Skip to content

Genetic Testing for Type 2 Diabetes

The Impact of Genetic Testing for Type 2 Diabetes on Health Behaviors

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT01060540
Enrollment
601
Registered
2010-02-02
Start date
2010-08-31
Completion date
2013-03-31
Last updated
2015-04-24

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Diabetes Mellitus

Keywords

genetic screening

Brief summary

In this 6-month randomized, controlled trial, we examined whether providing participants with genetic test results and counseling regarding their risk for type 2 diabetes would motivate them to improve their health behaviors and lose weight to reduce their diabetes risk. We hypothesized that participants who received conventional diabetes counseling plus genetic test results and counseling would have at least 6 lb greater weight loss at 3 months than participants who received conventional diabetes counseling without genetic test results.

Detailed description

In this 6-month randomized, controlled trial, we evaluated the impact of genetic testing for type 2 diabetes on psychological, health behavior, and clinical outcomes. Eligibility criteria included age 21 to 65 years, overweight or obese (body mass index \[BMI\] \>27 kg/m2), and no prior diagnosis of type 2 diabetes. At baseline, participants (N=601) had conventional risk factors assessed, including demographics, fasting plasma glucose (FPG), and family history. They also provided blood samples for genetic testing of TCF7L2, PPARG, and KCNJ11, three genes that confer elevated risk for development of type 2 diabetes. Participants were then randomized to receive conventional counseling plus control eye disease counseling (CR+EYE) or conventional counseling plus genetic test results (CR+G). Two to four weeks following the baseline visit, when the genetic test results were available, participants returned for a visit with a genetic counselor. All participants received conventional risk counseling based on their lifetime population risk, FPG results, and family history. Next, participants were informed of their randomization assignments; CR+EYE participants received counseling on eye diseases, whereas CR+G participants received genetic counseling. Then perceived risk, affect, self-efficacy, and readiness to change were assessed. All other outcomes were also assessed at 3 and 6 months.

Interventions

GENETICgenetic testing for type 2 diabetes

TCF7L2, PPARG, or KCNJ11

BEHAVIORALConventional risk counseling

Risk based on lifetime risk, fasting plasma glucose results, and family history.

BEHAVIORALeye disease counseling

addresses risk for age-related macular degeneration, glaucoma, cataracts

Sponsors

Duke University
CollaboratorOTHER
US Department of Veterans Affairs
Lead SponsorFED

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
PREVENTION
Masking
SINGLE (Outcomes Assessor)

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
21 Years to 65 Years
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* body mass index \>27 kg/m2 * baseline fasting plasma glucose \<=125 mg/dL

Exclusion criteria

* prior diagnosis of type 2 diabetes * fasting plasma glucose \>125 mg/dL on more than one occasion * HbA1c \> 7% * taking diabetes medication * actively losing weight * enrolled in research study focusing on lifestyle changes * unable to provide informed consent or answer survey questions unassisted * residing in nursing home or receiving home health care * active diagnosis of psychosis or dementia * at least one error on 6-item cognitive screener

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Weight3 monthsweight 3 months post-enrollment

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Insulin Resistance (HOMA2-IR)3 monthsCalculated using the updated homeostasis model assessment (HOMA) calculator at http://www.dtu.ox.ac.uk/homacalculator/ Higher numbers indicate higher insulin resistance. There are no established cutoffs indicating impaired resistance.
Perceived Lifetime Risk of Type 2 Diabetes3 monthsmeasured on 1-7 scale (definitely will not get diabetes to definitely will get diabetes)
Daily Caloric Intake3 monthsEstimated daily caloric intake based on self-reported frequency and amount of intake of specific foods over the past 3 months as assessed by the Block Brief Food Frequency Questionnaire
Moderate Intensity Physical Activity3 monthsself-report based on the long version of the International Physical Activity Questionnaire. Moderate physical activity was queried in the domains of work (e.g., carrying light loads), transportation (e.g., bicycling), domestic chores and gardening (e.g., sweeping, raking), and leisure-time (e.g., bicycling, swimming).

