Abstract
Lifestyle interventions for weight loss are the cornerstone of obesity therapy, yet their optimal design is debated. This is particularly true for postmenopausal women; a population with a high prevalence of obesity yet towards whom fewer studies are targeted. We conducted a year-long, 4-arm randomized trial among 439 overweight-to-obese postmenopausal sedentary women to determine the effects of a calorie-reduced, low-fat diet (D), a moderate-intensity, facility-based aerobic exercise program (E), or the combination of both interventions (D+E), vs. a no-lifestyle-change control (C) on change in body weight and composition. The group-based dietary intervention had a weight-reduction goal of ≥10%, and the exercise intervention consisted of a gradual escalation to 45 min aerobic exercise 5 d/wk. Participants were predominantly non-Hispanic Whites (85%) with a mean age of 58.0±5.0 years, a mean BMI of 30.9±4.0 kg/m2 and an average of 47.8±4.4% body fat. Baseline and 12-month weight and adiposity measures were obtained by staff blinded to participants’ intervention assignment. 399 women completed the trial (91% retention). Using an intention-to-treat analysis, average weight loss at 12 months was −8.5% for the D group (P<0.0001 vs. C), −2.4% for the E group (P=0.03 vs. C), and −10.8% for the D+E group (P<0.0001 vs. C), while the C group experienced a non-significant −0.8% decrease. BMI, waist circumference, and % body fat were also similarly reduced. Among postmenopausal women, lifestyle change involving diet, exercise, or both combined over 1 year improves body weight and adiposity, with the greatest change arising from the combined intervention.
Keywords: Body weight, body composition, weight-reducing diet, exercise intervention, women
INTRODUCTION
The prevalence of obesity has reached epidemic levels over the past few decades, and concurrent with this rise are increases in numerous obesity-associated diseases including heart disease, certain types of cancer, and diabetes (1). The cornerstone of therapeutic interventions to treat or prevent these diseases is weight loss via lifestyle modification, including hypocaloric diet and/or increased physical activity along with behavioral techniques to support these changes (2). Typical weight loss resulting from lifestyle change is between 5–10% of baseline weight, so such approaches rarely bring an obese individual to a normal body weight (3). However, losing even this modest amount of weight brings health benefits (4). Multiple non-randomized interventions have demonstrated improvements in biomarkers relating to diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and cancer risk (3, 5). Smaller-scale randomized studies of lifestyle change to induce weight loss have shown improvements in hypertension and metabolic syndrome (6–8). The Diabetes Prevention Program (DPP) randomized over 3,000 individuals at high risk for developing diabetes to an intensive, individual-focused combined diet-and-exercise lifestyle intervention vs. pharmaceutical therapies or placebo and demonstrated significant reductions in diabetes incidence. Particularly, those in the lifestyle intervention arm experienced the greatest (58%) decrease in disease incidence over 3 years, providing strong evidence for the efficacy of the lifestyle program (9).
Given the health impacts of the obesity epidemic and the research suggesting that weight loss can ameliorate these problems, there have been numerous calls for optimal obesity treatment strategies. The NIH Obesity Education Initiative Expert Panel suggested a caloric deficit of 500–1000 kcal/day using an individualized dietary strategy, along with 45 minutes of moderate-intensity physical activity 5 days/week (5). The Institute of Medicine recommended at least 1 hour/day of moderately-intense physical activity coupled with a caloric deficit while the US Department of Agriculture similarly suggests individuals engage in close to 1 hour of moderate-to-vigorous intensity exercise on most days of the week, without exceeding caloric intake requirements (3, 10). The US Center for Disease Control instead suggests at least 30 min/d of moderate-intensity exercise most days of the week while maintaining sensible portion sizes (11). The recommendations from these agencies are all based on expert opinion supported by the available data. Although numerous studies have examined the effect of lifestyle interventions on body weight, few have focused on postmenopausal women, a group experiencing particularly high rates of overweight and obesity using a tested intervention such as that undertaken by the DPP, a program known to reduce disease risk in other populations, and measured effects over a 12 month period (12). Hence, questions still remain regarding the best approach for weight loss from lifestyle change for this group in particular, and randomized, controlled studies are the best way to demonstrate effectiveness of interventions that could influence public health recommendations.
We conducted a year-long, group-based lifestyle intervention to examine the independent and combined effects of physical activity and dietary weight loss on body weight as well as body composition among 439 sedentary, overweight/obese postmenopausal women. We hypothesized that the women randomized to the intervention groups would experience greater weight loss and improvements in body composition parameters than those randomized to the control group (who maintained their usual lifestyle), and furthermore that weight loss and changes in body composition would vary among the intervention groups based on the separate and combined impacts of diet and exercise on overall energy balance.
METHODS AND PROCEDURES
The Nutrition and Exercise in Women (NEW) study, conducted from 2005 to 2009, was a 12-month randomized, controlled trial using a 4-arm design to compare the effect of three lifestyle change interventions (moderate-to-vigorous intensity aerobic exercise, dietary weight loss, or both interventions combined) vs. control (no lifestyle change) on body weight and composition. All study procedures were reviewed and approved by the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center (FHCRC) Institutional Review Board in Seattle, WA, and all participants provided signed Informed Consent.
Participant Recruitment, Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria
The target population for the NEW study included postmenopausal women from the greater Seattle, WA area, aged 50–75 years, who were overweight or obese (body mass index (BMI) ≥25 kg/m2, or ≥23 kg/m2 for Asian-American women), and exercising <100 min/week at moderate intensity or greater. Specific exclusion criteria included: diagnosed diabetes, fasting blood glucose ≥126 mg/dL, or use of diabetes medications; use of postmenopausal hormone therapy within the prior 3 months; history of breast cancer or other serious medical condition(s); alcohol intake in excess of 2 drinks/day or current smoker; contraindication to participating in the diet or exercise intervention for any reason, including an abnormal exercise tolerance test, current or planned participation in another structured weight loss program, use of weight loss medications, or additional factors that might interfere with measurement of outcomes or with the success of the intervention (e.g. inability to attend facility-based sessions).
Women were recruited through targeted mass mailing campaigns and media publicity or community outreach (Figure 1). Invitation letters were sent to 126,802 age-eligible women and 5,621 responded; in addition we received 2,048 media and community outreach-prompted calls. 929 women were telephone screen-eligible, a total of 703 women attended the information session, 684 women were screened in clinic, and 439 were randomized into the study (approximately 80% from mass mailings, 20% from media and community outreach).
Figure 1.
Flow diagram of the progress through the NEW trial
DXA: Dual X-ray absorptiometry
VO2max: Cardiorespiratory fitness test
Study Design and Randomization
The study design for the NEW trial is shown in Figure 1. Following baseline data collection, eligible women were randomized into one of four study arms: 1) dietary weight loss (D, N=118); 2) moderate-to-vigorous intensity aerobic exercise (E, N=117); 3) both interventions combined (D+E, N=117); or 4) no-lifestyle-change control (C, N=87). The random assignment was generated by a computerized program, stratified according to BMI (<30 kg/m2 or ≥30 kg/m2) and participants’ self-reported race/ethnicity (non-Hispanic White, Black, or other). In addition, to achieve a proportionally smaller number of women assigned to the control group, a permuted blocks randomization with blocks of 4 was used, wherein the control assignment was randomly eliminated from each block with a probability of approximately 1 in 4.
Lifestyle Change Interventions
The NEW dietary weight-loss intervention comprised our modification of the dietary component of the DPP (9) and the Look AHEAD (13) lifestyle intervention programs, with the following goals: total daily energy intake of 1200–2000 kcal/day based on baseline weight, less than 30% daily energy intake from fat, and a 10% reduction in body weight by 6 months with maintenance thereafter to 12 months. Content of the dietary counseling sessions was modified to better fit our study population (less focus on diabetes or diabetes risk), and the frequency and type of sessions (individual vs. group) also varied from DPP and Look AHEAD. Women met individually with a study dietitian for personalized goal-setting on at least two occasions, followed by weekly meetings in groups of approximately 5–10 women, through the first 6 months. Thereafter (months 7–12), dietitians had contact with participants twice a month, including one face-to-face contact (individual or group session) and one additional contact via phone or email. Participants were permitted additional in-person sessions, phone, or email contacts beyond the 32 expected, if they or the dietician felt these would help achieve intervention goals. This combination of individual and group-based approaches was used to maximize the benefits of targeted, personalized recommendations along with the social support and greater cost-effectiveness of a group setting. Women were asked to record all food eaten daily for at least 6 months, or until they reached their individual weight loss goal (10%). Food journals were collected by the dietitian and returned with feedback. Journaling, weekly weighins, and session attendance were tracked to promote adherence to the diet intervention.
