OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate trends in the use of obesogenic medications among adults. METHODS: Cross-sectional data on adults aged ≥20 years are from the 1999 to 2018 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (n = 52,340). Obesogenic medications were defined according to the 2015 Endocrine Society guidelines on the pharmacological management of obesity. Weight status was categorized according to BMI. Trends in prior 30-day use were evaluated. RESULTS: In NHANES 2017-2018, 20.3% of US adults used an obesogenic medication. Beta-blockers (9.8%) and antidiabetics (5.7%) were the most common; antipsychotics (1.0%) were the least common. Most common indications were disorders of glucose metabolism, hypertension, neuralgia or neuritis, heart disease, and musculoskeletal pain and/or inflammation. From 1999 to 2018, the proportional use of obesogenic medications increased for anticonvulsants (34.4% to 55.0%) but decreased for antidepressants (32.1% to 18.8%), antidiabetics (82.9% to 52.5%), and beta-blockers (83.9% to 80.7%). The proportional use of obesogenic medications was not associated with weight status, except for antipsychotics. CONCLUSIONS: Use of obesogenic medications was common. Differences in the proportional use of obesogenic medication may reflect changing availability of obesogenic versus nonobesogenic medications over time. The decision to prescribe a nonobesogenic alternative, if one exists, is guided by weighing the risks and benefits of available treatments.

OBJECTIVE: The Action for Health in Diabetes (Look AHEAD) study previously reported that intensive lifestyle intervention (ILI) reduced incident depressive symptoms and improved health-related quality of life (HRQOL) over nearly 10 years of intervention compared with a control group (the diabetes support and education group [DSE]) in participants with type 2 diabetes and overweight or obesity. The present study compared incident depressive symptoms and changes in HRQOL in these groups for an additional 6 years following termination of the ILI in September 2012. METHODS: A total of 1,945 ILI participants and 1,900 DSE participants completed at least one of four planned postintervention assessments at which weight, mood (via the Patient Health Questionnaire-9), antidepressant medication use, and HRQOL (via the Medical Outcomes Scale, Short Form-36) were measured. RESULTS: ILI participants and DSE participants lost 3.1 (0.3) and 3.8 (0.3) kg [represented as mean (SE); p = 0.10], respectively, during the 6-year postintervention follow-up. No significant differences were observed between groups during this time in incident mild or greater symptoms of depression, antidepressant medication use, or in changes on the physical component summary or mental component summary scores of the Short Form-36. In both groups, mental component summary scores were higher than physical component summary scores. CONCLUSIONS: Prior participation in the ILI, compared with the DSE group, did not appear to improve subsequent mood or HRQOL during 6 years of postintervention follow-up.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the cost-effectiveness (CE) of an intensive lifestyle intervention (ILI) compared with standard diabetes support and education (DSE) in adults with overweight/obesity and type 2 diabetes, as implemented in the Action for Health in Diabetes study. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Data were from 4,827 participants during their first 9 years of the study participation from 2001 to 2012. Information on Health Utilities Index Mark 2 (HUI-2) and HUI-3, Short-Form 6D (SF-6D), and Feeling Thermometer (FT), cost of delivering the interventions, and health expenditures was collected during the study. CE was measured by incremental CE ratios (ICERs) in costs per quality-adjusted life year (QALY). Future costs and QALYs were discounted at 3% annually. Costs were in 2012 U.S. dollars. RESULTS: Over the 9 years studied, the mean cumulative intervention costs and mean cumulative health care expenditures were $11,275 and $64,453 per person for ILI and $887 and $68,174 for DSE. Thus, ILI cost $6,666 more per person than DSE. Additional QALYs gained by ILI were not statistically significant measured by the HUIs and were 0.07 and 0.15, respectively, measured by SF-6D and FT. The ICERs ranged from no health benefit with a higher cost based on HUIs to $96,458/QALY and $43,169/QALY, respectively, based on SF-6D and FT. CONCLUSIONS: Whether ILI was cost-effective over the 9-year period is unclear because different health utility measures led to different conclusions.

OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated weight changes after cessation of the 10-year intensive lifestyle intervention (ILI) in the Look AHEAD (Action for Health in Diabetes) study. It was hypothesized that ILI participants would be more likely to gain weight during the 2-year observational period following termination of weight-loss-maintenance counseling than would participants in the diabetes support and education (DSE) control group. METHODS: Look AHEAD was a randomized controlled trial that compared the effects of ILI and DSE on cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in participants with overweight/obesity and type 2 diabetes. Look AHEAD was converted to an observational study in September 2012. RESULTS: Two years after the end of the intervention (EOI), ILI and DSE participants lost a mean (SE) of 1.2 (0.2) kg and 1.8 (0.2) kg, respectively (P = 0.003). In addition, 31% of ILI and 23.9% of DSE participants gained >/= 2% (P < 0.001) of EOI weight, whereas 36.3% and 45.9% of the respective groups lost >/= 2% of EOI weight (P = 0.001). Two years after the EOI, ILI participants reported greater use of weight-control behaviors than DSE participants. CONCLUSIONS: Both groups lost weight during the 2-year follow-up period, but more ILI than DSE participants gained >/= 2% of EOI weight. Further understanding is needed of factors that affected long-term weight change in both groups.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the effects of an intensive lifestyle intervention (ILI) on cardiovascular disease (CVD), the Action for Health in Diabetes (Look AHEAD) trial randomized 5,145 participants with type 2 diabetes and overweight/obesity to a ILI or diabetes support and education. Although the primary outcome did not differ between the groups, there was suggestive evidence of heterogeneity for prespecified baseline CVD history subgroups (interaction P = 0.063). Event rates were higher in the ILI group among those with a CVD history (hazard ratio 1.13 [95% CI: 0.90-1.41]) and lower among those without CVD (hazard ratio 0.86 [95% CI: 0.72-1.02]). METHODS: This study conducted post hoc analyses of the rates of the primary composite outcome and components, adjudicated cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, and hospitalization for angina, as well as three secondary composite cardiovascular outcomes. RESULTS: Interaction P values for the primary and two secondary composites were similar (0.060-0.064). Of components, the interaction was significant for nonfatal MI (P = 0.035). This interaction was not due to confounding by baseline variables, different intervention responses for weight loss and physical fitness, or hypoglycemic events. In those with a CVD history, statin use was high and similar by group. In those without a CVD history, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels were higher (P = 0.003) and statin use was lower (P </= 0.001) in the ILI group. CONCLUSIONS: Intervention response heterogeneity was significant for nonfatal MI. Response heterogeneity may need consideration in a CVD-outcome trial design.

Background: Lifestyle interventions have been shown to improve physical function over the short term; however, whether these benefits are sustainable is unknown. The long-term effects of an intensive lifestyle intervention (ILI) on physical function were assessed using a randomized post-test design in the Look AHEAD trial. Methods: Overweight and obese (body mass index >/= 25 kg/m2) middle-aged and older adults (aged 45-76 years at enrollment) with type 2 diabetes enrolled in Look AHEAD, a trial evaluating an ILI designed to achieve weight loss through caloric restriction and increased physical activity compared to diabetes support and education (DSE), underwent standardized assessments of performance-based physical function including a 4- and 400-m walk, lower extremity physical performance (expanded Short Physical Performance Battery, SPPBexp), and grip strength approximately 11 years postrandomization and 1.5 years after the intervention was stopped (n = 3,783). Results: Individuals randomized to ILI had lower odds of slow gait speed (<0.8 m/s) compared to those randomized to DSE (adjusted OR [95% CI]: 0.84 [0.71 to 0.99]). Individuals randomized to ILI also had faster gait speed over 4- and 400-m (adjusted mean difference [95% CI]: 0.019 [0.007 to 0.031] m/s, p = .002, and 0.023 [0.012 to 0.034] m/sec, p < .0001, respectively) and higher SPPBexp scores (0.037 [0.011 to 0.063], p = .005) compared to those randomized to DSE. The intervention effect was slightly larger for SPPBexp scores among older versus younger participants (0.081 [0.038 to 0.124] vs 0.013 [-0.021 to 0.047], p = .01). Conclusions: An intensive lifestyle intervention has modest but significant long-term benefits on physical function in overweight and obese middle-aged and older adults with type 2 diabetes. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00017953.

