November 14th, 2011
No comments »
The New England Journal of Medicine has just published a study by Thomas Wadden, et al., Three interventions were compared. One group received usual care consisting of quarterly visits with a primary care provider that included education about weight management. The second group received brief lifestyle counseling, consisting of quarterly visits with the primary care provider plus brief monthly session with lifestyle coaches who provided instruction about behavioral weight control. The third group received the same care as the second group but with the addition of meal replacements or weight-loss medications (orlistat or sibutramine before it was taken off the market).
The percentage of participants who lost more than 5% of their initial weight was 21.5% in the usual-care group, 26% in the brief-lifestyle counseling group and 34.9% in the enhanced-brief counseling group. The change in weight loss at 24 months was -1.7 kg in usual-care group, -2.9kg in the brief-lifestyle group, and -4.6kg in the enhanced brief-lifestyle group. The pattern shows significant weight loss at 6 and 12 months with subsequent modest regain. Participants who received enhanced brief-lifestyle intervention saw significant reductions in cardiovascular risk factors. SeeA Two-Year Randomized Trial of Obesity Treatment in Primary Care Practice — NEJM
In a second article, Lawrence J. Appel and colleagues compared in-person support with remote care delivered without face-to-face contact between participants and weight loss coaches. The percentage of participants who lost more than 5% of their initial weight was 18.8% in the control group, 38.2% in the remote support-only group and 41.4% in the in-person group. The change in weight loss was -0.8kg in the control group, -4.6kg in the remote-only group and -5.1kg in the in-person group, corresponding to -1.1%, -5% and -5.2%. Importantly, most participants sustained the weight loss at 24 months. Comparative Effectiveness of Weight-Loss Interventions in Clinical Practice — NEJM
Taken both together and with earlier research on primary care, the picture is that intervention by primary care providers can convey the seriousness of weight loss as well as provide patients with some real weight loss, albeit modest compared with surgery and some of the medications under review by the Food and Drug Administration but more than broad prescriptions to lose weight. Intensity matters as does the use of several, mutually-supporting strategies.
November 8th, 2011
No comments »
David Flum’s Bariatric Obesity Outcome Modeling Collaborative at the University of Washington School of Medicine (funded by the Department of Defense and the National Institute of Diabetes, Digestive Diseases and Kidney) recently published a study on the use, safety and cost of bariatric surgery before and after Medicare’s National Coverage Decision (NCD) expanding bariatric surgery in 2006.

The Medicare NCD expanded Medicare coverage of new surgeries, particularly laparoscopic gastric banding and laparoscopic gastric bypass when done in centers of excellence approved by either the American College of Surgeons (ACS) or the American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery (ASMBS). The standards of the two societies differed somewhat but both certified both hospitals and surgeons and both were based on having large volumes of cases. In addition, the ASMBS system, implemented by the Surgical Review Corporation, requires participation in a robust database, called BOLD, and a five-year follow-up of patients.
The number of surgeries dropped after the NCD but soon regained their pre-NCD levels. There was a significant shift to the laparoscopic gastric band after the NCD was issued. The mean age and mean comorbidity index increased slightly. The study found that outcomes improved after the NCD. The 90-day mortality rate dropped from 1.5% to 0.7% after the NCD. There was a significant reduction in the number of sites and surgeons performing the surgery. The improvement in patient safety seems mainly due to the shift to the laparoscopic gastric band rather than centers of excellence themselves. Overall, costs appear to have gone down across all procedures. The authors note that the durability of weight loss due to surgery is still an issue as the bands are showing a disturbing rate of removal in several European studies. The Use, Safety and Cost of Bariatric Surgery Befor… [Ann Surg. 2011] – PubMed – NCBI
The paper brought me back to a particular point in time in my professional career which I would like to share with you. In the early years of the new century, there was an intersection of two threads in obesity and public policy. On the one hand, bariatric surgery was reeling from bad publicity of terrible stories of botched operations. Insurers were dropping coverage of bariatric surgery all across the country. Malpractice insurers were upping their rates. The surgeons were in a crisis.
