- Journal List
- HHS Author Manuscripts
- PMC4339027
As a library, NLM provides access to scientific literature. Inclusion in an NLM database does not imply endorsem*nt of, or agreement with, the contents by NLM or the National Institutes of Health.
Learn more: PMC Disclaimer | PMC Copyright Notice
Curr Nutr Rep. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2015 Dec 1.
Published in final edited form as:
PMCID: PMC4339027
NIHMSID: NIHMS631709
PMID: 25729633
Xavier Pi-Sunyer, MD, MPH
Author information Copyright and License information PMC Disclaimer
The publisher's final edited version of this article is available at Curr Nutr Rep
Abstract
The LookAhead trial was a randomized controlled trial comparing an Intensive Lifestyle Intervention (ILI) to a Diabetes Support and Education (DSE) in overweight and obese type 2 diabetes patients to track the development of cardiovascular disease over time. The triaI intervention was stopped for futility after a median follow-up of 9.6 years. While there was a differential effect on weight loss and fitness between the two groups, there was no effect on cardiovascular outcomes. Cardiovascular events were less than half the projected rate per year in the DSE group: thus there was a very low over-all rate of events in both groups. There were many other health benefits of ILI, including improved biomarkers of glucose and lipid control, less sleep apnea, lower liver fat, less depression, improved insulin sensitivity, less urinary incontinence, less kidney disease, reduced need of diabetes medications, maintenance of physical mobility, improved quality of life and lower costs.
Keywords: Randomized controlled trial, type 2 diabetes, overweight, obese, intensive lifestyle intervention, cardiovascular outcomes, diabetic complications, quality of life, cost
INTRODUCTION
Type 2 diabetes (DM2) is a huge global problem. The International Diabetes Federation estimates that 382 million people presently have diabetes and that this number is projected to increase to 592 million by 2035 (1). The financial cost of this is also huge, estimated at $548 billion USD in 2013 (1). At the same time, there has been an increasing prevalence of obesity (2) and since obesity often leads to DM2 (3), it has greatly contributed to the increased incidence of diabetes (4). The side effects of DM2 are many and among the most important is an increased risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD). It is known that DM2 patients have twice the risk of developing CVD than do matched non-diabetic persons (5). As a result, the issue of whether an intensive lifestyle intervention would reduce CVD events in DM2 patients was a question needing an answer.
It was for this reason that the National Institutes of Health sponsored a randomized controlled trial to test whether an Intensive Lifestyle Intervention (ILI) as compared to a Diabetes Support and Education (DSE) in overweight or obese type 2 diabetic patients would lead to cardiovascular benefits. The trial was conducted on 5145 persons in 16 centers in the USA. At the end of a median of 9.6 years of intervention and a maximal follow-up of 11.5 years, the NIH announced that the lifestyle “intervention was stopped early in NIH-funded study of weight loss in overweight and obese adults with type 2 diabetes after finding no harm, but no cardiovascular benefits”(6). A report of the results of the trial have been published (7). The ILI led to an 8.6% weight loss the first year and a maintenance of nearly 5% at 4 years and 6.0% at the end of intervention (7). A significant differential of weight loss from DSE was maintained throughout the 11.5 years of follow-up. CVD events were less than half the projected rate in the DSE group (3.13.% per year in DSE vs 0.07% in ILI)(7). Thus there was a very low over-all rate of events in both groups. However, there were many other health benefits that occurred with ILI, including improved biomarkers of glucose and lipid control, less sleep apnea, lower liver fat, less depression, less urinary incontinence, less severe kidney disease, improved sexual dysfunction, reduced need of diabetes medications, maintenance of physical mobility, and improved quality of life. This was achieved with less health care costs (8)
DESIGN OF TRIAL
The design of the LookAHEAD trial has been published (9). The randomization was one to one. Both groups received routine medical care from their own health care providers. All subjects were overweight or obese (mean BMI 36.0) and ranged in age from 45–75. Volunteers had to pass a maximum exercise test to participate in the study. This was done so individuals could be given exercise goals to do throughout this long trial. As a result, patients with more severe cardiovascular disease were excluded. Patients with a past history of heart disease could be admitted into the trial, and 14% of participants gave such a history (10). I The average duration of diabetes was 6.8 years and that HbA1c, blood pressure, and lipids were fairly well controlled at baseline.
n the first year, the ILI intervention focused on behavioral, nutrition and activity themes, while the DSE was invited to 3 group sessions in the first year which reviewed general information of diabetes management. A study goal was set for reduction of baseline body weight in ILI by 7.0%, with each individual person’s goal set at 10%. LookAHEAD calorie goals were 1200–1500 Kcal/day with 40–50 gm of fat for initial weights of <250 lbs. and 1500–1800 kcal/day with 50–60 gm of fat for initial weights >250 lbs (11). The diet goals included taking <30% of calories from fat (11). The ILI physical activity goal was to do 175 minutes a week of unsupervised exercise. Most subjects walked, but some jogged, swam, and biked. Some resistance exercise was encouraged.