Based on our previous exercise research in a similar population, the goal of the NEW exercise intervention was ≥45 minutes of moderate-to-vigorous intensity exercise, 5 days/week (225 minutes/week) for 12 months (14, 15). Participants attended at least three sessions/week at our study facility where they were supervised by an exercise physiologist, and exercised for their remaining sessions at home. The exercise training program began with a 15 minute session at 60–70% maximal heart rate (determined by baseline exercise treadmill testing) and progressed to the target 70–85% maximal heart rate for 45 minutes by the 7th week after enrollment where it was maintained for the remainder of the study. Women wore Polar heart rate monitors (Polar Electro, Lake Success, NY) during facility exercise sessions to assist with attaining their target heart rate. In addition, during both facility and home sessions they recorded the mode and duration of exercise, and peak heart rate achieved. Facility-based exercise consisted of treadmill walking, stationary bicycling, and use of other aerobic machines; while a variety of home exercises were encouraged including walking/hiking, aerobics, and bicycling. A small amount of resistance training to strengthen joints and limit injury was recommended, though not required. Activities of at least 4 metabolic equivalents (METs) according to the Compendium of Physical Activities (16) such as brisk walking were counted towards the prescribed aerobic exercise target. Activity logs were reviewed weekly by study staff in order to monitor adherence. Participants who were not meeting exercise targets were contacted by staff to discuss barriers and approaches to increase activity. In addition, the dietitians and exercise physiologists met regularly with a clinical health psychologist experienced in lifestyle behavior change to discuss participant progress and refine behavior modification goals according to each participant’s needs.
Women randomized to the diet + exercise group received both the dietary weight loss and aerobic exercise interventions. They participated in separate groups for the dietary weight-loss intervention from women assigned to diet alone. Although the diet + exercise group could use the exercise facility at the same time as participants assigned to the exercise-only group, they were instructed not to discuss the diet intervention. Women randomized to the control group were requested not to change their diet or exercise habits for the duration of the trial. At the end of 12 months, participants in the control group were offered four group nutrition classes and 8 weeks of facility exercise training with individualized guidance from an exercise physiologist, as an incentive to undergo randomization.
Study Measures and Data Collection
All study measures were obtained by trained study personnel who were blinded to the participants’ randomization status.
Participants completed a series of questionnaires at their baseline screening visit prior to randomization, including demographic information, medical history, health habits, reproductive and body weight history, diet intake (via a validated 120-item self-administered food frequency questionnaire) (17), as well as frequency, duration and intensity of physical activity over the preceding 3 month period (via an interview-administered Minnesota Physical Activity Questionnaire) (18). These same questionnaires were completed at the end of the 12-month study period.
Anthropometric measures were obtained at baseline and again at 12 months, while participants wore a hospital gown without shoes. Weight and height were measured to the nearest 0.1 kg and 0.1 cm, respectively, with a balance beam scale and stadiometer. Both measures were made in duplicate and averaged. BMI was calculated as weight in kilograms divided by the square of height in meters. Waist and hip circumferences were measured in duplicate to the nearest 0.5 cm using a fiberglass tape, and averaged. Waist circumference was obtained at the end of normal expiration in the horizontal plane at the minimal waist, while the hip measure was obtained at the maximum point also in the horizontal plane. Total and percentage body fat and lean mass were measured using a dual x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) whole-body scanner (GE Lunar, Madison, WI) with participants in a supine position.
Adherence to the diet and exercise interventions was assessed via multiple approaches. The dietary intervention was evaluated by weight loss, and monitoring frequency of session attendance (19), food journal completion and submission, and self-weighing. These measures were reviewed weekly by study dieticians. Exercise participants tracked their activities in a daily exercise log that was reviewed on a weekly basis by the exercise physiologists. All participants completed certain measures at baseline and 12 months to assess differences and change across study arms. Food frequency questionnaires were completed primarily to assess dietary patterns and change in fat intake. Participants wore pedometers (Accusplit, Silicon Valley, CA) while awake for 7 consecutive days in order to determine an average daily step count. Cardiorespiratory fitness (VO2max) was assessed using a maximal graded treadmill test according to a modified branching protocol starting at 3.0 mph and 0% grade with incremental increases in speed or grade every 2 minutes (20, 21). Heart rate and oxygen uptake were continuously monitored with an automated metabolic cart (MedGraphics, St. Paul, MN).
Statistical Analyses
Our primary outcome was the comparison of change in body weight by study group from baseline to 12 months. Secondary outcomes included the comparison by study group of the 12-month change in body composition as well as additional anthropometric measures. With 439 women enrolled in the NEW trial, we had over 80% power to detect a 3.16 kg difference between groups, using a Bonferroni adjustment for the multiple comparisons (two-sided α=0.05/6), and assuming a 10% drop-out rate/5% drop-in rate. We experienced 91% retention at 12 months, with 399 out of the 439 women randomized returning for final assessments (Figure 1). All analyses were based on the assigned intervention at the time of randomization regardless of adherence (ie, intention-to-treat), with a conservative no-change-from-baseline imputation made for the missing values.
We computed the mean change in body weight, anthropometric, and body composition measures from baseline to 12 months and assessed the differences between each of the intervention and control groups. As these outcome measures were normally distributed, data transformation was not necessary. We used the generalized estimating equations (GEE) modification of linear regression to account for the longitudinal nature of the data and correlation within individuals. As a secondary analysis, we compared the mean 12-month changes in outcomes by tertiles of adherence measures. Additional descriptive data are presented as means±SD, unless otherwise noted. All statistical analyses were performed using SAS software version 9.1 (SAS Institute, Cary, NC).
RESULTS
The baseline characteristics of the 439 participants randomized to the NEW trial are shown in Table 1. Women were on average 58.0±5.0 years old, obese (BMI 30.9±4.0 kg/m2) with a high percent body fat (47.2±4.3%), and had poor cardiorespiratory fitness (VO2max 22.9±4.0 kg/ml/min). Approximately 85% of participants were non-Hispanic White, 65% were college graduates, and about half were full-time employed. With the exception of percent fat intake in the diet estimated by FFQ, there were no statistically significant differences in any demographic or lifestyle variables between the study groups at baseline. 40 women did not complete the study (D=13, E=11, D+E=9, C=7), with the primary reasons for study discontinuation being: dissatisfaction with randomization, work or family demands, or injury or other medical issues unrelated to the intervention. At 12 months, 399 participants completed follow-up visits for body weight and anthropometric assessments, 396 underwent a DXA scan, and 370 participants completed a maximal treadmill test (Figure 1).
Table 1.
