Study population
The randomised controlled lifestyle intervention, which was conducted in 2015 in the city of Malmö, Sweden, concerned immigrants from the Middle East at high risk for developing type 2 diabetes 11. The aim of the intervention was to improve insulin sensitivity, weight reduction and reduce type 2 diabetes risk. To summarise, individuals identified in the MEDIM population based study (conducted 2010 to 2012) born in the Middle East (Iraq) and that were overweight (> 28 kg/m2) were invited to participate (N = 636) 11 in the study. A total of 104 individuals wanted to participate in the study and were invited for a baseline health examination. At that examination, eight individuals were identified with type 2 diabetes and were excluded from the study. The rest of the participants were randomised to intervention or control with a 1:1 allocation ratio using a random number generator as previously described in detail 11. The planned intervention was initially of three years’ duration and was meant to include both Iraqi born and native Swedes. However, due to shortage of resources, the intervention only included Iraqi born participants with a follow-up time reduced to four months duration. The lifestyle intervention was culturally adapted where the intervention group received counselling on healthy habits including identification of cultural and social barriers for lifestyle change together with motivational and economic support for lifestyle change. The control group received treatment as usual, i.e., information to improve lifestyle habits provided in regular primary health care to patients at risk for type 2 diabetes. The study was conducted from mid-January 2015 to mid- June the same year, i.e., four months’ duration. This study was registered on 19/08/2011, at www.clinicaltrials.gov NCT01420198. The Consort Statement was applied 12. A flow chart describing enrolment, intervention allocation, follow-up and data analysis is presented in Fig. 1.
Measurement of proneurotensin from baseline and at least one more time point was required for the participant to be included in the final assessments.
Assessments
Fasting samples, oral glucose tolerance tests and questionnaires capturing self-reported lifestyle habits, comorbidity and medication were assessed at baseline, 2- months and at 4 months (end of study) 11. Self-reported physical activity was assessed using International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ) and self-reported diet intake was assessed using 4-day diet diaries. In addition, physical activity was objectively assessed using Actigraph® GT3X. Assessment of standard physical examinations, fasting samples, OGTT and clinical variables such as blood pressure, height, weight, body mass index (BMI) and waist-circumference was performed as described previously 11 .
Proneurotensin was measured using a chemiluminescence based immunoassay as described in detail previously (sphingotec GmbH, Hennigsdorf/Berlin, Germany) 9.
Outcome
Primary outcome was change over time in proneurotensin and secondary outcome was change over time in body mass index in relation to baseline plasma concentration of proneurotensin.
Statistical analysis
Statistical analysis was assessed using IBM SPSS version 24.0, STATA (version 13) and R Studio version 3.6.0. Differences between groups at baseline were assessed using an independent sample t-test for normally distributed continuous data and Mann-Whitney U test for non-normally distributed continuous data. Categorical variables were compared using chi-square test or Fisher’s exact test (Table 1).
Table 1
Baseline characteristics in the MEDIM intervention study.
Variables
|
Intervention n = 48
|
Control
n = 44
|
P-value
|
Age (years)
|
47.9 (10.4)
|
48.9 (9.05)
|
0.63
|
Male sex, n (%)
|
23 (46)
|
22 (47.8)
|
1.00
|
Proneurotensin, pmol/L, median (IQR+++)
|
119.3
(92.8–156.0)
|
104.5
(90.4–156.6)
|
0.69
|
Body weight (kg)
|
85.5 (15.2)
|
80.0 (13.1)
|
0.06
|
Body mass index(kg/m2)
|
31.0 (4.4)
|
29.6 (3.6)
|
0.09
|
Waist circumference men(cm)
|
108.2 (9.6)
|
106.1 (8.9)
|
0.45
|
Waist circumference women(cm)
|
100.7 (8.1)
|
97.2 (8.1)
|
0.13
|
Insulin Sensitivity Index, median (IQR+++)
|
62.4 (46.0, 99.5)
|
73.3 (56.7, 118.0)
|
0.16
|
Systolic blood pressure (mmHg)
|
121.6 (13.3)
|
126.9 (16.1)
|
0.08
|
Diastolic blood pressure (mm Hg)
|
77.6 (8.4)
|
79.7 (11.2)
|
0.30
|
Fasting glucose (mmol/L)
|
5.6 (0.5)
|
5.4 (0.7)
|
0.25
|
2-h glucose (mmol/L)
|
6.6 (1.8)
|
6.5 (1.8)
|
0.87
|
HbA1C (mmol/mol)
HbA1C in %
|
34 (4.7)
5.3% (0.4)
|
35(4.4)
5.4% (0.4)
|
0.33
|
Lipid-lowering drugs, n (%)
|
1 (2)
|
0 (0)
|
1.00∞
|
LDL-cholesterol (mmol/L)
|
3.4 (0.7)
|
3.3 (0.9)
|
0.51
|
HDL-cholesterol (mmol/L)
|
1.3 (0.3)
|
1.3 (0.4)
|
0.97
|
First-degree Family history T2D, n (%)
|
34 (68)
|
24 (52.2)
|
0.14
|
Education < HS+, n (%)
|
7 (14)
|
16 (34.8)
|
0.03
|
Unemployment, n (%)
|
26 (52)
|
24 (52.2)
|
1.00
|
Smoking, n (%)
|
8 (16)
|
8 (17.4)
|
0.86
|
Physical activity
(MET++-hours/week), median(IQR+++)
|
8.5 (0-47.6)
|
12.4 (0-66.3)
|
0.32*
|
Moderately active**, n (%)
|
18 (36)
|
26 (56.5)
|
0.05
|
Total fat intake (g/d)
|
86.1 (29.3)
|
98.3 (34.6)
|
0.08
|
Mean caloric intake (kcal)
|
1886.3 (619)
|
2052.3 (616)
|
0.21
|
Data presented as mean (standard deviation), numbers (percentages) or median (interquartile range). Differences between groups were compared using independent sample t-test for continuous variables and chi-square test for categorical variables. |
+High school; ++ Metabolic Equivalent of Task; +++Interquartile range; *Mann-Whitney U-test; ∞ Fisher’s exact test; |
** Individuals accumulating 10 MET-hours/week; |
Restricted maximum likelihood estimation of mixed effects regression was used to estimate the parameters in the models and to assess the effect of the intervention on the outcomes with respective change in proneurotensin (Table 3) and BMI respectively (Table 4) between the intervention group and the control group. The correlation within-subject errors due to the repeated measurements were adjusted by adding random intercepts and random slopes in addition to the fixed effects. Advantage with this model is that it uses all available observations during the study period and no imputation of missing data was needed. The difference in slopes of the outcomes as function of time between the intervention and the control groups was estimated by the time by group interaction (time * group) variable. The coefficient estimates are expressed in original units together with standardized regression coefficients. We developed this model is three steps. Firstly, a crude model was developed including only group, follow-up time and the group × time interaction. Secondly, we adjusted for age, sex, and education. Thirdly, we also added baseline value of fasting glucose and ISI.
As a sensitivity analysis we repeated the analysis on the subset of participants with post-baseline observations, corresponding to a per-protocol set analysis.
Level of significance was set to ≤ 0.05 and no multiple testing was done.
To the best of our knowledge, this is the first RCT on proneurotensin and lifestyle change in at-risk individuals of Middle Eastern background. Therefore, we did not have any estimates in change of proneurotensin. Thus the power calculation in this RCT was assessed rather on change in fasting glucose levels from baseline to end of intervention 13. Further, due to the low participation rate, we used restricted likelihood estimation of mixed regression; thus the initial power calculation that required a larger sample size was no longer relevant for this study.