Ruban Dhaliwal1, John A Shepherd2, Laure El Ghormli3, Kenneth C Copeland4, Mitchell E Geffner5, Janine Higgins6, Lynne L Levitsky7, Kristen J Nadeau6, Ruth S Weinstock1, Neil H White. 1. State University of New York Upstate Medical University, Syracuse, NY. 2. University of Hawaii, Honolulu, HI. 3. George Washington University Biostatistics Center, Rockville, MD elghorml@bsc.gwu.edu. 4. University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK. 5. The Saban Research Institute, Children's Hospital Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA. 6. University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, CO. 7. Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: In the Treatment Options for Type 2 Diabetes in Adolescents and Youth (TODAY) study, metformin plus rosiglitazone (M + R) maintained glycemic control better than metformin alone (M) or metformin plus lifestyle (M + L) in youth with type 2 diabetes (T2D). We hypothesized that changes in visceral adipose tissue (VAT) and subcutaneous adipose tissue (SAT) would explain the differential treatment effects on glycemia. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: In 626 youth ages 11-17 years with T2D duration <2 years, VAT and SAT were estimated by DXA at baseline and at 6 and 24 months. Changes from baseline were analyzed in linear mixed models. RESULTS:Baseline mean age was 13.9 years, 66.4% were female, 72.2% were Hispanic/non-Hispanic black, and 20.3% were non-Hispanic white (NHW). Mean BMI was 33.7 kg/m2. VAT increased more in M + R (13.1%) than M + L (3.9%, P = 0.0006) or M (6.5%, P = 0.0146). SAT also increased more in M + R (13.3%) than in M + L (5.4%, P < 0.0001) or M (6.4%, P = 0.0005), indicating no significant fat redistribution in M + R. In NHWs, VAT increased more in M + R than M (P = 0.0192) and M + L (P = 0.0482) but did not explain the race-ethnicity differences in treatment effects on glycemic control among treatment groups. VAT and SAT increases correlated with higher HbA1c, lower insulin sensitivity, and lower oral disposition index (all P < 0.05), but associations did not differ by treatment group. CONCLUSIONS: In contrast to the existing reports in adults with T2D, in TODAY, M + R resulted in the most VAT accumulation compared with M + L or M. Differential effects on depot-specific indirect measures of adiposity are unrelated to treatment effects in sustaining glycemic control. Additional studies are needed to understand the clinical markers of metabolic risk profile in youth with T2D on rosiglitazone.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: In the Treatment Options for Type 2 Diabetes in Adolescents and Youth (TODAY) study, metformin plus rosiglitazone (M + R) maintained glycemic control better than metformin alone (M) or metformin plus lifestyle (M + L) in youth with type 2 diabetes (T2D). We hypothesized that changes in visceral adipose tissue (VAT) and subcutaneous adipose tissue (SAT) would explain the differential treatment effects on glycemia. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: In 626 youth ages 11-17 years with T2D duration <2 years, VAT and SAT were estimated by DXA at baseline and at 6 and 24 months. Changes from baseline were analyzed in linear mixed models. RESULTS: Baseline mean age was 13.9 years, 66.4% were female, 72.2% were Hispanic/non-Hispanic black, and 20.3% were non-Hispanic white (NHW). Mean BMI was 33.7 kg/m2. VAT increased more in M + R (13.1%) than M + L (3.9%, P = 0.0006) or M (6.5%, P = 0.0146). SAT also increased more in M + R (13.3%) than in M + L (5.4%, P < 0.0001) or M (6.4%, P = 0.0005), indicating no significant fat redistribution in M + R. In NHWs, VAT increased more in M + R than M (P = 0.0192) and M + L (P = 0.0482) but did not explain the race-ethnicity differences in treatment effects on glycemic control among treatment groups. VAT and SAT increases correlated with higher HbA1c, lower insulin sensitivity, and lower oral disposition index (all P < 0.05), but associations did not differ by treatment group. CONCLUSIONS: In contrast to the existing reports in adults with T2D, in TODAY, M + R resulted in the most VAT accumulation compared with M + L or M. Differential effects on depot-specific indirect measures of adiposity are unrelated to treatment effects in sustaining glycemic control. Additional studies are needed to understand the clinical markers of metabolic risk profile in youth with T2D on rosiglitazone.
Authors: Z Punthakee; N Alméras; J-P Després; G R Dagenais; S S Anand; D L Hunt; A M Sharma; H Jung; S Yusuf; H C Gerstein Journal: Diabet Med Date: 2014-06-19 Impact factor: 4.359
Authors: Lisa K Micklesfield; Julia H Goedecke; Mark Punyanitya; Kevin E Wilson; Thomas L Kelly Journal: Obesity (Silver Spring) Date: 2012-01-12 Impact factor: 5.002