Baseline characteristics of NEW trial participants
| All (N=439) |
Control (N=87) |
Diet (N=118) |
Exercise (N=117) |
Diet+Exercise (N=117) |
||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean(SD) | Mean(SD) | Mean(SD) | Mean(SD) | Mean(SD) | Pa | |
| Age (y) | 58.0(5.0) | 57.4(4.4) | 58.1(6.0) | 58.1(5.0) | 58.0(4.5) | 0.76 |
| Weight (kg) | 83.6(11.8) | 84.2(12.5) | 84.0(11.8) | 83.7(12.3) | 82.5(10.8) | 0.71 |
| BMI (kg/m2) | 30.9(4.0) | 30.7(3.9) | 31.1(3.9) | 30.7(3.7) | 31.0(4.3) | 0.83 |
| Waist circumference (cm) | 94.5(10.1) | 94.8(10.2) | 94.6(10.2) | 95.1(10.1) | 93.7(9.9) | 0.76 |
| Body fat mass (kg) | 39.8(8.1) | 40.1(8.5) | 39.8(8.1) | 39.9(8.2) | 39.4(7.9) | 0.95 |
| Body fat (%) | 47.2(4.3) | 47.3(4.4) | 47.0(4.3) | 47.3(4.1) | 47.4(4.5) | 0.90 |
| Lean mass (kg) | 40.2(5.0) | 40.6(5.3) | 40.7(5.1) | 40.2(5.3) | 39.6(4.3) | 0.36 |
| Lean mass (%) | 48.5(4.2) | 48.5(4.3) | 48.7(4.3) | 48.3(3.9) | 48.3(4.4) | 0.87 |
| VO2max (kg/ml/min) | 22.9(4.0) | 23.1(4.1) | 22.7(3.8) | 22.5(4.1) | 23.5(4.1) | 0.17 |
| Usual physical activity (min/wk)b | 32.8(44.1) | 23.8(41.2) | 33.6(45.5) | 37.7(43.7) | 33.6(44.7) | 0.16 |
| Total calories (kcal/d)c | 1934(638) | 1988(669) | 1884(661) | 1986(589) | 1890(638) | 0.46 |
| Fat intake(% of total kcal/d)c | 34.3(6.9) | 35.6(6.9) | 33.1(6.3) | 33.6(6.9) | 35.3(7.3) | 0.02 |
| N(%) | N(%) | N(%) | N(%) | N(%) | Pd | |
| Ethnicity | ||||||
| Non-Hispanic white | 373(85.0) | 74(85.1) | 101(85.6) | 98(83.8) | 100(85.5) | 0.15 |
| Non-Hispanic black | 35(8.0) | 6(6.9) | 9(7.6) | 15(12.8) | 5(4.3) | 0.07 |
| Education | ||||||
| College Graduate | 287(65.4) | 59(67.8) | 76(64.4) | 70(59.9) | 82(70.1) | 0.26 |
| Employment | ||||||
| Part-time employed | 123(28.0) | 25(33.8) | 34(32.4) | 34(35.4) | 30(29.1) | 0.62 |
| Full-time employed | 222(50.6) | 47(63.5) | 58(55.2) | 53(55.2) | 64(62.1) | 0.42 |
: ANOVA test, comparing baseline characteristics among 4 groups
: from Physical Activity Index questionnaire
: N=427 for total; N=85 for Control; N=114 for Diet, Exercise, and Diet + Exercise groups
: Chi-square test or Fisher exact test, comparing baseline characteristics among 4 groups
Overall, adherence to the dietary weight loss and aerobic exercise interventions was excellent (Table 2). Estimated relative fat intake (% of total kcal/day) decreased by 18% in the diet alone group and by 20% in the diet + exercise group. Changes in total kcal intake among D and D+E groups did not change significantly compared to controls, however the FFQ is not as robust for estimating this parameter (17). In both the diet alone and diet + exercise groups, women attended an average of 27 diet behavior change sessions (86%). Women randomized to exercise alone achieved on average 80% of the target 225 min/wk aerobic exercise over the 12 month trial, while women randomized to diet + exercise achieved 85%. Both groups significantly increased their average pedometer steps/day (E: 2354±2749 steps/d, 42% increase; D+E: 3408±3001 steps/d, 58% increase) and VO2max (E: 0.16±0.36 L/min, 9% increase; D+E: 0.12±0.34 L/min, 7% increase), compared to baseline.
Table 2.
Baseline and 12-month body weights, anthropometric measures, and body composition measures by intervention group
| Control (N=87) | Diet (N=118) | Exercise (N=117) | Diet + Exercise (N=116) | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Baseline Mean(SD) |
12month Mean(SD) |
%Δ | Baseline Mean(SD) |
12month Mean(SD) |
%Δ | Baseline Mean(SD) |
12 month Mean(SD) |
%Δ | Baseline Mean(SD) |
12month Mean(SD) |
%Δ | |
| Weight (kg) | 84.2(12.5) | 83.5(12.3) | −0.8 | 84.0(11.8) PC <.0001 |
76.9(13.4) PE <.0001 |
−8.5 PD+E =.03 |
83.7(12.3) PC =.03 |
81.7(12.4) PD <.0001 |
−2.4 PD+E<.0001 |
82.5(10.8) PC <.0001 |
73.6(11.5) PE <.0001 |
−10.8 PD =.03 |
| BMI (kg/m2) | 30.7(3.9) | 30.5(4.1) | −0.7 | 31.0(3.9) PC <.0001 |
28.4(4.6) PE <.0001 |
−8.6 PD+E =.02 |
30.7(3.7) PC =.017 |
29.9(3.8) PD <.0001 |
−2.4 PD+E<.0001 |
31.0(4.3) PC <.0001 |
27.6(4.5) PE <.0001 |
−10.8 PD =.02 |
| Waist (cm) | 94.8(10.2) | 95.7(9.6) | 1.0 | 94.6(10.2 PC <.0001 |
90.2(11.5) PE =.004 |
−4.7 PD+E =.004 |
95.1(10.1) PC =.001 |
93.1(9.8) PD =.004 |
−2.1 PD+E<.0001 |
93.7(9.9) PC <.0001 |
86.7(11.6) PE <.0001 |
−7.5 PD =.004 |
| Body fat (kg) | 40.1(8.5) | 39.7(8.7) | −1.0 | 39.7(8.1) PC <.0001 |
33.6(10.0) PE <.0001 |
−15.6 PD+E =.006 |
39.9(8.2) PC =.0006 |
37.8(8.7) PD <.0001 |
−5.3 PD+E<.0001 |
39.4(7.9) PC <.0001 |
31.2(9.5) PE <.0001 |
−20.8 PD =.006 |
| Body fat (%) | 47.3(4.4) | 47.1(5.2) | −0.3 | 47.0(4.3) PC <.0001 |
42.8(6.6) PE <.0001 |
−8.9 PD+E =.005 |
47.3(4.1) PC =.0006 |
45.7(4.9) PD <.0001 |
−3.3 PD+E<.0001 |
47.4(4.5) PC <.0001 |
41.5(7.0) PE <.0001 |
−12.4 PD =.005 |
| Lean mass (kg) | 40.6(5.3) | 40.5(5.0) | −0.1 | 40.7(5.1) PC =.0048 |
39.9(4.8) PE <.0001 |
−1.9 PD+E =.15 |
40.2(5.3) PC =.20 |
40.5(5.1) PD <.0001 |
0.7 PD+E =.003 |
39.6(4.3) PC =.15 |
39.2(3.9) PE =.003 |
−1.1 PD =.15 |
| Lean mass (%) | 48.5(4.3) | 48.9(4.8) | 0.8 | 48.7(4.3) PC <.0001 |
52.8(6.5) PE <.0001 |
8.3 PD+E =.008 |
48.3(3.9) PC =.0005 |
50.0(4.8) PD <.0001 |
3.5 PD+E<.0001 |
48.3(4.4) PC <.0001 |
54.0(7.0) PE <.0001 |
11.8 PD =.008 |
| Physical activity (min/wk)a |
23.8(41.2) | 63.8(96.3) | 168 | 33.6(45.5) PC =.21 |
57.7(87.8) PE<.0001 |
72 PD+E<.0001 |
37.7(43.7) PC <.0001 |
223.0(135) PD<.0001 |
491 PD+E=.28 |
33.6(44.7) PC <.0001 |
238.0(138) PD<.0001 |
609 PE=.28 |
| Pedometer (steps/wk)b |
5605(2334) | 6155(2811) | 9.8 | 5539(2257) PC =.95 |
6110(2865) PE<.0001 |
10.3 PD+E<.0001 |
5777(2129) PC <.0001 |
8192(3373) PD<.0001 |
41.8 PD+E=.0056 |
5980(2393) PC <.0001 |
9448(3316) PD<.0001 |
58.0 PD+E=.0056 |
| VO2max (L/min) |
1.93(0.37) | 1.91(0.33) | −1.1 | 1.89(0.31) PC =.92 |
1.87(0.31) PE <.0001 |
−1.0 PD+E<.0001 |
1.85(0.31) PC <.0001 |
2.02(0.34) PD <.0001 |
8.9 PD+E =.38 |
1.93(0.34) PC =.0007 |
2.05(0.41) PE =.38 |
6.5 PD <.0001 |
| Total calories (kcal/d)c |
1988(669) | 1768(606) | − 11.0 |
1884(661) PC =.72 |
1637(621) PE =.37 |
−13.0 PD+E =.70 |
1986(589) PC =.66 |
1801(551) PD =.37 |
−9.3 PD+E =.17 |
1890(638) PC =.48 |
1617(598) PE =.17 |
−14.0 PD=.70 |
| Fat intake (% of kcal/d)c |
35.6(6.9) | 33.4(6.8) | −6.2 | 33.1(6.3) PC <.0001 |
27.3(7.2) PE<.0001 |
−18.0 PD+E=.18 |
33.6(6.9) PC =.12 |
32.5(7.3) PD<.0001 |
−3.3 PD+E<.0001 |
35.3(7.3) PC <.0001 |
28.3(7.6) PE<.0001 |
−20.0 PD=.18 |
Baseline observation carried forward for 12 month missing values, P<0.05/6=0.0083 considered significant
PC: comparing the change from baseline to 12 month follow-up between Control and intervention group
