Effect of nutrition changes on foods selected by students in a middle school-based diabetes prevention intervention program: The HEALTHY experience

BACKGOUND: The HEALTHY primary prevention trial developed an integrated multi-component intervention program to moderate risk factors for type 2 diabetes in middle schools. The nutrition component aimed to improve the quality of foods and beverages served to students. Changes in the School Breakfast Program (SBP), National School Lunch Program (NSLP), and a la carte venues are compared to the experience of control schools. METHODS: The intervention was implemented in 21 middle schools from winter 2007 through spring 2009 (following a cohort of students from sixth through eighth grades); 21 schools acted as observed controls. The nutrition component targeted school food service environmental change. Data identifying foods and nutrients served (selected by students for consumption) were collected over a 20-day period at baseline and end of study. Analysis compared end of study values for intervention versus control schools. RESULTS: Intervention schools more successfully limited dessert and snack food portion size in NSLP and a la carte and lowered fat content of foods served. Servings of high fiber grain-based foods and/or legumes were improved in SBP but not NSLP. Intervention and control schools eliminated >1% fat milk and sugar added beverages in SBP, but intervention schools were more successful in NSLP and a la carte. CONCLUSION: The HEALTHY program demonstrated significant changes in the nutritional quality of foods and beverages served in the SBP, NSLP, and a la carte venues, as part of an effort to decrease childhood obesity and support beneficial effects in some secondary HEALTHY study outcomes

Severe Obesity and Selected Risk Factors in a Sixth Grade Multiracial Cohort: The HEALTHY Study

To document the prevalence of severe obesity and associated risk in the HEALTHY cohort

Vitamin D Supplementation and Prevention of Type 2 Diabetes

BACKGROUND Observational studies support an association between a low blood 25-hydroxyvitamin D level and the risk of type 2 diabetes. However, whether vitamin D supplementation lowers the risk of diabetes is unknown. METHODS We randomly assigned adults who met at least two of three glycemic criteria for prediabetes (fasting plasma glucose level, 100 to 125 mg per deciliter; plasma glucose level 2 hours after a 75-g oral glucose load, 140 to 199 mg per deciliter; and glycated hemoglobin level, 5.7 to 6.4%) and no diagnostic criteria for diabetes to receive 4000 IU per day of vitamin D3 or placebo, regardless of the baseline serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D level. The primary outcome in this time-to-event analysis was new-onset diabetes, and the trial design was event-driven, with a target number of diabetes events of 508. RESULTS A total of 2423 participants underwent randomization (1211 to the vitamin D group and 1212 to the placebo group). By month 24, the mean serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D level in the vitamin D group was 54.3 ng per milliliter (from 27.7 ng per milliliter at baseline), as compared with 28.8 ng per milliliter in the placebo group (from 28.2 ng per milliliter at baseline). After a median follow-up of 2.5 years, the primary outcome of diabetes occurred in 293 participants in the vitamin D group and 323 in the placebo group (9.39 and 10.66 events per 100 person-years, respectively). The hazard ratio for vitamin D as compared with placebo was 0.88 (95% confidence interval, 0.75 to 1.04; P = 0.12). The incidence of adverse events did not differ significantly between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS Among persons at high risk for type 2 diabetes not selected for vitamin D insufficiency, vitamin D3 supplementation at a dose of 4000 IU per day did not result in a significantly lower risk of diabetes than placebo. (Funded by the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases and others; D2d ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01942694.

Vitamin D Supplementation and Prevention of Type 2 Diabetes

BACKGROUND Observational studies support an association between a low blood 25-hydroxyvitamin D level and the risk of type 2 diabetes. However, whether vitamin D supplementation lowers the risk of diabetes is unknown. METHODS We randomly assigned adults who met at least two of three glycemic criteria for prediabetes (fasting plasma glucose level, 100 to 125 mg per deciliter; plasma glucose level 2 hours after a 75-g oral glucose load, 140 to 199 mg per deciliter; and glycated hemoglobin level, 5.7 to 6.4%) and no diagnostic criteria for diabetes to receive 4000 IU per day of vitamin D3 or placebo, regardless of the baseline serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D level. The primary outcome in this time-to-event analysis was new-onset diabetes, and the trial design was event-driven, with a target number of diabetes events of 508. RESULTS A total of 2423 participants underwent randomization (1211 to the vitamin D group and 1212 to the placebo group). By month 24, the mean serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D level in the vitamin D group was 54.3 ng per milliliter (from 27.7 ng per milliliter at baseline), as compared with 28.8 ng per milliliter in the placebo group (from 28.2 ng per milliliter at baseline). After a median follow-up of 2.5 years, the primary outcome of diabetes occurred in 293 participants in the vitamin D group and 323 in the placebo group (9.39 and 10.66 events per 100 person-years, respectively). The hazard ratio for vitamin D as compared with placebo was 0.88 (95% confidence interval, 0.75 to 1.04; P = 0.12). The incidence of adverse events did not differ significantly between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS Among persons at high risk for type 2 diabetes not selected for vitamin D insufficiency, vitamin D3 supplementation at a dose of 4000 IU per day did not result in a significantly lower risk of diabetes than placebo. (Funded by the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases and others; D2d ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01942694.

