The Diabetes Prevention Program is a randomized clinical trial testing strategies to prevent or delay the development of type 2 diabetes in high-risk individuals with elevated fasting plasma glucose concentrations and impaired glucose tolerance. The 27 clinical centers in the U.S. are recruiting at least 3,000 participants of both sexes, ~50% of whom are minority patients and 20% of whom are ≥65 years old, to be assigned at random to one of three intervention groups: an intensive lifestyle intervention focusing on a healthy diet and exercise and two masked medication treatment groupsmetformin or placebo-combined with standard diet and exercise recommendations. Participants are being recruited during a 2 2/3-year period, and all will be followed for an additional 3 1/3 to 5 years after the close of recruitment to a common closing date in 2002. The primary outcome is the development of diabetes, diagnosed by fasting or post-challenge plasma glucose concentrations meeting the 1997 American Diabetes Association criteria. The 3,000 participants will provide 90% power to detect a 33% reduction in an expected diabetes incidence rate of at least 6.5% per year in the placebo group. Secondary outcomes include cardiovascular disease and its risk factors; changes in glycemia, β-cell function, insulin sensitivity, obesity, diet, physical activity, and health-related quality of life; and occurrence of adverse events. A fourth treatment group-troglilazone combined with standard diet and exercise recommendations-was included initially but discontinued because of the liver toxicity of the drug. This randomized clinical trial will test the possibility of preventing or delaying the onset of type 2 diabetes in individuals at high risk. AbbreviationsADA, American Diabetes Association; DPP, Diabetes Prevention Program; FPG, fasting plasma glucose; IGT, impaired glucose tolerance; NIDDK, National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases; OGTT, oral glucose tolerance test; WHO, World Health Organization Type 2 diabetes is a common chronic disease affecting an estimated 12% of 40-to 74-yearold people in the U.S. (1). It is a major cause of premature mortality and morbidity due to cardiovascular, renal, ophthalmic, and neurologic diseases. Although treatment of type 2 diabetes can improve hyperglycemia, normalization of glycemia and glycohemoglobin is rarely achieved or maintained. Furthermore, macro-vascular disease and its risk factors are often already present in individuals at high risk of developing type 2 diabetes (2). Therefore, a policy RESEARCH GOALS PrimaryThe primary research goal is a comparison of the efficacy and safety of each of three interventions (an intensive lifestyle intervention or standard lifestyle recommendations combined with metformin or placebo) in preventing or delaying the development of diabetes. Diabetes is diagnosed by fasting plasma glucose (FPG) or glucose tolerance testing according to the 1997 American Diabetes Association (ADA) criteria (1). SecondarySecondary research goals i...

This paper reviews the contribution of qualitative methods to health services research (HSR) and discusses some of the issues involved in recognizing quality in such work. The place of qualitative work is first defined by reference to Archie Cochrane's agenda for HSR and the limitations of the recent focus on randomized trials as the standard method. Health care practice involves large elements of improvisation which cannot be captured by evidence-based approaches. Qualitative methods offer ways of understanding this improvisation and of identifying more efficient and effective practices, as well as considering the traditional topics of equity and humanity. The methodological procedures of qualitative work reflect a long-established inductive tradition in scientific practice. The logic of grounded theory provides a contemporary specification. In its application, it is quite different from the methodological anarchy of postmodernism. The use of qualitative research and the theoretically stated generalizations which arise from it inform reflective work by health service managers, planners and clinicians.

Weight-loss interventions generally improve lipid profiles and reduce cardiovascular disease risk, but effects are variable and may depend on genetic factors. We performed a genetic association analysis of data from 2,993 participants in the Diabetes Prevention Program to test the hypotheses that a genetic risk score (GRS) based on deleterious alleles at 32 lipid-associated single-nucleotide polymorphisms modifies the effects of lifestyle and/or metformin interventions on lipid levels and nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) lipoprotein subfraction size and number. Twenty-three loci previously associated with fasting LDL-C, HDL-C, or triglycerides replicated (P = 0.04–1×10−17). Except for total HDL particles (r = −0.03, P = 0.26), all components of the lipid profile correlated with the GRS (partial |r| = 0.07–0.17, P = 5×10−5–1×10−19). The GRS was associated with higher baseline-adjusted 1-year LDL cholesterol levels (β = +0.87, SEE±0.22 mg/dl/allele, P = 8×10−5, P interaction = 0.02) in the lifestyle intervention group, but not in the placebo (β = +0.20, SEE±0.22 mg/dl/allele, P = 0.35) or metformin (β = −0.03, SEE±0.22 mg/dl/allele, P = 0.90; P interaction = 0.64) groups. Similarly, a higher GRS predicted a greater number of baseline-adjusted small LDL particles at 1 year in the lifestyle intervention arm (β = +0.30, SEE±0.012 ln nmol/L/allele, P = 0.01, P interaction = 0.01) but not in the placebo (β = −0.002, SEE±0.008 ln nmol/L/allele, P = 0.74) or metformin (β = +0.013, SEE±0.008 nmol/L/allele, P = 0.12; P interaction = 0.24) groups. Our findings suggest that a high genetic burden confers an adverse lipid profile and predicts attenuated response in LDL-C levels and small LDL particle number to dietary and physical activity interventions aimed at weight loss.