PE: comparing the change from baseline to 12 month follow-up between Exercise and other intervention group
PD: comparing the change from baseline to 12 month follow-up between Diet and other intervention group
PD+E: comparing the change from baseline to 12 month follow-up between Diet + Exercise and other intervention group
:from Physical Activity Index questionnaire
:N=82 for Control, N=117 for Diet, N=114 for Exercise, N=115 for Diet + Exercise
:N=85 for Control, N=114 for Diet, Exercise, and Diet + Exercise group
Body weight, anthropometric, and body composition changes were evaluated at 12 months and are presented in Table 2. Participants in the diet alone group lost a mean 7.2 kg (−8.5%, P<0.0001), those in the exercise alone group lost a mean 2.0 kg (−2.4%, P=0.034), while those in the diet + exercise group lost a mean 8.9 kg (−10.8%, P<0.0001), each compared to a 0.7 kg decrease among controls. The weight reductions for the diet alone and diet + exercise groups both were significantly greater than that experienced by the exercise alone group (both P<0.0001), though the difference between diet alone and diet + exercise did not reach the adjusted level of statistical significance (P=0.02). Waist circumference decreased significantly in all intervention groups compared to the non-significant 0.9 cm increase among controls (D: −4.5 cm P<0.0001; E: −2.0 cm P=0.001; D+E: −7.0 cm P<0.0001). Furthermore, the decrease in waist circumference was significantly greater for the diet + exercise participants than for either the diet-alone or exercise-alone participants (P=0.004 D+E vs. D and P<0.0001 D+E vs. E), and women who were assigned to diet alone also experienced significantly greater decrease compared to those assigned to exercise alone (P=0.004). Similarly, % body fat decreased among all intervention groups compared to controls, with an absolute percent change of −4.2% for diet alone, −1.6% for exercise alone, and −5.9% for diet + exercise (all P<0.0001). Paralleling the findings for waist circumference, comparing these reductions among intervention groups revealed the rank-order for the reduction was also D+E > D > E (all P<0.005). Finally, lean mass increased only among those participating in exercise alone (+0.3 kg). Although this increase did not differ significantly from control women, it was significantly greater compared to the reductions in lean mass among women in the diet alone (−0.8 kg, P<0.0001 E vs. D) or diet + exercise (−0.4 kg, P=0.003 E vs. D+E) groups.
We assessed measures of adherence for the combined diet + exercise group separately from either intervention alone. Changes in outcome measures at 12 months stratified by tertiles of percentage of in-person diet intervention session attendance are shown in Table 3A (D group) and Table 3B (D+E group). Women from the diet-alone group who participated in ≥106% of sessions (included optional visits) lost the most weight, with an 11.4 kg (13.5%) decrease, compared to losses of 8.3 kg (10.4%) among women attending 84–106% of sessions, 5.5 kg (6.3%) among those attending <84%, or a 0.5 kg loss (0.6%) among controls (all P trend <0.0001). Comparable findings were noted for BMI, waist circumference, and % body fat (all P trend ≤0.0001, Table 3A). Similarly to the diet-alone participants, women from the diet + exercise group who attended the most in-person sessions also lost the most weight, with a 10.9 kg (13.4%) decrease, compared to losses of 9.4 kg (11.5%) among women attending 84–106% of sessions, and 8.1 kg (9.6%) among those attending <84% (all P trend <0.0001). Equivalent changes were observed for other all outcome measures (Table 3B).
Table 3.
Baseline and 12-month body weight, anthropometric, and body composition measures stratified by baseline BMI
| Control | Diet | |||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Baseline | 12 Month | Baseline | 12 Month | |||||||||||||
| BMI | N | Mean | STD | N | Mean | STD | %Δ | N | Mean | STD | N | Mean | STD | %Δ | Pa | |
| Weight (kg) | <30 | 41 | 75.8 | 8.6 | 38 | 75.7 | 9.1 | −0.2 | 55 | 75.3 | 6.7 | 52 | 67.2 | 7.9 | −11 | <.0001 |
| ≥30 | 46 | 91.7 | 10.6 | 42 | 91.0 | 10.2 | −0.8 | 63 | 91.7 | 10.0 | 52 | 82.7 | 11.0 | −9.8 | <.0001 | |
| Interaction Pb=0.99 | ||||||||||||||||
| BMI (kg/m2) | <30 | 41 | 27.3 | 1.6 | 38 | 27.2 | 2.3 | −0.3 | 55 | 27.6 | 1.3 | 52 | 24.6 | 2.3 | −11 | <.0001 |
| ≥30 | 46 | 33.7 | 2.6 | 42 | 33.4 | 3.1 | −1.0 | 63 | 34.1 | 2.8 | 52 | 30.8 | 3.6 | −9.6 | <.0001 | |
| Interaction Pb=0.89 | ||||||||||||||||
| Waist (cm) | <30 | 41 | 87.4 | 6.8 | 38 | 89.0 | 7.1 | 1.8 | 55 | 88.1 | 7.5 | 52 | 82.7 | 8.6 | −6.1 | <.0001 |
| ≥30 | 46 | 101 | 8.0 | 41 | 101 | 7.5 | 0.0 | 63 | 100 | 8.7 | 51 | 94.5 | 8.7 | −5.8 | .0005 | |
| Interaction Pb=0.70 | ||||||||||||||||
| Body fat (%) | <30 | 41 | 44.8 | 4.2 | 38 | 44.5 | 5.0 | −0.6 | 55 | 44.5 | 3.6 | 52 | 38.7 | 5.7 | −13 | <.0001 |
| ≥30 | 46 | 49.4 | 3.2 | 42 | 49.6 | 4.5 | 0.2 | 63 | 49.1 | 3.8 | 52 | 45.4 | 5.2 | −7.5 | <.0001 | |
| Interaction Pb=0.11 | ||||||||||||||||
| Exercise | Diet + Exercise | ||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Baseline | 12 Month | Baseline | 12 Month | ||||||||||||||
| BMI | N | Mean | STD | N | Mean | STD | %Δ | Pa | N | Mean | STD | N | Mean | STD | %Δ | Pa | |
| Weight (kg) | <30 | 57 | 74.1 | 6.8 | 53 | 72.5 | 7.8 | −2.3 | .09 | 57 | 74.8 | 6.3 | 54 | 65.9 | 7.0 | −12 | <.0001 |
| ≥30 | 60 | 92.7 | 9.0 | 52 | 89.5 | 9.6 | −3.5 | .09 | 60 | 89.9 | 8.8 | 55 | 79.3 | 10.0 | −12 | <.0001 | |
| Interaction Pb=0.97 | Interaction Pb=0.35 | ||||||||||||||||
| BMI (kg/m2) | <30 | 57 | 27.5 | 1.5 | 53 | 26.9 | 1.9 | −2.4 | .05 | 57 | 27.4 | 1.4 | 54 | 24.2 | 1.9 | −12 | <.0001 |
| ≥30 | 60 | 33.6 | 2.6 | 52 | 32.8 | 3.0 | −2.5 | .10 | 60 | 34.4 | 3.2 | 55 | 30.5 | 3.9 | −11 | <.0001 | |
| Interaction Pb=0.73 | Interaction Pb=0.42 | ||||||||||||||||
| Waist (cm) | <30 | 57 | 88.6 | 6.3 | 53 | 86.5 | 7.5 | −2.3 | .0017 | 57 | 87.8 | 6.9 | 54 | 78.7 | 6.8 | −10 | <.0001 |
| ≥30 | 60 | 101 | 9.3 | 53 | 99.3 | 7.9 | −1.9 | .13 | 60 | 99.3 | 9.0 | 55 | 92.4 | 9.4 | −7.0 | <.0001 | |
| Interaction Pb=0.63 | Interaction Pb=0.11 | ||||||||||||||||
| Body fat (%) | <30 | 57 | 45.3 | 3.8 | 53 | 42.9 | 4.8 | −5.3 | .0006 | 57 | 44.5 | 3.3 | 54 | 36.8 | 5.7 | −17 | <.0001 |
| ≥30 | 60 | 49.2 | 3.6 | 52 | 48.2 | 3.6 | −2.0 | .09 | 60 | 50.2 | 3.6 | 55 | 45.4 | 5.4 | −9.6 | <.0001 | |
| Interaction Pb=0.53 | Interaction Pb=0.02 | ||||||||||||||||
: P-value comparing change from baseline to 12-months in intervention group versus Controls within BMI strata.