Financial management of large, multi-center trials in a challenging funding milieu

Abstract Background Randomized clinical trials that have public health implications but no or low potential for commercial gain are predominantly funded by governmental (e.g., National Institutes of Health (NIH)) and not-for-profit organizations. Our objective was to develop an alternative clinical trial site funding model for judicious allocation of declining public research funds. Methods In the Vitamin D and Type 2 Diabetes (D2d) study, an NIH-supported, large clinical trial testing the effect of vitamin D supplementation on incident diabetes in 2423 participants at high risk for diabetes, a hybrid financial management model for supporting collaborating clinical sites was developed and applied. The funding model employed two reimbursement components: Core (for study start-up and partial efforts throughout the study, ~40% of the total site budget), invoiced by sites, and Performance-Based Payments (for successful enrollment of participants and completion of follow-up visits, ~60% of the total site budget), automatically issued to the sites by the Coordinating Center based on actual recruitment and visits conducted. Underperforming sites transitioned to Performance-Based Payments only. Results Recruitment occurred from October 2013 through December 2016, requiring one additional year than the 2-year projection. Median enrollment at each site was 88 participants (range 29–318; 20 to 205% of the site target). At the end of year 1, study-wide recruitment was at 12% of the target (vs. 50% projected) and 12% of the total grant award was invested. The model constantly evaluated sites’ needs and re-allocated resources to meet the study enrollment goal. If D2d had issued cost reimbursement subaward agreements and sites invoiced for their entire budget, 83% of the award would have been spent for all study activities over the first 4 years of the trial compared to 65% of the award spent (US$26M) under the hybrid model used by D2d. Conclusions It is feasible to foster a hybrid financial management approach to steward limited available public funds for research in a dynamic and consistent way that does not compromise the trial’s scientific integrity and ensures conservation of funds to complete recruitment and continue to follow up participants

The effects of salsalate on glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes: A randomized trial

BACKGROUND: Salsalate, a nonacetylated prodrug of salicylate, has been shown to decrease blood glucose concentration in small studies. OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy and safety of salsalate at different doses in patients with type 2 diabetes. DESIGN: Parallel randomized trial with computer-generated randomization and centralized allocation. Patients and investigators, including those assessing outcomes and performing analyses, were masked to group assignment. (ClinicalTrials.gov registration number: NCT00392678) SETTING: 3 private practices and 14 universities in the United States. PATIENTS: Persons aged 18 to 75 years with fasting plasma glucose concentrations of 12.5 mmol/L or less (≤225 mg/dL) and hemoglobin A(1c) (HbA(1c)) levels of 7.0% to 9.5% treated by diet, exercise, and oral medication at stable doses for at least 8 weeks. INTERVENTION: After a 4-week, single-masked run-in period, patients were randomly assigned to receive placebo or salsalate in dosages of 3.0, 3.5, or 4.0 g/d for 14 weeks (27 patients each) in addition to their current therapy. MEASUREMENTS: Change in HbA(1c) was the primary outcome. Adverse effects and changes in measures of coronary risk and renal function were secondary outcomes. RESULTS: Higher proportions of patients in the 3 salsalate treatment groups experienced decreases in HbA(1c) levels of 0.5% or more from baseline (P = 0.009). Mean HbA(1c) changes were −0.36% (P = 0.02) at 3.0 g/d, −0.34% (P = 0.02) at 3.5 g/d, and −0.49% (P = 0.001) at 4.0 g/d compared with placebo. Other markers of glycemic control also improved in the 3 salsalate groups, as did circulating triglyceride and adiponectin concentrations. Mild hypoglycemia was more common with salsalate; documented events occurred only in patients taking sulfonylureas. Urine albumin concentrations increased in all salsalate groups compared with placebo. The drug was otherwise well tolerated. LIMITATION: The number of patients studied and the trial duration were insufficient to warrant recommending the use of salsalate for type 2 diabetes at this time. CONCLUSION: Salsalate lowers HbA(1c) levels and improves other markers of glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes and may therefore provide a new avenue for treatment. Renal and cardiac safety of the drug require further evaluation. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, National Institutes of Health