The ILI patients were seen by individual lifestyle coaches who were registered dietitians, psychologists, and/or exercise physiologists. Sessions were 3 group and 1 individual session per month for the first 6 months. For the next 6 months they came to 2 group and 1 individual session per month. In years 2–4, they were seen a minimum of once per month and an additional contact by group, phone, mail or e-mail (11). The group sessions were with the same 10–20 participants and lasted 60 to 75 minutes. These included a private weigh-in, group self-reports on weight, self-monitoring and goal setting, presentation of a new topic, discussion of topic and of barriers to success, action plans and homework for the next session (11). The sessions dealt with setting goals for weight, activity, fat and calorie intake. Self-monitoring was stressed, with a fat and calorie counter booklet where food and portion sizes were recorded as well as food portions and physical activity in minutes. These were reviewed with their lifestyle coaches. Effort was placed on strategies to reduce fat and calories. Patients were offered structured menus and up to two meal replacements per day if they wished. The ILI volunteers could choose from four commercial liquid food replacements which were provided free of charge.
A tool-box strategy was used. For subjects having trouble with their weight loss goals, problem solving, motivational interviewing and behavioral contracts were used. For those who did not reach a weight loss of 5% after the first 6 months, an advanced tool box was utilized. These included frozen meals, community classes, exercise items, or use of weight loss medication. Only orlistat was offered. Very few opted to use orlistat and it was not successful in rescuing patients (11).
The characteristics of the patients at baseline were similar in the two groups and have been published (7). There was excellent randomization with risk factors comparable in the two groups.
RESULTS
The results of weight, physical fitness, waist circumference, and glycated hemoglobin throughout the trial have been published (7), as have the cumulative hazard curves for the primary composite end point (7). There was no difference with regard to cardiovascular endpoints between ILI and DSE. The event rate was 1.83 per 100 patient-years for ILI and 1.92 events for patient-years for DSE (HR 0.95, 95% CI 0.83–1.09, P= 0.51). It is for this reason that the DSMB recommended stopping the trial for futility and the NIH agreed to do so.
At 1 year of intervention, the ILI group lost 8.6% of their initial body weight while the DSE group lost 0.7% (12). Fitness levels improved by 20.4% in ILI and by 5% in DSE (13). At study end, ILI still had a 6% weight loss while DSE had 3.5% (7). With regard to fitness, ILI had greater improvement in heart rate recovery after graded exercise testing compared with DSE (p<0.001) (14).. The ADA goal of lowering HbA1c <7% was found to have been increased in ILI subjects from 46% to 73%, while in the DSE it increased from 45% to 50%. As for meeting the 3 ADA goals for glycemic control, blood pressure, and lipids increased from 10.8% to 23.6% in ILI and from 9.5% to 16% in DSE (p<0.001) (12). At 4 years and 8 years of intervention, even though the weight loss maintenance was attenuated, there was still a significant difference in weight between the ILI and DSE groups (15, 16). This was continued in the weights at the end of intervention (7).
The ILI group showed improved biomarkers of glucose and lipid control (7,12), improved blood pressure (7,14), less sleep apnea (17, 18), lower liver fat (19), less depression (20,21), less urinary incontinence (22), less severe kidney disease and retinopathy (23), reduced need of diabetes medications (24), maintenance of physical mobility (25), improved quality of life (26), less knee pain (27), improved sexual function (28), lowered inflammation (29) and reduced over-all health costs (8).
DISCUSSION
There are a number of issues to review and discuss regarding the LookAHEAD results.
1) Low CVD event rate
As stated previously, there was a much lower CVD event rate than was projected from available data at the time of the start of the trial (0.7%/yr vs 3.125%/yr). In fact, the event rate in DSE was so low that the investigators decided to revise the primary outcome so as to document more events by including hospitalized angina (30). Why did this occur? A number of possibilities could have had an impact. First, the participants’ physicians were aware of their patients’ participation in the trial. In addition, these physicians were repeatedly reminded by LookAhead sites of the guidelines for treatment of DM2 patients promulgated by the American Diabetes Association. Also, they received results of the biomarkers being followed, so they were well aware if their patients were reaching guidelines or not. This could have affected their interactions with their patients for the better: more advice on behavioral change, more attention to appropriate medications.