: P-value comparing difference in change from baseline to 12 months in intervention group versus Controls in high BMI strata versus low BMI strata.
Changes in outcome measures at 12 months stratified by tertiles of reported exercise (exercise logbook min/wk) are shown in Table 4A (E group) and Table 4B (D+E group). Women from the exercise-alone group who participated in ≥196 min/wk physical activity (highly active) lost the most weight, with a 3.1 kg (3.9%) decrease, compared to losses of 2.0 kg (2.4%) among intermediate-active women (154–196 min/wk), 1.9 kg (2.2%) among low-active women (<154 min/wk) or a 0.5 kg loss (0.6%) among controls (P trend <0.0001 in reference to controls, P=0.12 in reference to low-active group). Comparable findings were noted for BMI, waist circumference, and % body fat (P trend all <0.01 in reference to controls, Table 4A); in addition these same trends were observed when adherence was assessed by change in cardiorespiratory fitness level or change in pedometer steps/wk (data not shown). Highly active women from the diet + exercise group lost 10.5 kg (12.8%) decrease, similar to the weight loss achieved by active-intermediate women (10.5 kg or 12.7%), while low-active women lost 8.0 kg (9.6%; all P trend <0.0001 in reference to controls, and P trend ≤0.01 in reference to low-active group). Equivalent changes were observed for other outcome measures (Table 4B), and also when adherence was assessed by change in cardiorespiratory fitness level or change in pedometer steps/wk (data not shown).
Table 4.
| A. Baseline and 12-month weight, anthropometric, and body composition measures for EXERCISE group, stratified by adherencea | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Basline | 12 Month | |||||||||
| N | Mean | STD | N | Mean | STD | % | P-Valueb | P-Valuec | ||
| Weight (kg) | Control | 87 | 84.2 | 12.5 | 80 | 83.7 | 12.3 | −0.6 | Ref. | |
| <154 mins/wk | 41 | 87.7 | 10.8 | 29 | 85.8 | 9.6 | −2.2 | 0.40 | Ref. | |
| 154–196 mins/wk | 41 | 83.0 | 13.1 | 41 | 81.0 | 12.7 | −2.4 | 0.09 | 0.11 | |
| ≥196 mins/wk | 35 | 79.8 | 11.9 | 35 | 76.7 | 12.2 | −3.9 |
0.01 (0.009d) |
0.01 (0.12e) |
|
| BMI (kg/m2) | Control | 87 | 30.7 | 3.9 | 80 | 30.4 | 4.1 | −0.8 | Ref. | |
| <154 mins/wk | 41 | 31.9 | 3.8 | 29 | 31.8 | 3.8 | −0.5 | 0.38 | Ref. | |
| 154–196 mins/wk | 41 | 30.5 | 3.6 | 41 | 29.8 | 3.6 | −2.4 | 0.06 | 0.08 | |
| ≥196 mins/wk | 35 | 29.3 | 3.3 | 35 | 28.2 | 3.5 | −3.9 |
0.007 (0.004 d) |
0.009 (0.10e) |
|
| Waist (cm) | Control | 87 | 94.8 | 10.2 | 79 | 95.4 | 9.6 | 0.7 | Ref. | |
| <154 mins/wk | 41 | 98.2 | 10.3 | 30 | 98.3 | 8.3 | 0.1 | 0.18 | Ref. | |
| 154–196 mins/wk | 41 | 93.7 | 9.6 | 41 | 91.9 | 9.7 | −1.9 | 0.03 | 0.06 | |
| ≥196 mins/wk | 35 | 92.9 | 9.9 | 35 | 89.4 | 9.9 | −3.8 |
0.0009 (0.0005d) |
0.002 (0.10e) |
|
| Body fat (%) | Control | 87 | 47.3 | 4.4 | 80 | 47.2 | 5.3 | −0.2 | Ref. | |
| <154 mins/wk | 41 | 48.3 | 3.7 | 29 | 47.8 | 3.9 | −0.9 | 0.23 | Ref. | |
| 154–196 mins/wk | 41 | 47.1 | 4.0 | 41 | 45.8 | 4.1 | −2.9 | 0.009 | 0.01 | |
| ≥196 mins/wk | 35 | 46.3 | 4.6 | 35 | 43.4 | 5.8 | −6.3 |
0.0001 (<0.0001d) |
0.0001 (0.003e) |
|
| B. Baseline and 12-month weight, anthropometric, and body composition measures for DIET+EXERCISE group, stratified by adherencea | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Basline | 12 Month | |||||||||
| N | Mean | STD | N | Mean | STD | % | P-Valueb | P-Valuec | ||
| Weight (kg) | Control | 87 | 84.2 | 12.5 | 80 | 83.7 | 12.3 | −0.6 | Ref. | |
| <154 mins/wk | 39 | 83.2 | 11.4 | 31 | 75.2 | 10.8 | −9.6 | <0.0001 | Ref. | |
| 154–196 mins/wk | 36 | 82.8 | 10.2 | 36 | 72.3 | 10.9 | −12.7 | <0.0001 | <0.0001 | |
| ≥196 mins/wk | 42 | 81.7 | 10.8 | 42 | 71.2 | 11.0 | −12.8 |
<0.0001 (<0.0001d) |
<0.0001 (0.01e) |
|
| BMI (kg/m2) | Control | 87 | 30.7 | 3.9 | 80 | 30.4 | 4.1 | −0.8 | Ref. | |
| <154 mins/wk | 39 | 30.9 | 4.4 | 31 | 28.2 | 4.6 | −8.8 | <0.0001 | Ref. | |
| 154–196 mins/wk | 36 | 31.4 | 4.5 | 36 | 27.4 | 4.7 | −12.7 | <0.0001 | <0.0001 | |
| ≥196 mins/wk | 42 | 30.7 | 4.1 | 42 | 26.7 | 4.1 | −12.9 |
<0.0001 (<0.0001d) |
<0.0001 (0.006e) |
|
| Waist (cm) | Control | 87 | 94.8 | 10.2 | 79 | 95.4 | 9.6 | 0.7 | Ref. | |
| <154 mins/wk | 39 | 94.6 | 12.0 | 31 | 88.0 | 11.2 | −7.0 | <0.0001 | Ref. | |
| 154–196 mins/wk | 36 | 93.3 | 9.4 | 36 | 86.0 | 11.0 | −7.7 | <0.0001 | <0.0001 | |
| ≥196 mins/wk | 42 | 93.3 | 8.1 | 42 | 83.5 | 9.8 | −10.5 |
<0.0001 (<0.0001d) |
<0.0001 (0.002e) |
|
| Body fat (%) | Control | 87 | 47.3 | 4.4 | 80 | 47.2 | 5.3 | −0.2 | Ref. | |
| <154 mins/wk | 39 | 47.3 | 4.4 | 31 | 43.1 | 6.8 | −8.9 | <0.0001 | Ref. | |
| 154–196 mins/wk | 36 | 47.8 | 4.6 | 36 | 41.4 | 6.4 | −13.4 | <0.0001 | <0.0001 | |
| ≥196 mins/wk | 42 | 47.2 | 4.5 | 42 | 39.4 | 7.4 | −16.5 |
<0.0001 (<0.0001d) |
<0.0001 (0.0003e) |
|
: Adherence defined by exercise logbook minutes per week, by tertiles
:Testing difference in change from baseline to 12 months in body composition measure compared to Controls
:Testing difference in change from baseline to 12 months in body composition measure compared to low adherence group, excluding Controls
:Testing for a trend in change from baseline to 12 months in body composition measures from Controls through high adherence group
:Testing for a trend in change from baseline to 12 months in body composition measures from low adherence group through high adherence group
DISCUSSION
We found that a year-long lifestyle-change program, incorporating either combined or separate dietary weight loss or moderate-to-vigorous aerobic exercise interventions, produced clinically important and significant reductions in body weight and improvements in body composition among overweight-to-obese postmenopausal women. Our dietary intervention was adapted primarily from the DPP for group-based delivery, while our exercise intervention was based on our previous successful physical activity programs (14, 15). With excellent overall follow-up (>90%) and adherence to the interventions, we observed an 8.5% weight loss among women participating in diet alone, 2.4% weight loss among those participating in exercise alone, and 10.8% weight loss among those in the combined diet + exercise interventions. Furthermore, we observed that the relative reductions in % body fat measured by DXA in each group differed significantly (at a Bonferroni-adjusted level of P<0.05/6 to account for the multiple comparisons) with the following rank order: −12.4% (D+E) > −8.9% (D) > −3.3% (E) > −0.3 (C).
