Vosseler; Benjamin Assad Jaghutriz; Nils Heyne; Andreas Peter; Hans-Ulrich Häring; Norbert Stefan; Andreas Fritsche; Ferruh Artunc
Journal:  Cardiovasc Diabetol       Date:  2019-04-05       Impact factor: 9.951

4.  Comparison of the associations between non-traditional and traditional indices of adiposity and cardiovascular mortality: an observational study of one million person-years of follow-up.

Authors:  Anne Pernille Ofstad; Christine Sommer; Kåre I Birkeland; Marit Rokne Bjørgaas; Jon Michael Gran; Hanne Løvdal Gulseth; Odd Erik Johansen
Journal:  Int J Obes (Lond)       Date:  2019-03-29       Impact factor: 5.095

Review 5.  Cardiovascular benefits of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors in diabetic and nondiabetic patients.

Authors:  Boyang Xiang; Xiaoya Zhao; Xiang Zhou
Journal:  Cardiovasc Diabetol       Date:  2021-04-07       Impact factor: 9.951

6.  Visceral Obesity-Related Indices in the Identification of Individuals with Metabolic Syndrome Among Different Ethnicities in Xinjiang, China.

Authors:  Xianghui Zhang; Yusong Ding; Yinbao Shao; Jia He; Jiaolong Ma; Heng Guo; Mulatibieke Keerman; Jiaming Liu; Huili Si; Shuxia Guo; Rulin Ma
Journal:  Diabetes Metab Syndr Obes       Date:  2021-04-12       Impact factor: 3.168

7.  Dynamic Relation of Changes in Weight and Indices of Fat Distribution With Cardiac Structure and Function: The Dallas Heart Study.

Authors:  Bryan Wilner; Sonia Garg; Colby R Ayers; Christopher D Maroules; Roderick McColl; Susan A Matulevicius; James A de Lemos; Mark H Drazner; Ronald Peshock; Ian J Neeland
Journal:  J Am Heart Assoc       Date:  2017-07-19       Impact factor: 5.501

Review 8.  21st Century Advances in Multimodality Imaging of Obesity for Care of the Cardiovascular Patient.

Authors:  Ian J Neeland; Takeshi Yokoo; Olof Dahlqvist Leinhard; Carl J Lavie
Journal:  JACC Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2020-04-15
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.