Second, while patients were randomized to one of the two groups, all were free to do as they pleased with regard to how they led their life. They could sign up for other weight loss programs or to exercise programs as they wished. These were health conscious individuals who had signed up for a very long study, so they may have been over-all much more careful about health risks than the average person with diabetes.
Thirdly, volunteers could only enter the study if they could perform a maximal exercise test. This was done because part of the intervention was to be increased physical activity and the investigators wanted to be sure that this could be prescribed to the ILI group. But this may have biased towards a “healthier” group of volunteers than the average DM2 patient.
Fourthly, while patients could enter the study if they had a history of heart disease, only 14% of the patients did. Thus, again, the cohort may have been healthier than the average diabetic patient.
2) Diet
The nutritional approach in the LookAHEAD trial was based on the success of the DPP (31). Essentially the same diet was recommended, though somewhat more strict with regard to calories. The emphasis was to lower calories by restricting fat to less than 30% of total and also reducing intake of low-quality carbohydrates such as sugar, sugar-flavored beverages, and high calorie snacks. It is impossible to say whether a different dietary approach would have given different event rates. The investigators opted for an approach that had been found to work.
3) Physical Activity
The recommended increase in activity for ILI was to 175 min per day at least 5 days per week. This was all the investigators felt they could ask from this extremely sedentary and aging population. All documentation of the activity was done by individual diaries, since the exercise was done at or near the home and not at the centers. That the ILI was compliant to an extent was shown by the increase in fitness that was found at 1 and 4 years (13). The DSE also improved somewhat in year 1, suggesting that they also picked up their physical activity, though not as much. Whether a more intensive exercise program in ILI would have had a greater impact is impossible to say.
4) Lifestyle vs medication
The ILI seems to have achieved a lowering of CV events by focusing on nutrition and physical activity. The ILI volunteers were successful in losing weight and maintaining a significant weight loss over the full median 9.6 years of the trial. They were also successful in increasing physical activity. The DSE was also successful in lowering of CV events to the same degree, and they achieved this by taking more medications: for diabetes, for blood pressure, and for LDL cholesterol drop (24). Is one approach superior to the other? ILI had a great number of other positive effects that were enumerated and referenced above. It seems reasonable to suggest that invoking lifestyle change by health professionals and public health agencies is a constructive approach to prevent some of the side effects of DM2.
5) Effectiveness in Relation to Weight
Individuals who were the most severely obese actually lost more weight than patients who were overweight. At 1 year, the severely obese lost 9.04% of initial body weight while the overweight lost 7.43% (32). “All BMI groups had comparable improvements in fitness, physical activity, LDL cholesterol, triglycerides, blood pressure, fasting glucose, and HbA1c at 1 year. ILI treatment session attendance was excellent and did not differ among weight categories” (32) This shows that all size individuals can profit from a lifestyle change and all can get equally positive outcomes.
6) Effectiveness in Relation to Age
The ILI was actually more effective for the older volunteers (>65 yrs) than for younger ones. This may be because they were more compliant with diet and physical activity guidelines. They opted for more meal replacements and they came to meetings more regularly (33). Clearly, older age is not a negative with regard to behavioral change.
7) Effectiveness in Relation to Ethnic/Racial Diversity
In LookAHEAD, 35% of participants were from minorities, with BMIs ranging from 25 to 60 kg/m2. All groups were able to lose weight and improve their risk factors. There was little difference among Caucasians, African-Americans, Hispanics. Native Americans did slightly less well. Thus, a preventive approach seems reasonable for everyone.
8) Regression of Diabetes
There was some regression of diabetes in the ILI group (34). This did not occur in the DSE group. This occurred more in patients with a short duration of diabetes diagnosis and who had lost more weight and improved fitness better (34). This is good news since DM2 leads to a host of complications that are costly in terms of quality of life and of dollars spent. It suggests that if one intervenes forcefully early on as soon as diabetes in diagnosed, a chance for remission is there.
9) Duration of Diabetes
The LookAHEAD trial randomized DM@ patient volunteers with an average duration of diabetes of 6.8 years (7). It is possible that an earlier intervention would be successful in reducing cardiovascular risk. It is well-known that the atherogenic process begins long before DM2 is diagnosed (35). It is possible that if only a very recently diagnosed group had been included that a positive effect on CVD events would have been shown.
10) Cost
A crucial issue is the cost/benefit ratio of this preventive approach. A recent publication answers this question. Use and costs of health-care services were recorded across an average of 10 years. “Compared with DSE over 10 years, ILI had fewer hospitalizations, fewer medications, and lower health-care costs” (8). So the intervention was carried out without incurring extra health care costs.