Our combined diet + exercise group effectively put to the test the recommendation of the NIH Obesity Education Initiative Expert Panel, which suggested a caloric deficit of 500–1000 kcal/day using an individualized dietary strategy, along with 45 minutes of moderate-intensity physical activity 5d/wk. Most importantly, we tested this among postmenopausal women, for whom well-designed studies examining the longer-term benefits of lifestyle change are needed (12). When we examined the percentage of participants from our trial who achieved various clinically relevant weight loss targets (<5%, 5 to <10%, and ≥10%), the majority (60%) of women in the diet + exercise intervention achieved ≥10%, while only 42% of those in diet alone, and 3% in exercise alone achieved that target (data not shown). Although adding 5d/wk of exercise requires effort, 20% more women attained the very relevant goal of 10% weight loss when they added exercise to diet modification. It is likely that the cost of exercise is offset by the cost savings due to health benefits arising from increased physical activity (22). Furthermore, following a recent review of studies examining exercise for weight loss the American College of Sports Medicine has now increased its recommended dose of exercise to 150 – 250 min/wk, suggesting that particularly when exercise is combined with moderate caloric restriction these levels are necessary to augment weight loss (23). Similarly, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Physical Activity Guidelines Committee found that optimal exercise levels for weight loss and weight loss maintenance could be up to 60 min/d (24).
Other research has demonstrated comparable degrees of weight loss to those we found with our interventions, though studies vary widely with respect to type of diet and exercise interventions, the inclusion of a control group, their duration, size, and measures of potential greater metabolic relevance such as body fat and lean mass (25–30). The MONET Study also targeted postmenopausal women (N=173), but only examined diet vs. diet + resistance training over 6 months, and found equivalent weight loss between these groups (31). We found that exercise had an important effect of maintaining lean body mass that did not occur with diet alone, and this effect could certainly have important implications as older people are at increased risk for sarcopenia (32). Although it would be difficult to determine the relative impact of different diets and doses of exercise within a single study, it has been shown that most diets are effective regardless of composition as long as participants are adherent (33, 34). We found adherence, whether to the diet or exercise intervention, had a clear dose-dependent impact on weight loss and change in body composition among our population of postmenopausal women.
The degree of adherence to lifestyle change has been clearly shown to positively influence all weight and body composition-related outcomes. We found that greater adherence to our exercise intervention, whether measured using a self-reported variable of minutes exercised per week (in relation to the goal of 225), or more objective measures such as pedometer-recorded steps per week or cardiorespiratory fitness (measured by an exercise tolerance test), was associated with greater weight reduction or improvement in body composition. Greater adherence to the exercise prescription in both the DPP and the Look AHEAD trial also predicted greater rates of achieving weight loss goals (19, 35). The same relationship with adherence and weight loss was found when we examined in-person session attendance for our diet intervention. The level of adherence overall was very high (over 90% attendance for both D and D+E), but we were still able to see greater improvement in body weight and composition outcomes among women in the highest adherence groups. Alhassan et al found that adherence to diet was a key predictor of weight loss in the ‘A to Z’ study of different popular diets, similar findings were also reported by Greenberg et al for a randomized low fat vs. low carbohydrate diet, and again for the DPP and Look AHEAD (19, 35–37). Further research is warranted to improve our understanding of behavioral and biological determinants of adherence, particularly those that could be modifiable.
One limitation of our study was that exercise performed at home was self-reported, in comparison with that directly observed at our facility. Although facility sessions allowed for direct observation of participants’ activity, the applicability of our findings to less-intensive or costly community programs to promote physical activity is not as clear. Still, the significant increases in VO2max observed only among women randomized to the exercise groups (E and D+E) support the internal validity of our data, and that these women did raise their physical activity level. Diet was also self-reported by women in the dietary weight loss arms, and although the FFQ is a valid measure for assessing diet, it has acknowledged limitations. The significant weight loss experienced by women in the diet interventions (nearly 9% and 11% in D and D+E, respectively) again supports that these women did reduce their caloric intake. Another potential factor which may have introduced some additional variability to the weight loss achieved by the study groups is contact time with study staff. Study contact time may impact weight loss (38), and it varied to some degree by intervention group and was the least, by design, for women in the control group.
Strengths of our study included our large study size with sufficient power to examine differences not only in comparison to a no-lifestyle-change control group, but also relative to differences among the elements of lifestyle change (diet and exercise, alone and in combination). We examined the impacts of our interventions on weight, but also on body fat measured by DXA. Body fat does not increase linearly with body weight, and measuring body fat directly may allow for better estimation of health impacts (39). Our study population consisted of postmenopausal women, and our focus on this group was purposeful, given their particularly high rates of weight gain and obesity (1, 40). Furthermore, we experienced excellent adherence to the interventions, and low drop-out rates. Finally, in contrast to numerous published short-term studies examining the impacts of diet and exercise, our study was a full year in duration. Ongoing, long-term follow up of participants is now underway, and factors contributing to the successful maintenance of weight loss will be examined in the future.
In conclusion, we have demonstrated a successful implementation of a group-based modification of the DPP dietary weight loss intervention, along with moderate-vigorous aerobic physical activity, among a population at high risk for ongoing weight gain and the negative metabolic consequences thereof. Although our diet and exercise interventions had beneficial effects on weight loss and body composition when delivered in isolation, the greatest effects were found in the combined intervention group, where 60% of participants achieved ≥10% weight loss at 1 year. Our combined diet + exercise intervention group essentially followed the current recommendations by the NIH Obesity Education Initiative Expert Panel (5), providing the highest level of support for these recommendations: a randomized clinical trial that examined each element singly and in combination vs. a no-lifestyle change control. Yet, despite the now overwhelming evidence for the benefits of lifestyle-induced weight loss, there are still major barriers to implementing these programs, particularly at the primary care level where the most benefit stands to be made (41, 42). Providing group-based nutrition education along with exercise likely outweighs the costs of health consequences that come from untreated obesity, assuming these changes can be sustained over the long-term (43, 44). We are conducting ongoing follow up of our NEW trial participants to examine the behavioral and physiologic predictors of long-term weight loss maintenance in a free-living environment post-trial, with the goal that identification of these factors will help guide the successful design and implementation of obesity treatment programs with the greatest potential to impact public health.