Intentional weight loss is an important treatment option for overweight persons with type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM), but the effects on long term fracture risk are not known. The purpose of this Look AHEAD analysis was to evaluate whether long term intentional weight loss would increase fracture risk in overweight or obese persons with DM. Look AHEAD is a multicenter, randomized clinical trial. Recruitment began in August 2001 and follow-up continued for a median of 11.3 years at 16 academic centers. 5145 persons aged 45 - 76 with DM were randomized to either an intensive lifestyle intervention (ILI) with reduced calorie consumption and increased physical activity designed to achieve and maintain ≥7% weight loss or to diabetes support and education intervention (DSE). Incident fractures were ascertained every 6 months by self-report and confirmed with central adjudication of medical records.The baseline mean age of participants was 59 years, 60% were women, 63% were Caucasian, and the mean BMI was 36 kg/m2 . Weight loss over the intervention period (median 9.6 years) was 6.0% in ILI and 3.5% in DSE. 731 participants had a confirmed incident fracture (358 in DSE v. 373 in ILI). There were no statistically significant differences in incident total or hip fracture rates between the ILI and DSE groups. However, compared to the DSE group, the ILI group had a statistically significant 39% increased risk of a frailty fracture (HR = 1.39, 95% CI 1.02, 1.89).An intensive lifestyle intervention resulting in long term weight loss in overweight / obese adults with DM was not associated with an overall increased risk of incident fracture but may be associated with an increased risk of frailty fracture. When intentional weight loss is planned, consideration of bone preservation and fracture prevention is warranted. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the relative impact of an intensive lifestyle intervention (ILI) on use and costs of health care within the Look AHEAD trial. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A total of 5,121 overweight or obese adults with type 2 diabetes were randomly assigned to an ILI that promoted weight loss or to a comparison condition of diabetes support and education (DSE). Use and costs of health-care services were recorded across an average of 10 years. RESULTS: ILI led to reductions in annual hospitalizations (11%, P = 0.004), hospital days (15%, P = 0.01), and number of medications (6%, P < 0.001), resulting in cost savings for hospitalization (10%, P = 0.04) and medication (7%, P < 0.001). ILI produced a mean relative per-person 10-year cost savings of $5,280 (95% CI 3,385-7,175); however, these were not evident among individuals with a history of cardiovascular disease. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with DSE over 10 years, ILI participants had fewer hospitalizations, fewer medications, and lower health-care costs.

BACKGROUND: Weight loss is recommended for overweight or obese patients with type 2 diabetes on the basis of short-term studies, but long-term effects on cardiovascular disease remain unknown. We examined whether an intensive lifestyle intervention for weight loss would decrease cardiovascular morbidity and mortality among such patients. METHODS: In 16 study centers in the United States, we randomly assigned 5145 overweight or obese patients with type 2 diabetes to participate in an intensive lifestyle intervention that promoted weight loss through decreased caloric intake and increased physical activity (intervention group) or to receive diabetes support and education (control group). The primary outcome was a composite of death from cardiovascular causes, nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, or hospitalization for angina during a maximum follow-up of 13.5 years. RESULTS: The trial was stopped early on the basis of a futility analysis when the median follow-up was 9.6 years. Weight loss was greater in the intervention group than in the control group throughout the study (8.6% vs. 0.7% at 1 year; 6.0% vs. 3.5% at study end). The intensive lifestyle intervention also produced greater reductions in glycated hemoglobin and greater initial improvements in fitness and all cardiovascular risk factors, except for low-density-lipoprotein cholesterol levels. The primary outcome occurred in 403 patients in the intervention group and in 418 in the control group (1.83 and 1.92 events per 100 person-years, respectively; hazard ratio in the intervention group, 0.95; 95% confidence interval, 0.83 to 1.09; P=0.51). CONCLUSIONS: An intensive lifestyle intervention focusing on weight loss did not reduce the rate of cardiovascular events in overweight or obese adults with type 2 diabetes. (Funded by the National Institutes of Health and others; Look AHEAD ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00017953.).