CONCLUSION
Overweight and obese DM2 patients are increasing in prevalence is the USA and globally. A majority suffer and die from CVD. The LookAHEAD study was a randomized controlled trial testing whether an ILI would lower the CVD event rate as compared to a DSE group. The event rate was very low in both groups, but there was no difference in CV outcomes between the two groups. The intervention was stopped for futility with a median follow-up of 9.6 years and a maximum one of 11.5 years. Despite no difference in event rates, the ILI profited from a large number of improvements to risk factors and side effects. It raised quality of life at lower cost. Although negative in its primary outcome, it was positive in many other aspects of diabetes morbidity.
Footnotes
Conflict of Interest
Xavier Pi-Sunyer declares that he has no conflict of interest.
Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent
This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.
REFERENCES
1. International Diabetes Federation. IDF Diabetes Atlas. 6th edn. Brussels, Belgium: International Diabetes Federation; 2013. http://www.idf.org/diabetesatlas. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
2. Flegal KM, Carroll MD, Kit BK, Ogden CL. Prevalence of obesity and trends in the distribution of body mass index among US adults, 1999–2010. JAMA. 2012;307:491–497. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
3. Guh DP, Zhang W, Bansback N, et al. The incidence of co-morbidities related to obesity and overweight: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Public Health. 2009;9:88. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
4. Fact sheet: Obesity and overweight [internet] Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization (international); [Updated 2013 March; cited 2014] Available from: http//www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs311/en/index.html. [Google Scholar]
5. Emerging Risk Factor Collaboration. Diabetes fasting glucose concentration and risk of vascular disease: a collaborative metaanalysis of 102 prospective studies. Lancet. 2010;375:2215–2222. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
6. NIH press release. 2012 Oct 19; [Google Scholar]
7. The Look AHEAD Research Group. Cardiovascular effects of intensive lifestyle intervention in type 2 diabetes. NEJM. 2013;369:145–154. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]This is the final results paper with the weight, fitness, and cardiovascular outcomes
8. Espeland MA, Glick HA, Bertoni A, et al. for the Look AHEAD Research Group. Impact of an intensive lifestyle intervention on use and cost of medical services amont overweight and obese adults with type 2 diabetes: the Actsion for Health in Diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2014;37:2548–2556. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
9. Look AHEAD Research Group. Look AHEAD (Action for Health in Diabetes): design and methods for a clinical trial of weight loss for the prevention of cardiovascular disease in type 2 diabetes. Con Clin Trials. 2003;24:610–628. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]This explains the design of the study
10. Bray G, Gregg E, Haffner S, et al. Look AHEAD Research Group. Baseline characteristics of the randomized cohort from the Look AHEAD (action for Health in Diabetes) study. Diab Vasc Dis Res. 2006;3:202–215. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
11. Wadden TA, Smith West D, Delahanty LM, Jakicic JM, Rejeski J, Berkowitz KL, Williamson DA, Kelley DE, Kumanyika SK, Hill JO, Tomchee CM the Look AHEAD Research Group. The Look AHEAD study: a description of the lifestyle intervention and the evidence supporting it. Obesity. 2006;14(5):737–752. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]This gives a description of the intensive intervention in the trial
12. The Look AHEAD Research Group. Pi-Sunyer, et al. Reduction in weight and cardiovascular disease risk factors in individuals with type 2 diabetes: one-year results of the Look AHEAD trial. Diabetes Care. 2007;30:1374–1383. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
13. Jakicic JM, Jaramillo SA, Balasubramanyam A, et al. Effect of a lifestyle intervention on change in cardiorespiratory fitness in adults with type 2 diabetes: results from the Look AHEAD study. Int J Obes (Lond) 2009;33:305–316. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
14. Ribisl P, Gaussoin SA, Lang W, et al. Lifestyle intervention improves heart rate recovery from exercise in adults with type 2 diabetes: Results from the Look AHEAD Study. J Obes. 2012 Article ID 309196. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
15. The Look AHEAD Research Group. Long term effects of a lifestyle intervention on weight and cardiovascular risk factors in individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus: four-year results of the Look AHEAD trial. Arch Int Med. 2010;170:1566–1575. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
16. The Look AHEAD Research Group. Eight-year weight losses with an intensive lifestyle intervention: the Look AHEAD Study. Obesity. 2014;22:5–13. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