Table 5.
| A. Baseline and 12-month weight, anthropometric, and body composition measures for DIET group, stratified by adherencea | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Baseline | 12 Month | |||||||||
| N | Mean | STD | N | Mean | STD | % | P-Valueb | P-Valuec | ||
| Weight (kg) | CONTROL | 87 | 84.2 | 12.5 | 80 | 83.7 | 12.3 | −0.6 | Ref. | |
| <84.3% | 41 | 87.3 | 12.7 | 28 | 81.8 | 12.0 | −6.3 | 0.006 | Ref. | |
| 84.3%–106% | 37 | 80.6 | 10.8 | 36 | 72.3 | 9.8 | −10.4 | <0.0001 | <0.0001 | |
| ≥106% | 40 | 83.9 | 11.1 | 40 | 72.5 | 12.9 | −13.5 |
<0.0001 (<0.0001d) |
<0.0001 (<0.0001e) |
|
| BMI (kg/m2) | CONTROL | 87 | 30.7 | 3.9 | 80 | 30.4 | 4.1 | −0.8 | Ref. | |
| <84.3% | 41 | 32.4 | 4.1 | 28 | 30.6 | 4.1 | −5.5 | 0.004 | Ref. | |
| 84.3%–106% | 37 | 29.9 | 3.5 | 36 | 26.8 | 3.3 | −10.3 | <0.0001 | <0.0001 | |
| ≥106% | 40 | 30.8 | 3.9 | 40 | 26.6 | 4.5 | −13.6 |
<0.0001 (<0.0001d) |
<0.0001 (<0.0001e) |
|
| Waist (cm) | CONTROL | 87 | 94.8 | 10.2 | 79 | 95.4 | 9.6 | 0.7 | Ref. | |
| <84.3% | 41 | 96.3 | 10.6 | 28 | 93.9 | 9.8 | −2.5 | 0.10 | Ref. | |
| 84.3%–106% | 37 | 92.8 | 11.0 | 35 | 86.9 | 8.8 | −6.4 | <0.0001 | <0.0001 | |
| ≥106% | 40 | 94.5 | 8.9 | 40 | 86.3 | 11.2 | −8.7 |
<0.0001 (<0.0001d) |
<0.0001 (0.0001e) |
|
| Body fat (%) | CONTROL | 87 | 47.3 | 4.4 | 80 | 47.2 | 5.3 | −0.2 | Ref. | |
| <84.3% | 41 | 47.7 | 4.8 | 28 | 45.8 | 4.5 | −3.9 | 0.03 | Ref. | |
| 84.3%–106% | 37 | 46.3 | 3.7 | 36 | 41.8 | 6.3 | −9.8 | <0.0001 | <0.0001 | |
| ≥106% | 40 | 46.9 | 4.4 | 40 | 39.7 | 6.5 | −15.3 |
<0.0001 (<0.0001d) |
<0.0001 (<0.0001e) |
|
| B. Baseline and 12-month weight, anthropometric, and body composition measures for DIET+EXERCISE group, stratified by adherencea | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Baseline | 12 Month | |||||||||
| N | Mean | STD | N | Mean | STD | % | P-Valueb | P-Valuec | ||
| Weight (kg) | CONTROL | 87 | 84.2 | 12.5 | 80 | 83.7 | 12.3 | −0.6 | Ref. | |
| <84.3% | 33 | 84.4 | 10.6 | 25 | 76.3 | 9.5 | −9.6 | <0.0001 | Ref. | |
| 84.3%–106% | 43 | 82.0 | 12.2 | 43 | 72.6 | 13.1 | −11.5 | <0.0001 | <0.0001 | |
| ≥106% | 41 | 81.5 | 9.4 | 41 | 70.6 | 8.7 | −13.4 |
<0.0001 (<0.0001d) |
<0.0001 (0.03e) |
|
| BMI (kg/m2) | CONTROL | 87 | 30.7 | 3.9 | 80 | 30.4 | 4.1 | −0.8 | Ref. | |
| <84.3% | 33 | 31.6 | 4.3 | 25 | 28.9 | 4.3 | −8.5 | <0.0001 | Ref. | |
| 84.3%–106% | 43 | 30.9 | 4.8 | 43 | 27.3 | 5.2 | −11.5 | <0.0001 | <0.0001 | |
| ≥106% | 41 | 30.7 | 3.8 | 41 | 26.6 | 3.4 | −13.4 |
<0.0001 (<0.0001d) |
<0.0001 (0.02e) |
|
| Waist (cm) | CONTROL | 87 | 94.8 | 10.2 | 79 | 95.4 | 9.6 | 0.7 | Ref. | |
| <84.3% | 33 | 97.4 | 10.8 | 25 | 90.1 | 9.9 | −7.5 | <0.0001 | Ref. | |
| 84.3%–106% | 43 | 92.4 | 10.3 | 43 | 85.1 | 11.8 | −7.9 | <0.0001 | <0.0001 | |
| ≥106% | 41 | 92.1 | 7.9 | 41 | 83.4 | 9.1 | −9.4 |
<0.0001 (<0.0001d) |
<0.0001 (0.24e) |
|
| Body fat (%) | CONTROL | 87 | 47.3 | 4.4 | 80 | 47.2 | 5.3 | −0.2 | Ref. | |
| <84.3% | 33 | 47.7 | 4.6 | 25 | 44.4 | 6.1 | −7.0 | 0.0003 | Ref. | |
| 84.3%–106% | 43 | 47.0 | 4.5 | 43 | 40.4 | 7.4 | −14.0 | <0.0001 | <0.0001 | |
| ≥106% | 41 | 47.6 | 4.4 | 41 | 39.8 | 6.6 | −16.4 |
<0.0001 (<0.0001d) |
<0.0001 (0.0001e) |
|
: Adherence defined by percent of in-person nutrition session attendance, by tertiles
:Testing difference in change from baseline to 12 months in body composition measure compared to Controls
:Testing difference in change from baseline to 12 months in body composition measure compared to low adherence group, excluding Controls
:Testing for a trend in change from baseline to 12 months in body composition measures from Controls through high adherence group
:Testing for a trend in change from baseline to 12 months in body composition measures from low adherence group through high adherence group
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This study was funded by National Cancer Institute (NCI) NIH grants R01 CA102504 and U54-CA116847. KFS received support from NIH 5KL2RR025015-03, AK was supported by NCI R25 CA94880. The authors wish to thank the study participants for their time and dedication to the study
Footnotes
DISCLOSURE
Nothing to disclose
REFERENCES
- 1.Flegal KM, Carroll MD, Ogden CL, Curtin LR. Prevalence and trends in obesity among US adults, 1999–2008. JAMA. 303:235–241. doi: 10.1001/jama.2009.2014. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Wadden TA, Butryn ML, Wilson C. Lifestyle modification for the management of obesity. Gastroenterology. 2007;132:2226–2238. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2007.03.051. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Summary: weighing the options--criteria for evaluating weight-management programs. Committee to Develop Criteria for Evaluating the Outcomes of Approaches to Prevent and Treat Obesity Food and Nutrition Board, Institute of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences. J Am Diet Assoc. 1995;95:96–105. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Pi-Sunyer FX. A review of long-term studies evaluating the efficacy of weight loss in ameliorating disorders associated with obesity. Clin Ther. 1996;18:1006–1035. doi: 10.1016/s0149-2918(96)80057-9. discussion 5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Clinical Guidelines on the Identification, Evaluation, and Treatment of Overweight and Obesity in Adults--The Evidence Report. National Institutes of Health. Obes Res. 1998;6(Suppl 2):51S–209S. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Ebrahim S, Smith GD. Lowering blood pressure: a systematic review of sustained effects of non-pharmacological interventions. J Public Health Med. 1998;20:441–448. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.pubmed.a024800. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Eriksson KM, Westborg CJ, Eliasson MC. A randomized trial of lifestyle intervention in primary healthcare for the modification of cardiovascular risk factors. Scand J Public Health. 2006;34:453–461. doi: 10.1080/14034940500489826. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Phelan S, Wadden TA, Berkowitz RI, et al. Impact of weight loss on the metabolic syndrome. Int J Obes (Lond) 2007;31:1442–1448. doi: 10.1038/sj.ijo.0803606. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Knowler WC, Barrett-Connor E, Fowler SE, et al. Reduction in the incidence of type 2 diabetes with lifestyle intervention or metformin. N Engl J Med. 2002;346:393–403. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa012512. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Agriculture U, editor. Washington, D.C: US Government Printing Office; 2005. Dietary guidelines for Americans. [Google Scholar]
- 11.Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; 2009. Healthy Living: Nutrition, Physical Activity and Exercise. ed.; www.cdc.gov/HealthyLiving/ [Google Scholar]