Countries

United States

Participant flow

Participants by arm

ArmCount
CR+G
conventional risk counseling (lifetime risk, fasting plasma glucose, and family history) plus genetic testing for type 2 diabetes
303
CR+EYE
conventional risk counseling (lifetime risk, fasting plasma glucose, and family history) plus eye disease counseling
298
Total601

Withdrawals & dropouts

PeriodReasonFG000FG001
Overall StudyDeath21
Overall StudyLost to Follow-up5243
Overall StudyPhysician Decision01
Overall StudyWithdrawal by Subject1020

Baseline characteristics

CharacteristicCR+GCR+EYETotal
Age, Continuous53.9 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 9.1
54.4 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 8.4
54.1 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 8.7
Body mass index (BMI) stratification
BMI<35 kg/m^2
208 participants213 participants421 participants
Body mass index (BMI) stratification
BMI >= 35 kg/m^2
95 participants85 participants180 participants
Education
High school graduate or less
82 participants72 participants154 participants
Education
Some post-high school education
221 participants226 participants447 participants
Family history risk
high
79 participants60 participants139 participants
Family history risk
low
141 participants140 participants281 participants
Family history risk
moderate
79 participants94 participants173 participants
Family history risk
unknown
4 participants4 participants8 participants
Genetic risk
high
74 participantsNA participantsNA participants
Genetic risk
low
114 participantsNA participantsNA participants
Genetic risk
moderate
113 participantsNA participantsNA participants
Genetic risk
unknown
2 participantsNA participantsNA participants
Lifetime risk
high
213 participants193 participants406 participants
Lifetime risk
low
8 participants5 participants13 participants
Lifetime risk
moderate
81 participants99 participants180 participants
Lifetime risk
unknown
1 participants1 participants2 participants
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Non-Hispanic White
137 participants115 participants252 participants
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Other
166 participants183 participants349 participants
Region of Enrollment
United States
303 participants298 participants601 participants
Sex: Female, Male
Female
55 Participants63 Participants118 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Male
248 Participants235 Participants483 Participants
Weight103.8 kg
STANDARD_DEVIATION 17.7
100.7 kg
STANDARD_DEVIATION 18.9
101.8 kg
STANDARD_DEVIATION 18.3

Adverse events

Event typeEG000
affected / at risk
EG001
affected / at risk
deaths
Total, all-cause mortality
— / —— / —
other
Total, other adverse events
0 / 3031 / 298
serious
Total, serious adverse events
1 / 3032 / 298

Outcome results

Primary

Weight

weight 3 months post-enrollment

Time frame: 3 months

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
CR+GWeight103.8 kgStandard Deviation 17.7
CR+EYEWeight100.7 kgStandard Deviation 18.9
p-value: 0.4495% CI: [-0.3, 0.7]Mixed Models Analysis
Secondary

Daily Caloric Intake

Estimated daily caloric intake based on self-reported frequency and amount of intake of specific foods over the past 3 months as assessed by the Block Brief Food Frequency Questionnaire

Time frame: 3 months

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
CR+GDaily Caloric Intake1487 kcalStandard Deviation 1127
CR+EYEDaily Caloric Intake1573 kcalStandard Deviation 894
p-value: 0.0595% CI: [-0.2, 0]Mixed Models Analysis
Secondary

Insulin Resistance (HOMA2-IR)

Calculated using the updated homeostasis model assessment (HOMA) calculator at http://www.dtu.ox.ac.uk/homacalculator/ Higher numbers indicate higher insulin resistance. There are no established cutoffs indicating impaired resistance.

Time frame: 3 months

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
CR+GInsulin Resistance (HOMA2-IR)4.1 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 3.6
CR+EYEInsulin Resistance (HOMA2-IR)4.1 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 4.5
p-value: 0.1995% CI: [-0.1, 0.3]Mixed Models Analysis
Secondary

Moderate Intensity Physical Activity

self-report based on the long version of the International Physical Activity Questionnaire. Moderate physical activity was queried in the domains of work (e.g., carrying light loads), transportation (e.g., bicycling), domestic chores and gardening (e.g., sweeping, raking), and leisure-time (e.g., bicycling, swimming).

Time frame: 3 months

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
CR+GModerate Intensity Physical Activity568 minutes per weekStandard Deviation 650
CR+EYEModerate Intensity Physical Activity633 minutes per weekStandard Deviation 794
p-value: 0.6895% CI: [0.7, 1.2]generalized linear model for count data
Secondary

Perceived Lifetime Risk of Type 2 Diabetes

measured on 1-7 scale (definitely will not get diabetes to definitely will get diabetes)

Time frame: 3 months

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
CR+GPerceived Lifetime Risk of Type 2 Diabetes3.1 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.6
CR+EYEPerceived Lifetime Risk of Type 2 Diabetes3.1 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.6
p-value: 0.3895% CI: [-0.4, 0.1]Mixed Models Analysis

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Mar 25, 2026