Impact of weight loss on cancer-related proteins in serum: results from a cluster randomised controlled trial of individuals with type 2 diabetes.

BACKGROUND: Type 2 diabetes is associated with higher risk of several cancer types. However, the biological intermediates driving this relationship are not fully understood. As novel interventions for treating and managing type 2 diabetes become increasingly available, whether they also disrupt the pathways leading to increased cancer risk is currently unknown. We investigated the effect of a type 2 diabetes intervention, in the form of intentional weight loss, on circulating proteins associated with cancer risk to gain insight into potential mechanisms linking type 2 diabetes and adiposity with cancer development. METHODS: Fasting serum samples from participants with diabetes enrolled in the Diabetes Remission Clinical Trial (DiRECT) receiving the Counterweight-Plus weight-loss programme (intervention, N = 117, mean weight-loss 10 kg, 46% diabetes remission) or best-practice care by guidelines (control, N = 143, mean weight-loss 1 kg, 4% diabetes remission) were subject to proteomic analysis using the Olink Oncology-II platform (48% of participants were female; 52% male). To identify proteins which may be altered by the weight-loss intervention, the difference in protein levels between groups at baseline and 1 year was examined using linear regression. Mendelian randomization (MR) was performed to extend these results to evaluate cancer risk and elucidate possible biological mechanisms linking type 2 diabetes and cancer development. MR analyses were conducted using independent datasets, including large cancer meta-analyses, UK Biobank, and FinnGen, to estimate potential causal relationships between proteins modified during intentional weight loss and the risk of colorectal, breast, endometrial, gallbladder, liver, and pancreatic cancers. FINDINGS: Nine proteins were modified by the intervention: glycoprotein Nmb; furin; Wnt inhibitory factor 1; toll-like receptor 3; pancreatic prohormone; erb-b2 receptor tyrosine kinase 2; hepatocyte growth factor; endothelial cell specific molecule 1 and Ret proto-oncogene (Holm corrected P-value <0.05). Mendelian randomization analyses indicated a causal relationship between predicted circulating furin and glycoprotein Nmb on breast cancer risk (odds ratio (OR) = 0.81, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.67-0.99, P-value = 0.03; and OR = 0.88, 95% CI = 0.78-0.99, P-value = 0.04 respectively), though these results were not supported in sensitivity analyses examining violations of MR assumptions. INTERPRETATION: Intentional weight loss among individuals with recently diagnosed diabetes may modify levels of cancer-related proteins in serum. Further evaluation of the proteins identified in this analysis could reveal molecular pathways that mediate the effect of adiposity and type 2 diabetes on cancer risk. FUNDING: The main sources of funding for this work were Diabetes UK, Cancer Research UK, World Cancer Research Fund, and Wellcome.

The Diabetes Remission Clinical Trial (DiRECT): protocol for a cluster randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Despite improving evidence-based practice following clinical guidelines to optimise drug therapy, Type 2 diabetes (T2DM) still exerts a devastating toll from vascular complications and premature death. Biochemical remission of T2DM has been demonstrated with weight loss around 15kg following bariatric surgery and in several small studies of non-surgical energy-restriction treatments. The non-surgical Counterweight-Plus programme, running in Primary Care where obesity and T2DM are routinely managed, produces >15 kg weight loss in 33% of all enrolled patients. The Diabetes UK-funded Counterpoint study suggested that this should be sufficient to reverse T2DM by removing ectopic fat in liver and pancreas, restoring first-phase insulin secretion. The Diabetes Remission Clinical Trial (DiRECT) was designed to determine whether a structured, intensive, weight management programme, delivered in a routine Primary Care setting, is a viable treatment for achieving durable normoglycaemia. Other aims are to understand the mechanistic basis of remission and to identify psychological predictors of response. METHODS/DESIGN: Cluster-randomised design with GP practice as the unit of randomisation: 280 participants from around 30 practices in Scotland and England will be allocated either to continue usual guideline-based care or to add the Counterweight-Plus weight management programme, which includes primary care nurse or dietitian delivery of 12-20weeks low calorie diet replacement, food reintroduction, and long-term weight loss maintenance. Main inclusion criteria: men and women aged 20-65 years, all ethnicities, T2DM 0-6years duration, BMI 27-45 kg/m(2). Tyneside participants will undergo Magnetic Resonance (MR) studies of pancreatic and hepatic fat, and metabolic studies to determine mechanisms underlying T2DM remission. Co-primary endpoints: weight reduction ≥ 15 kg and HbA1c <48 mmol/mol at one year. Further follow-up at 2 years. DISCUSSION: This study will establish whether a structured weight management programme, delivered in Primary Care by practice nurses or dietitians, is a viable treatment to achieve T2DM remission. Results, available from 2018 onwards, will inform future service strategy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN03267836 . Date of Registration 20/12/2013.

Engaging patients, clinicians and health funders in weight management: the Counterweight Programme.

BACKGROUND: The Counterweight Programme provides an evidence based and effective approach for weight management in routine primary care. Uptake of the programme has been variable for practices and patients. Aim. To explore key barriers and facilitators of practice and patient engagement in the Counterweight Programme and to describe key strategies used to address barriers in the wider implementation of this weight management programme in UK primary care. METHODS: All seven weight management advisers participated in a focus group. In-depth interviews were conducted with purposeful samples of GPs (n = 7) and practice nurses (n = 15) from 11 practices out of the 65 participating in the programme. A total of 37 patients participated through a mixture of in-depth interviews (n = 18) and three focus groups. Interviews and focus groups were analysed for key themes that emerged. RESULTS: Engagement of practice staff was influenced by clinicians' beliefs and attitudes, factors relating to the way the programme was initiated and implemented, the programme content and organizational/contextual factors. Patient engagement was influenced by practice endorsement of the programme, clear understanding of programme goals, structured proactive follow-up and perception of positive outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Having a clear understanding of programme goals and expectations, enhancing self-efficacy in weight management and providing proactive follow-up is important for engaging both practices and patients. The widespread integration of weight management programmes into routine primary care is likely to require supportive public policy.