17. Foster GD, Borradaile KE, Sanders MH, et al. A randomized study on the effect of weight loss on obstructive sleep apnea among obese patients with type 2 diabetes, the Sleep AHEAD study. Arch Int Med. 2009;169:1619–1626. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
18. Kuna ST, Reboussin DM, Borradaile KE, Sanders MH, Millman RP, Zammit G, Newman AB, Wadden TA, Jakicic JM, Wing RR, Pi-Sunyer FX, Foster GD Sleep AHEAD Research Group of the Look AHEAD Research Group. Long-term effect of weight loss on obstructive sleep apnea severity in obese patients with type 2 diabetes. Sleep. 2013;36:641–649. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
19. Lazo M, Solga S, Horska A, et al. Effect of a 12-month intensive lifestyle intervention on hepatic steatosisin adults with type 2 diabetes. Diab Care. 2010;33:2156–2163. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
20. Faulconbridge L, Wadden T, Rubin R, et al. One-year changes in symptoms of depression and weight in overweight/obese individuals with type 2 diabetes in the Look AHEAD study. Obesity (Silver Spring) 2012;20:783–793. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
21. The Look AHEAD Research Group. Impact of intensive lifestyle intervention on depression and health-related quality of life in type 2 diabetes: The Look AHEAD trial. Diab Care. 2014 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
22. Phelan S, Kanaya A, Subak L, et al. Weight loss prevents urinary incontinence in women with type 2 diabetes: Results from the Look AHEAD Trial. J. Urol. 2012;187:939–944. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
23. The Look AHEAD Research Group. Effect of a long-term behavioral weight loss intervention on nephropathy in overweigth or obese adults with type 2 diabetes: the Look AHEAD randomised clinical trial. The Lancet Diabetes and Endocrinology [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
24. Redmon B, Bertoni A, Connely S, et al. Effect of the Look AHEAD study intervention on medication use and related cost to treat cardiovascular disease risk factors in individuals with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2010;33:1153–1158. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
25. Jakicic JM, Egan CM, Fabricatore AN, Gaussoin SA, Glasser SP, Hesson LA, Knowler WC, Lang W, Regensteiner JG, Ribisl PM, Ryan DH. Four-year change in cardiorespiratory fitness and influence on glycemic control in adults with type 2 diabetes in a randomized trial: the Look AHEAD Trial. Diab Care. 2013;36:1297–1303. PMID 23223405. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
26. Williamson D, Rejeski J, Lang WA, et al. Impact of a weight management program on health-related quality of life in overweight adults with type 2 diabetes. Arch Int Med. 2009;169:163–171. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
27. Foy C, Lewis B, Hairston K, et al. Intensive lifestyle intervention improves physical function among obese adults with knee pain: Findings from the Look AHEAD Trial. Obesity (Silver Spring) 2011;19:83–93. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
28. Wing RR, Bond DS, Gendrano IN, 3rd, et al. Effect of intensive lifestyle intervention on sexual dysfunction in women with type 2 diabetes: results from an ancillary Look AHEAD study. Diabetes Care. 2013;36:2937–2944. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
29. Belalcazar M, Haffner S, Lang W, et al. Lifestyle intervention and/or statins for the reduction of C-reactive protein in diabetes: From the Look AHEAD Study. Obesity (Silver Spring) 2013;x:944–950. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
30. Brancati FL, et al. Midcourse correction to a clinical trial when the event rate is underestimated.: the LookAHEAD (Action for Health in Diabetes) Study. Clin Trials. 2012;9:113–124. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
31. Diabetes Prevention Program Research Group. Reduction in the incidence of ype 2 diabetes with lifestyle intervention or metformin. N Engl J Med. 2002;346 39/3-403. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
32. Unick JL, Beavers D, Jakicic JM, Kitabchi AE, Knowler WC, Wadded TA, Wing RR for the LookAHEAD Research Group. Effectiveness of lifestyle interventions for individuals with severe obesity and type 2 diabetes: results from the Look AHEAD trial. Diabetes Care. 2011;34:2152–2157. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
33. Look AHEAD Research Group. Wadden TA, West DS. The Look AHEAD study: a description of the lifestyle intervention and the evidence supporting it. Obesity (Silver Spring) 2006;14:737–752. [Erratum, Obesity (Silver Spring) 2007; 15: 1339.] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
34. Gregg EW, Chen H, Wagenknecht LE, et al. Association of an intensive lifestyle intervention with remission of type 2 diabetes. JAMA. 2012;308:2489–2498. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
35. Haffner SM, Stern MP, Hazuda HP, et al. Cardiovascular risk factors in confirmed prediabetic individuals. Does the clock for coronary heart disease start ticking before the onset of clinical diabetes? JAMA. 1990;263:2893–2898. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