On a totally separate track, as director of the American Obesity Association, I had persuaded the Internal Revenue Service to recognize obesity as a disease in April of 2002. Subsequently, I took the same arguments to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) which had a policy statement that obesity was not a disease. On July 15, 2004, Medicare withdrew that statement, recognizing obesity as a disease. Soon thereafter, I met with Steve Phurrough, the head of the CMS center for coverage and analysis, and asked him what was CMS going to do next. “Bariatric Surgery,” he replied. CMS scheduled a Medicare Coverage Advisory Committee (MCAC) hearing for November 4, 2004 to look at bariatric surgery.
I contacted ASMBS (or ASBS as it was then called) as well as five companies involved in bariatric surgery. A couple of the companies did not have products on the market but were in developmental phase. I felt it was important they were at the table. I read them all the riot act. If everyone went off on their own, bariatric surgery was not going to fare well at the MCAC hearing. If we focused on what was best for the patients, who the patients were and what they needed, we would do ok. I want to say it was an easy sell. Some got it, some did not.
So the two threads crossed: crisis for bariatric surgery and an emerging consensus to treat obesity as a disease. At this point, the presentation for bariatric surgery at the MCAC was in the hands of a few veterans: Walter Poires, Henry Buchwald, Harvey Sugerman, and Neil Hutcher, stand out in my mind. As they were putting the presentation to MCAC together, they were also working within ASBS to create the Centers of Excellence movement. The stakes of such a move should not be understated. Such an effort means saying to loyal, dues-paying, members that their colleagues felt they are not good enough to keep doing what they have been doing for years. The emotional and professional price could be high. Participating in the MCAC hearing were the next generation of leaders, Bruce Wolf, Robin Blackstone, Christopher Still, to name a few.
At the end of the day, CMS expanded coverage for bariatric surgery, much to the dismay of some. ASBS created its centers of excellence of program, implemented by the Surgical Review Corporation. (I went on its board of directors for a few years.)
Now, we see from Flum’s report what we had hoped for: patients have access to a safer, cheaper procedure. I am not aware of any medical specialty which has overcome its quality problems so aggressively in such a short period of time. When people talk about how hard it is to achieve change, I think of what ASMBS did in a few short years.
Subsequent research may challenge this but subsequent technological improvements may enhance surgery as well. It isn’t always that one gets to see whether an earlier effort has played out as you hoped. As my son would say, “Sweet.”
November 2nd, 2011
No comments »
A new study of exenatide, a drug for type 2 diabetes which can also cause weight loss, has shown a rapid anti-inflammatory effect, independent of weight loss, in a study of 24 obese diabetics. Participants also saw a drop in HbA1c levels from 8.6% to 7.4% The anti-inflammatory effect may reduce the risk of atherosclerosis in patients with type 2 diabetes.Exenatide Exerts a Potent Antiinflam… [J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2011] – PubMed – NCBI Exenatide has previously been shown to cause about a 6.6 kg (14lb) weight loss combined with a lifestyle modification program. Effects of exenatide combined with lifestyle modifi… [Am J Med. 2010] – PubMed – NCBI
October 28th, 2011
No comments »
Antidepressant usage is the topic of a recent data brief from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The paper shows that 11% of Americans over 12 years of age take antidepressants. More than 60% taking antidepressants do so for 2 years or longer with 14% taking the medication for 10 years or more. Less than 1/3 taking one antidepressant has been seen by a mental health professional in the past year. Usage is heaviest among white women. Products – Data Briefs – Number 76 – October 2011
Why is this important for obesity? Because most antidepressants cause weight gain. According to a recent meta-analysis, amitriptyline, mirtazapine and paroxetine were associated with weight gain. Weight loss was associated with fluoxetine and bupropion. Antidepressants and body weight: a compreh… [J Clin Psychiatry. 2010] – PubMed – NCBI
On average, there is a 1-3kg average weight gain on antidepressants. Weight gain, obesity, and psychotropic prescribing. [J Obes. 2011] – PubMed – NCBI. Thus, the continuing high usage of the antidepressants which cause weight gain and the long duration of weight with low medical oversight indicates a point of intervention to prevent further health problems in the population taking these drugs. Click here for information on other FDA approved drugs which cause weight gain.