No abstract

A table elsewhere in this issue shows conventional and Système International (SI) units and conversion factors for many substances. The Diabetes Prevention ProgramBaseline characteristics of the randomized cohort O R I G I N A L A R T I C L EOBJECTIVE -The Diabetes Prevention Program (DPP) is a 27-center randomized clinical trial designed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of interventions that may delay or prevent development of diabetes in people at increased risk for type 2 diabetes.RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS -Eligibility requirements were age Ն25 years, BMI Ն24 kg/m 2 (Ն22 kg/m 2 for Asian-Americans), and impaired glucose tolerance plus a fasting plasma glucose of 5.3-6.9 mmol/l (or Յ6.9 mmol for American Indians). Randomization of participants into the DPP over 2.7 years ended in June 1999. Baseline data for the three treatment groups-intensive lifestyle modification, standard care plus metformin, and standard care plus placebo-are presented for the 3,234 participants who have been randomized.RESULTS -Of all participants, 55% were Caucasian, 20% were African-American, 16% were Hispanic, 5% were American Indian, and 4% were Asian-American. Their average age at entry was 51 ± 10.7 years (mean ± SD), and 67.7% were women. Moreover, 16% were Ͻ40 years of age, and 20% were Ն60 years of age. Of the women, 48% were postmenopausal. Men and women had similar frequencies of history of hypercholesterolemia (37 and 33%, respectively) or hypertension (29 and 26%, respectively). On the basis of fasting lipid determinations, 54% of men and 40% of women fit National Cholesterol Education Program criteria for abnormal lipid profiles. More men than women were current or former cigarette smokers or had a history of coronary heart disease. Furthermore, 66% of men and 71% of women had a firstdegree relative with diabetes. Overall, BMI averaged 34.0 ± 6.7 kg/m 2 at baseline with 57% of the men and 73% of women having a BMI Ն30 kg/m 2 . Average fasting plasma glucose (6.0 ± 0.5 mmol/l) and HbA 1c (5.9 ± 0.5%) in men were comparable with values in women (5.9 ± 0.4 mmol/l and 5.9 ± 0.5%, respectively).CONCLUSIONS -The DPP has successfully randomized a large cohort of participants with a wide distribution of age, obesity, and ethnic and racial backgrounds who are at high risk for developing type 2 diabetes. The study will examine the effects of interventions on the development of diabetes.

Across the Diabetes Prevention Program (DPP) follow-up, cumulative diabetes incidence remained lower in the lifestyle compared with the placebo and metformin randomized groups and could not be explained by weight. Collection of self-reported physical activity (PA) (yearly) with cross-sectional objective PA (in follow-up) allowed for examination of PA and its long-term impact on diabetes prevention. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS Yearly self-reported PA and diabetes assessment and oral glucose tolerance test results (fasting glucose semiannually) were collected for 3,232 participants with one accelerometry assessment 11-13 years after randomization (n 5 1,793). Mixed models determined PA differences across treatment groups. The association between PA and diabetes incidence was examined using Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS There was a 6% decrease (Cox proportional hazard ratio 0.94 [95% CI 0.92, 0.96]; P < 0.001) in diabetes incidence per 6 MET-h/week increase in time-dependent PA for the entire cohort over an average of 12 years (controlled for age, sex, baseline PA, and weight). The effect of PA was greater (12% decrease) among participants less active at baseline (<7.5 MET-h/week) (n 5 1,338) (0.88 [0.83, 0.93]; P < 0.0001), with stronger findings for lifestyle participants. Lifestyle had higher cumulative PA compared with metformin or placebo (P < 0.0001) and higher accelerometry total minutes per day measured during follow-up (P 5 0.001 and 0.047). All associations remained significant with the addition of weight in the models. CONCLUSIONS PA was inversely related to incident diabetes in the entire cohort across the study, with cross-sectional accelerometry results supporting these findings. This highlights the importance of PA within lifestyle intervention efforts designed to prevent diabetes and urges health care providers to consider both PA and weight when counseling high-risk patients.

In a previous study, we obtained preliminary evidence in a small series of patients (n = 63) suggesting that susceptibility to childhood common acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (c-ALL) was associated with an allele at the HLA-DPB1 locus, DPB1*0201. We have now tested this hypothesis by comparing the frequency of children with leukaemia (n = 982) who typed for specific DPB1 alleles and two groups of non-leukaemic children, one consisting of children with solid tumours, excluding lymphomas (n = 409), the other consisting of normal infants (n = 864). We found that significantly more children with c-ALL and T-ALL, but not pro-B ALL or acute non-ALL typed for DPB1*0201 as compared with children with solid tumours [odds ratio (OR), 95% confidence interval (CI) for c-ALL: 1.76, 1.20-2.56; T-ALL: 1.93, 1.01-3.80] and normal infants (OR, 95% CI for c-ALL: 1.83, 1.34-2.48; T-ALL: 2.00, 1.10-3.82). In childhood c-ALL, significantly more children than those with solid tumours or normal infants typed for DPB1 alleles coding specific polymorphic amino acids lining the antigen-binding site of the DPbeta1*0201 allotypic protein, suggesting that susceptibility to childhood c-ALL may be influenced by DPbeta ABS amino acid polymorphisms shared by DPbeta1*0201 and other DPbeta1 allotypes. These results point to a mechanism of c-ALL susceptibility that involves the presentation of specific antigenic peptides, possibly derived from infectious agents, by DPbeta1*0201-related allotypic proteins, leading to the activation of helper T cells mediating proliferative stress on preleukaemic cells.

No abstract