FRI417 An Interdisciplinary Program Promoting The Adoption Of A Healthy Lifestyle Increases Insulin Sensitivity In Women With Obesity And Infertility
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Disclosure: A. Forget-Renaud: None. M. Belan: None. F. Jean-Denis: None. M. Pesant: None. J. Baillargeon: Grant Recipient; Self; Ferring Pharmaceuticals, JPB received an unrestricted investigator-initiated grant from Ferring Canada, which was not for the reported study. Introduction Obesity increases the risk of ovulatory and anovulatory infertility in women, mainly through the development of polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS). Insulin resistance contributes to the pathogenesis of PCOS and may play a role in the infertility of PCOS and non-PCOS women with overweight or obesity. Lifestyle modifications are recommended as a first-line therapy in women with PCOS or those with obesity and infertility, as it was associated with improvement in menstrual pattern and fertility outcomes. We therefore hypothesized that a lifestyle intervention may increase insulin sensitivity in women with obesity and infertility. Methods Women with obesity and infertility were randomly allocated to usual fertility care (control group, CG) or to an interdisciplinary intervention promoting the adoption of a healthy lifestyle (LSG) alone for 6 months and then combined with usual care. Insulin resistance was estimated during fasting (HOMA-IR) and a 75-g oral glucose test (Matsuda Insulin Sensitivity Index, ISI(M)), and β-cell function was estimated using the Insulin Secretion-Sensitivity Index (ISSI-2) in women not taking medication affecting insulin sensitivity (except metformin). Data were collected at baseline, 6, 12 and 18 months, and as soon as possible when the participant knew she was pregnant. We estimated the integrated change in insulin sensitivity during follow-up using the incremental area-under-the-curve of ISI(M) divided by time (iAUC-ISI(M)/time). Results Among 130 randomized participants, 105 had available data (LSG=51, CG=54). PCOS was diagnosed using the Rotterdam criteria in 63.2% of participants, equally distributed between the groups. As compared to CG, women in the LSG improved significantly more their ISI(M) after 6 months (+0.24 [IQR: -0.48 - +0.94] vs 0.16 [-1.32 - +0.53], p=0.039, n=90), as well as their iAUC-ISI(M)/time during follow-up (+0.18±0.84 vs -0.21±0,93, p=0.035, n=104). All these results remained statistically significant after correction for baseline BMI, age and use of folic acid. Increases in iAUC-ISI(M)/time in the intervention vs control groups were significantly more important (p for interaction=0.045) in participants with baseline ISI(M) above the median (LSG: +0.10±1.13, n=24, vs CG: -0.62±1.13, n=27, p=0.028) than in those below the median (LSG: +0.26±0.48, n=27, vs CG: +0.21±0.35, n=26, p=0.71). Interactions with PCOS status and other subgroups were not statistically significant. There was no impact on HOMA-IR or ISSI-2. Conclusion An interdisciplinary program promoting the adoption of a healthy lifestyle significantly increases whole-body insulin sensitivity in women with infertility and obesity, mainly in those with higher baseline insulin sensitivity. It may be explained in part by the weight loss associated with the intervention and may have a role in improving fertility in this population. Presentation: Friday, June 16, 2023
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".