- 12.Witham MD, Avenell A. Interventions to achieve long-term weight loss in obese older people: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Age Ageing. 39:176–184. doi: 10.1093/ageing/afp251. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Wadden TA, West DS, Delahanty L, et al. The Look AHEAD study: a description of the lifestyle intervention and the evidence supporting it. Obesity (Silver Spring) 2006;14:737–752. doi: 10.1038/oby.2006.84. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Irwin ML, Yasui Y, Ulrich CM, et al. Effect of exercise on total and intra-abdominal body fat in postmenopausal women: a randomized controlled trial. Jama. 2003;289:323–330. doi: 10.1001/jama.289.3.323. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.McTiernan A, Sorensen B, Irwin ML, et al. Exercise effect on weight and body fat in men and women. Obesity (Silver Spring) 2007;15:1496–1512. doi: 10.1038/oby.2007.178. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Ainsworth BE, Haskell WL, Whitt MC, et al. Compendium of physical activities: an update of activity codes and MET intensities. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2000;32:S498–S504. doi: 10.1097/00005768-200009001-00009. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Patterson RE, Kristal AR, Tinker LF, Carter RA, Bolton MP, Agurs-Collins T. Measurement characteristics of the Women's Health Initiative food frequency questionnaire. Ann Epidemiol. 1999;9:178–187. doi: 10.1016/s1047-2797(98)00055-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.Taylor HL, Jacobs DR, Jr, Schucker B, Knudsen J, Leon AS, Debacker G. A questionnaire for the assessment of leisure time physical activities. J Chronic Dis. 1978;31:741–755. doi: 10.1016/0021-9681(78)90058-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Wadden TA, West DS, Neiberg RH, et al. One-year weight losses in the Look AHEAD study: factors associated with success. Obesity (Silver Spring) 2009;17:713–722. doi: 10.1038/oby.2008.637. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Schauer JE, Hanson P. Usefulness of a branching treadmill protocol for evaluation of cardiac functional capacity. Am J Cardiol. 1987;60:1373–1377. doi: 10.1016/0002-9149(87)90622-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.Pate R, Blair S, Durstine J. Guidelines for exercise testing and prescription. Philadelphia, PA: Lea & Febinger; 1991. pp. 70–72. [Google Scholar]
- 22.Roux L, Pratt M, Tengs TO, et al. Cost effectiveness of community-based physical activity interventions. Am J Prev Med. 2008;35:578–588. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2008.06.040. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23.Donnelly JE, Blair SN, Jakicic JM, Manore MM, Rankin JW, Smith BK. American College of Sports Medicine Position Stand. Appropriate physical activity intervention strategies for weight loss and prevention of weight regain for adults. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2009;41:459–471. doi: 10.1249/MSS.0b013e3181949333. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24.Physical Activity Guidelines Advisory Committee report, 2008. To the Secretary of Health and Human Services. Part A: executive summary. Nutr Rev. 2009;67:114–120. doi: 10.1111/j.1753-4887.2008.00136.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25.Svendsen OL, Hassager C, Christiansen C. Effect of an energy-restrictive diet, with or without exercise, on lean tissue mass, resting metabolic rate, cardiovascular risk factors, and bone in overweight postmenopausal women. Am J Med. 1993;95:131–140. doi: 10.1016/0002-9343(93)90253-l. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26.Stefanick ML, Mackey S, Sheehan M, Ellsworth N, Haskell WL, Wood PD. Effects of diet and exercise in men and postmenopausal women with low levels of HDL cholesterol and high levels of LDL cholesterol. N Engl J Med. 1998;339:12–20. doi: 10.1056/NEJM199807023390103. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27.Andersen RE, Wadden TA, Bartlett SJ, Zemel B, Verde TJ, Franckowiak SC. Effects of lifestyle activity vs structured aerobic exercise in obese women: a randomized trial. JAMA. 1999;281:335–340. doi: 10.1001/jama.281.4.335. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28.Brochu M, Malita MF, Messier V, et al. Resistance training does not contribute to improving the metabolic profile after a 6-month weight loss program in overweight and obese postmenopausal women. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2009;94:3226–3233. doi: 10.1210/jc.2008-2706. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29.Caudwell P, Hopkins M, King NA, Stubbs RJ, Blundell JE. Exercise alone is not enough: weight loss also needs a healthy (Mediterranean) diet? Public Health Nutr. 2009;12:1663–1666. doi: 10.1017/S1368980009990528. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 30.Hankey CR. Session 3 (Joint with the British Dietetic Association): Management of obesity: Weight-loss interventions in the treatment of obesity. Proc Nutr Soc. 69:34–38. doi: 10.1017/S0029665109991844. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31.Messier V, Rabasa-Lhoret R, Doucet E, et al. Effects of the addition of a resistance training programme to a caloric restriction weight loss intervention on psychosocial factors in overweight and obese post-menopausal women: a Montreal Ottawa New Emerging Team study. J Sports Sci. 28:83–92. doi: 10.1080/02640410903390105. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 32.Weinheimer EM, Sands LP, Campbell WW. A systematic review of the separate and combined effects of energy restriction and exercise on fat-free mass in middle-aged and older adults: implications for sarcopenic obesity. Nutr Rev. 68:375–388. doi: 10.1111/j.1753-4887.2010.00298.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 33.Dansinger ML, Gleason JA, Griffith JL, Selker HP, Schaefer EJ. Comparison of the Atkins, Ornish, Weight Watchers, and Zone diets for weight loss and heart disease risk reduction: a randomized trial. Jama. 2005;293:43–53. doi: 10.1001/jama.293.1.43. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 34.Shai I, Schwarzfuchs D, Henkin Y, et al. Weight loss with a low-carbohydrate, Mediterranean, or low-fat diet. N Engl J Med. 2008;359:229–241. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa0708681. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 35.Wing RR, Hamman RF, Bray GA, et al. Achieving weight and activity goals among diabetes prevention program lifestyle participants. Obes Res. 2004;12:1426–1434. doi: 10.1038/oby.2004.179. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 36.Alhassan S, Kim S, Bersamin A, King AC, Gardner CD. Dietary adherence and weight loss success among overweight women: results from the A TO Z weight loss study. Int J Obes (Lond) 2008;32:985–991. doi: 10.1038/ijo.2008.8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 37.Greenberg I, Stampfer MJ, Schwarzfuchs D, Shai I. Adherence and success in long-term weight loss diets: the dietary intervention randomized controlled trial (DIRECT) J Am Coll Nutr. 2009;28:159–168. doi: 10.1080/07315724.2009.10719767. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 38.Turk MW, Yang K, Hravnak M, Sereika SM, Ewing LJ, Burke LE. Randomized clinical trials of weight loss maintenance: a review. J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2009;24:58–80. doi: 10.1097/01.JCN.0000317471.58048.32. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 39.Flegal KM, Shepherd JA, Looker AC, et al. Comparisons of percentage body fat, body mass index, waist circumference, and waist-stature ratio in adults. Am J Clin Nutr. 2009;89:500–508. doi: 10.3945/ajcn.2008.26847. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 40.Fine JT, Colditz GA, Coakley EH, et al. A prospective study of weight change and health-related quality of life in women. JAMA. 1999;282:2136–2142. doi: 10.1001/jama.282.22.2136. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 41.Bish CL, Blanck HM, Serdula MK, Marcus M, Kohl HW, 3rd, Khan LK. Diet and physical activity behaviors among Americans trying to lose weight: 2000 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System. Obes Res. 2005;13:596–607. doi: 10.1038/oby.2005.64. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 42.Shiffman S, Sweeney CT, Pillitteri JL, Sembower MA, Harkins AM, Wadden TA. Weight management advice: what do doctors recommend to their patients? Prev Med. 2009;49:482–486. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2009.09.015. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 43.Avenell A, Broom J, Brown TJ, et al. Systematic review of the long-term effects and economic consequences of treatments for obesity and implications for health improvement. Health Technol Assess. 2004;8:iii–iv. 1–182. doi: 10.3310/hta8210. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 44.Ackermann RT, Edelstein SL, Narayan KM, et al. Changes in health state utilities with changes in body mass in the Diabetes Prevention Program. Obesity (Silver Spring) 2009;17:2176–2181. doi: 10.1038/oby.2009.114. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]