Does the Effect of a 3-Year Lifestyle Intervention on Body Weight and Cardiometabolic Health Differ by Prediabetes Metabolic Phenotype? A Post Hoc Analysis of the PREVIEW Study

Low-calorie diets for people with isolated impaired fasting glucose

Thirunavukkarasu et al. discuss how standard lifestyle interventions prove ineffective in preventing type 2 diabetes in individuals with isolated impaired fasting glucose, a highly prevalent prediabetes phenotype globally. They propose low-calorie diets as a promising strategy for diabetes prevention in this high-risk population.

Metabolic phenotyping in people living with obesity: Implications for dietary prevention

Given the increasing number of people living with obesity and related chronic metabolic disease, precision nutrition approaches are required to increase the effectiveness of prevention strategies. This review addresses these approaches in different metabolic phenotypes (metabotypes) in obesity. Although obesity is typically associated with an increased cardiometabolic disease risk, some people with obesity are relatively protected against the detrimental effects of excess adiposity on cardiometabolic health, also referred to as 'metabolically healthy obesity' (MHO). Underlying mechanisms, the extent to which MHO is a transient state as well as lifestyle strategies to counteract the transition from MHO to metabolically unhealthy obesity (MUO) are discussed. Based on the limited resources that are available for dietary lifestyle interventions, it may be reasonable to prioritize interventions for people with MUO, since targeting high-risk patients for specific nutritional, lifestyle or weight-loss strategies may enhance the cost-effectiveness of these interventions. Additionally, the concept of tissue insulin resistant (IR) metabotypes is discussed, representing distinct etiologies towards type 2 diabetes (T2D) as well as cardiovascular disease (CVD). Recent evidence indicates that these tissue IR metabotypes, already present in individuals with obesity with a normal glucose homeostasis, respond differentially to diet. Modulation of dietary macronutrient composition according to these metabotypes may considerably improve cardiometabolic health benefits. Thus, nutritional or lifestyle intervention may improve cardiometabolic health, even with only minor or no weight loss, which stresses the importance of focusing on a healthy lifestyle and not on weight loss only. Targeting different metabotypes towards T2D and cardiometabolic diseases may lead to more effective lifestyle prevention and treatment strategies. Age and sex-related differences in tissue metabotypes and related microbial composition and functionality (fermentation), as important drivers and/or mediators of dietary intervention response, have to be taken into account. For the implementation of these approaches, more prospective trials are required to provide the knowledge base for precision nutrition in the prevention of chronic metabolic diseases.

Associations of obesity phenotypes with weight change, cardiometabolic benefits, and type 2 diabetes incidence during a lifestyle intervention: results from the PREVIEW study

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES

Some individuals with overweight/obesity may be relatively metabolically healthy (MHO) and have a lower risk of cardiovascular disease than those with metabolically unhealthy overweight/obesity (MUO). We aimed to compare changes in body weight and cardiometabolic risk factors and type 2 diabetes incidence during a lifestyle intervention between individuals with MHO vs MUO.

METHODS

This post-hoc analysis included 1012 participants with MHO and 1153 participants with MUO at baseline in the randomized trial PREVIEW. Participants underwent an eight-week low-energy diet phase followed by a 148-week lifestyle-based weight-maintenance intervention. Adjusted linear mixed models and Cox proportional hazards regression models were used.

RESULTS

There were no statistically significant differences in weight loss (%) between participants with MHO vs MUO over 156 weeks. At the end of the study, weight loss was 2.7% (95% CI, 1.7%-3.6%) in participants with MHO and 3.0% (2.1%-4.0%) in those with MUO. After the low-energy diet phase, participants with MHO had smaller decreases in triglyceride (mean difference between MHO vs MUO 0.08 mmol·L-1 [95% CI, 0.04-0.12]; P < 0.001) but similar reductions in fasting glucose and HOMA-IR than those with MUO. However, at the end of weight maintenance, those with MHO had greater reductions in triglyceride (mean difference -0.08 mmol·L-1 [-0.12--0.04]; P < 0.001), fasting glucose, 2-hour glucose (difference -0.28 mmol·L-1 [-0.41--0.16]; P < 0.001), and HOMA-IR than those with MUO. Participants with MHO had smaller decreases in diastolic blood pressure and HbA1c and greater decreases in HDL cholesterol after weight loss than those with MUO, whereas the statistically significant differences disappeared at the end of weight maintenance. Participants with MHO had lower 3-year type 2 diabetes incidence than those with MUO (adjusted hazard ratio 0.37 [0.20-0.66]; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Individuals with MUO had greater improvements in some cardiometabolic risk factors during the low-energy diet phase, but had smaller improvements during long-term lifestyle intervention than those with MHO.