October 28th, 2011
No comments »
In mid-October, the Food and Drug Administration Center for Devices and Radiological Health and Massachusetts General Hospital conducted a workshop on device development in obesity and metabolic disease. The two-day program covered clinical trial design, inclusion criteria, outcome targets, device development strategies and regulatory considerations. Perspectives were vigorously offered from the clinical, industry, payer and FDA perspectives.
A couple of important issues emerged. First, device developers are as frustrated with the FDA as are drug developers. The reasons for the frustration are similar as well: uncertainty over what is clinically meaningful weight loss and the need for a new guidance for device developers which eschew the ‘one size fits all’ approach in favor of a new system which takes into account the invasiveness of the procedure and the expected amount of weight loss and its durability. The FDA is also grappling with the decision to lower the BMI threshold for gastric banding in terms of understanding the benefits of weight loss at lower BMIs.
An extensive discussion, led by Dr. Lee Kaplan of the Harvard Medical School, focused on why developers were conducting so much research outside of the United States. The answer from the companies and venture capital investors was clear: the delays and uncertainty in the FDA process (“regulatory purgatory” was the term of one participant) cost too much time and money for a small company compared to going to Europe or South America for research and for obtaining the “CE” mark to allow marketing in Europe. The bottom line was that the device industry was looking to move its research and development base (and jobs) outside the US.
October 28th, 2011
No comments »
It comes as no surprise that regaining weight after weight loss is common and frustrating to dieters. It also limits choices for policy makers who, in general, had avoided treatment strategies because of the transient nature of weight loss.
It also comes as no surprise that, after weight loss, metabolism of overweight persons slowed down and hormonal changes increased the powerful sensation of hunger. This double whammy makes maintenance of weight loss so challenging.
Now come researchers from Australia who studies a small group (only 50 overweight and obese patients without diabetes) . The group lost about 13.5kg which led to reductions in levels of leptin, peptide YY, cholesystokinin, insulin and amylin and increases in ghrelin. There was also an increase in subjective appetite.(See Brain and Gut for background.) What is new is that these changes persisted for one year after initial weight loss. They did not revert to the levels recorded before weight loss, probably explaining why so many dieters relapse. See Long-term persistence of hormonal adaptations t… [N Engl J Med. 2011] – PubMed – NCBI
Gina Kolata, writing in the New York Times, quotes Dr. Jules Hirsch as saying that researchers may just not know enough about obesity to prescribe solutions yet. “One thing is clear, he said, “A vast effort to persuade the public to change its habits just hasn’t prevented or cured obesity.” “We need more knowledge,” Dr. Hirsch said, “Condemning the public for their uncontrollable hedonism and the food industry for its inequities just doesn’t seem to be turning the tide.” Study Shows Why It’s Hard to Keep Weight Off – NYTimes.com
October 26th, 2011
No comments »
The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality has opened for public comment an update
to the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation for the screening and management of adults with obesity. The comment period is open until November 28, 2011. See U.S. Preventive Services Task Force: Draft Recommendation Statement
The USPSTF recommendations are particularly important as they are widely used by private insurers as well as included in several parts of the Affordable Care Act.
October 21st, 2011
No comments »
The federal Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality is seeking comments on an evidence report comparing bariatric surgery to other modes of treating adults with obesity with a BMI between 30 and 35 with metabolic comorbidities, such as type 2 diabetes. The draft report finds moderate strength evidence for Roux-en-Y, laproscopic gastric banding and sleeve gastrectomy for resolution of type 2 diabetes at least in the short term.