BACKGROUND: Few national data exist to assess primary care physicians' (PCPs') clinical practices with regard to childhood obesity. PURPOSE: To survey pediatricians and family practice physicians regarding their assessment, counseling, and management of diet, physical activity, and weight status among pediatric patients in the primary care setting. METHODS: A nationally representative cross-sectional survey of pediatricians and family practice physicians sampled from the American Medical Association (AMA) Masterfile was conducted in 2008 and analyzed in 2010. Outcomes included physicians' self-reported practice behaviors regarding assessments of pediatric patients' weight status, counseling of diet and physical activity, and referrals and follow-ups. RESULTS: Response rate excluding physicians listed as "no-contact" by the AMA was 73.7% among pediatricians and 66.9% among family physicians. Less than 50% of all PCPs assessed BMI percentiles regularly in children. Eighteen percent of all PCPs reported referring children for further evaluation or management. Fifty-eight percent of all PCPs reported never, rarely, or only sometimes tracking patients over time concerning weight or weight-related behaviors. Pediatricians were more likely than family physicians to assess weight status and provide behavioral counseling (p's<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Active PCP participation in assessing or managing childhood obesity in the primary care setting appears low relative to the frequency of the problem in the U.S. Interventions to reduce the barriers to physician engagement in the assessment and management of healthy lifestyles are needed to prevent and control childhood obesity.

BACKGROUND: Lifestyle interventions produce shortterm improvements in glycemia and cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factors in individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus, but no long-term data are available. We examined the effects of lifestyle intervention on changes in weight, fitness, and CVD risk factors during a 4-year study. METHODS: The Look AHEAD (Action for Health in Diabetes) trial is a multicenter randomized clinical trial comparing the effects of an intensive lifestyle intervention (ILI) and diabetes support and education (DSE; the control group) on the incidence of major CVD events in 5145 overweight or obese individuals (59.5% female; mean age, 58.7 years) with type 2 diabetes mellitus. More than 93% of participants provided outcomes data at each annual assessment. RESULTS: Averaged across 4 years, ILI participants had a greater percentage of weight loss than DSE participants (-6.15% vs -0.88%; P < .001) and greater improvements in treadmill fitness (12.74% vs 1.96%; P < .001), hemoglobin A1c level (-0.36% vs -0.09%; P < .001), systolic (-5.33 vs -2.97 mm Hg; P < .001) and diastolic (-2.92 vs -2.48 mm Hg; P=.01) blood pressure, and levels of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (3.67 vs 1.97 mg/dL; P < .001) and triglycerides (-25.56 vs -19.75 mg/dL; P < .001). Reductions in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels were greater in DSE than ILI participants (-11.27 vs -12.84 mg/dL; P=.009) owing to greater use of medications to lower lipid levels in the DSE group. At 4 years, ILI participants maintained greater improvements than DSE participants in weight, fitness, hemoglobin A1c levels, systolic blood pressure, and highdensity lipoprotein cholesterol levels. CONCLUSIONS: Intensive lifestyle intervention can produce sustained weight loss and improvements in fitness, glycemic control, and CVD risk factors in individuals with type 2 diabetes. Whether these differences in risk factors translate to reduction in CVD events will ultimately be addressed by the Look AHEAD trial. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov IDENTIFIER: NCT00017953 2010 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.