OBJECTIVE: The overall aim of the Alliance of Randomized Trials of Medicine versus Metabolic Surgery in Type 2 Diabetes (ARMMS-T2D) consortium is to assess the durability and longer-term effectiveness of metabolic surgery compared with medical/lifestyle management in patients with type 2 diabetes (NCT02328599). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A total of 316 patients with type 2 diabetes previously randomly assigned to surgery (N = 195) or medical/lifestyle therapy (N = 121) in the STAMPEDE, TRIABETES, SLIMM-T2D, and CROSSROADS trials were enrolled into this prospective observational cohort. The primary outcome was the rate of diabetes remission (hemoglobin A1c [HbA1c] ≤6.5% for 3 months without usual glucose-lowering therapy) at 3 years. Secondary outcomes included glycemic control, body weight, biomarkers, and comorbidity reduction. RESULTS: Three-year data were available for 256 patients with mean 50 ± 8.3 years of age, BMI 36.5 ± 3.6 kg/m2, and duration of diabetes 8.8 ± 5.7 years. Diabetes remission was achieved in more participants following surgery than medical/lifestyle intervention (60 of 160 [37.5%] vs. 2 of 76 [2.6%], respectively; P < 0.001). Reductions in HbA1c (Δ = -1.9 ± 2.0 vs. -0.1 ± 2.0%; P < 0.001), fasting plasma glucose (Δ = -52 [-105, -5] vs. -12 [-48, 26] mg/dL; P < 0.001), and BMI (Δ = -8.0 ± 3.6 vs. -1.8 ± 2.9 kg/m2; P < 0.001) were also greater after surgery. The percentages of patients using medications to control diabetes, hypertension, and dyslipidemia were all lower after surgery (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Three-year follow-up of the largest cohort of randomized patients followed to date demonstrates that metabolic/bariatric surgery is more effective and durable than medical/lifestyle intervention in remission of type 2 diabetes, including among individuals with class I obesity, for whom surgery is not widely used.
OBJECTIVE: The overall aim of the Alliance of Randomized Trials of Medicine versus Metabolic Surgery in Type 2 Diabetes (ARMMS-T2D) consortium is to assess the durability and longer-term effectiveness of metabolic surgery compared with medical/lifestyle management in patients with type 2 diabetes (NCT02328599). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A total of 316 patients with type 2 diabetes previously randomly assigned to surgery (N = 195) or medical/lifestyle therapy (N = 121) in the STAMPEDE, TRIABETES, SLIMM-T2D, and CROSSROADS trials were enrolled into this prospective observational cohort. The primary outcome was the rate of diabetes remission (hemoglobin A1c [HbA1c] ≤6.5% for 3 months without usual glucose-lowering therapy) at 3 years. Secondary outcomes included glycemic control, body weight, biomarkers, and comorbidity reduction. RESULTS: Three-year data were available for 256 patients with mean 50 ± 8.3 years of age, BMI 36.5 ± 3.6 kg/m2, and duration of diabetes 8.8 ± 5.7 years. Diabetes remission was achieved in more participants following surgery than medical/lifestyle intervention (60 of 160 [37.5%] vs. 2 of 76 [2.6%], respectively; P < 0.001). Reductions in HbA1c (Δ = -1.9 ± 2.0 vs. -0.1 ± 2.0%; P < 0.001), fasting plasma glucose (Δ = -52 [-105, -5] vs. -12 [-48, 26] mg/dL; P < 0.001), and BMI (Δ = -8.0 ± 3.6 vs. -1.8 ± 2.9 kg/m2; P < 0.001) were also greater after surgery. The percentages of patients using medications to control diabetes, hypertension, and dyslipidemia were all lower after surgery (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Three-year follow-up of the largest cohort of randomized patients followed to date demonstrates that metabolic/bariatric surgery is more effective and durable than medical/lifestyle intervention in remission of type 2 diabetes, including among individuals with class I obesity, for whom surgery is not widely used.
Authors: Ariana M Chao; Thomas A Wadden; Robert I Berkowitz; George Blackburn; Paula Bolin; Jeanne M Clark; Mace Coday; Jeffrey M Curtis; Linda M Delahanty; Gareth R Dutton; Mary Evans; Linda J Ewing; John P Foreyt; Linda J Gay; Edward W Gregg; Helen P Hazuda; James O Hill; Edward S Horton; Denise K Houston; John M Jakicic; Robert W Jeffery; Karen C Johnson; Steven E Kahn; William C Knowler; Anne Kure; Katherine L Michalski; Maria G Montez; Rebecca H Neiberg; Jennifer Patricio; Anne Peters; Xavier Pi-Sunyer; Henry Pownall; David Reboussin; Bruce Redmon; W Jack Rejeski; Helmut Steinburg; Martha Walker; Donald A Williamson; Rena R Wing; Holly Wyatt; Susan Z Yanovski; Ping Zhang Journal: Obesity (Silver Spring) Date: 2020-05 Impact factor: 5.002
Authors: David M Nathan; Patricia A Cleary; Jye-Yu C Backlund; Saul M Genuth; John M Lachin; Trevor J Orchard; Philip Raskin; Bernard Zinman Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2005-12-22 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Guilherme M Campos; Jad Khoraki; Matthew G Browning; Bernardo M Pessoa; Guilherme S Mazzini; Luke Wolfe Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2020-02 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Vanita R Aroda; Julio Rosenstock; Yasuo Terauchi; Yuksel Altuntas; Nebojsa M Lalic; Enrique C Morales Villegas; Ole K Jeppesen; Erik Christiansen; Christin L Hertz; Martin Haluzík Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2019-06-11 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Maryam Afkarian; Leila R Zelnick; Yoshio N Hall; Patrick J Heagerty; Katherine Tuttle; Noel S Weiss; Ian H de Boer Journal: JAMA Date: 2016-08-09 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Donna H Ryan; Mark A Espeland; Gary D Foster; Steven M Haffner; Van S Hubbard; Karen C Johnson; Steven E Kahn; William C Knowler; Susan Z Yanovski Journal: Control Clin Trials Date: 2003-10
Authors: Francesco Rubino; David M Nathan; Robert H Eckel; Philip R Schauer; K George M M Alberti; Paul Z Zimmet; Stefano Del Prato; Linong Ji; Shaukat M Sadikot; William H Herman; Stephanie A Amiel; Lee M Kaplan; Gaspar Taroncher-Oldenburg; David E Cummings Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2016-06 Impact factor: 19.112