Skip to main content
  • More from ADA
    • Diabetes
    • Clinical Diabetes
    • Diabetes Spectrum
    • ADA Standards of Medical Care
    • ADA Scientific Sessions Abstracts
    • BMJ Open Diabetes Research & Care
  • Subscribe
  • Log in
  • My Cart
  • Follow ada on Twitter
  • RSS
  • Visit ada on Facebook
Diabetes Care

Advanced Search

Main menu

  • Home
  • Current
    • Current Issue
    • Online Ahead of Print
    • Special Article Collections
    • ADA Standards of Medical Care
  • Browse
    • By Topic
    • Issue Archive
    • Saved Searches
    • Special Article Collections
    • ADA Standards of Medical Care
  • Info
    • About the Journal
    • About the Editors
    • ADA Journal Policies
    • Instructions for Authors
    • Guidance for Reviewers
  • Reprints/Reuse
  • Advertising
  • Subscriptions
    • Individual Subscriptions
    • Institutional Subscriptions and Site Licenses
    • Access Institutional Usage Reports
    • Purchase Single Issues
  • Alerts
    • E­mail Alerts
    • RSS Feeds
  • Podcasts
    • Diabetes Core Update
    • Special Podcast Series: Therapeutic Inertia
    • Special Podcast Series: Influenza Podcasts
    • Special Podcast Series: SGLT2 Inhibitors
    • Special Podcast Series: COVID-19
  • Submit
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Journal Policies
    • Instructions for Authors
    • ADA Peer Review
  • More from ADA
    • Diabetes
    • Clinical Diabetes
    • Diabetes Spectrum
    • ADA Standards of Medical Care
    • ADA Scientific Sessions Abstracts
    • BMJ Open Diabetes Research & Care

User menu

  • Subscribe
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Diabetes Care
  • Home
  • Current
    • Current Issue
    • Online Ahead of Print
    • Special Article Collections
    • ADA Standards of Medical Care
  • Browse
    • By Topic
    • Issue Archive
    • Saved Searches
    • Special Article Collections
    • ADA Standards of Medical Care
  • Info
    • About the Journal
    • About the Editors
    • ADA Journal Policies
    • Instructions for Authors
    • Guidance for Reviewers
  • Reprints/Reuse
  • Advertising
  • Subscriptions
    • Individual Subscriptions
    • Institutional Subscriptions and Site Licenses
    • Access Institutional Usage Reports
    • Purchase Single Issues
  • Alerts
    • E­mail Alerts
    • RSS Feeds
  • Podcasts
    • Diabetes Core Update
    • Special Podcast Series: Therapeutic Inertia
    • Special Podcast Series: Influenza Podcasts
    • Special Podcast Series: SGLT2 Inhibitors
    • Special Podcast Series: COVID-19
  • Submit
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Journal Policies
    • Instructions for Authors
    • ADA Peer Review
Cardiovascular and Metabolic Risk

Association of BMI, Fitness, and Mortality in Patients With Diabetes: Evaluating the Obesity Paradox in the Henry Ford Exercise Testing Project (FIT Project) Cohort

  1. Seamus P. Whelton1⇑,
  2. Paul A. McAuley2,
  3. Zeina Dardari1,
  4. Olusola A. Orimoloye1,
  5. Clinton A. Brawner3,
  6. Jonathan K. Ehrman3,
  7. Steven J. Keteyian3,
  8. Mouaz Al-Mallah4 and
  9. Michael J. Blaha1
  1. 1Johns Hopkins Ciccarone Center for the Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD
  2. 2Department of Health, Physical Education and Sport Studies, Winston-Salem State University, Winston-Salem, NC
  3. 3Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit, MI
  4. 4Houston Methodist DeBakey Heart & Vascular Center, Houston, TX
  1. Corresponding author: Seamus P. Whelton, seamus.whelton{at}jhmi.edu
Diabetes Care 2020 Mar; 43(3): 677-682. https://doi.org/10.2337/dc19-1673
PreviousNext
  • Article
  • Figures & Tables
  • Suppl Material
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

OBJECTIVE To determine the effect of fitness on the association between BMI and mortality among patients with diabetes.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS We identified 8,528 patients with diabetes (self-report, medication use, or electronic medical record diagnosis) from the Henry Ford Exercise Testing Project (FIT Project). Patients with a BMI <18.5 kg/m2 or cancer were excluded. Fitness was measured as the METs achieved during a physician-referred treadmill stress test and categorized as low (<6), moderate (6–9.9), or high (≥10). Adjusted hazard ratios for mortality were calculated using standard BMI (kilograms per meter squared) cutoffs of normal (18.5–24.9), overweight (25–29.9), and obese (≥30). Adjusted splines centered at 22.5 kg/m2 were used to examine BMI as a continuous variable.

RESULTS Patients had a mean age of 58 ± 11 years (49% women) with 1,319 deaths over a mean follow-up of 10.0 ± 4.1 years. Overall, obese patients had a 30% lower mortality hazard (P < 0.001) compared with normal-weight patients. In adjusted spline modeling, higher BMI as a continuous variable was predominantly associated with a lower mortality risk in the lowest fitness group and among patients with moderate fitness and BMI ≥30 kg/m2. Compared with the lowest fitness group, patients with higher fitness had an ∼50% (6–9.9 METs) and 70% (≥10 METs) lower mortality hazard regardless of BMI (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS Among patients with diabetes, the obesity paradox was less pronounced for patients with the highest fitness level, and these patients also had the lowest risk of mortality.

Introduction

There is conflicting evidence on whether BMI is associated with adverse cardiovascular outcomes and mortality in patients with diabetes. A number of studies have demonstrated a lower mortality risk among individuals with diabetes who are overweight or obese compared with normal-weight individuals, a finding that has been termed the “obesity paradox” (1,2). Conversely, other studies among individuals with diabetes have not demonstrated a lower mortality risk or have demonstrated a higher risk of mortality for overweight or obese individuals (3,4).

Understanding whether the obesity paradox exists among patients with type 2 diabetes is of particular importance, because a higher BMI is one of the strongest risk factors for the development of type 2 diabetes, which is independently associated with an higher risk for cardiovascular disease (CVD) and all-cause mortality (5–7). Overweight or obese individuals with a high fitness level have been termed “fat but fit,” and it has been suggested that individuals with a higher BMI who are metabolically healthy may partly account for the observed obesity paradox (8,9). While there is significant heterogeneity in CVD risk for patients with diabetes, they are often considered as a CVD risk equivalent group, and diabetes is one of the four groups identified by the 2018 American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology Cholesterol Guidelines to benefit from statin therapy (10,11). However, fitness modifies the relationship between BMI and mortality among patients with CVD, and we therefore hypothesized that 1) among individuals with diabetes, those with a higher fitness level would not have a paradoxical relationship between BMI and mortality; and 2) individuals with a higher fitness level would have a lower risk of mortality regardless of BMI category (12,13). Accordingly, we investigated the association between obesity and mortality among individuals with diabetes in the Henry Ford Exercise Testing Project (FIT Project) and whether fitness modified this relationship.

Research Design and Methods

This analysis includes 8,528 individuals with diabetes from the Henry Ford Exercise Testing Project (FIT Project) who performed a clinically indicated, physician-referred Bruce protocol exercise treadmill stress test between 1991 and 2009 at the Henry Ford Health System medical centers in metropolitan Detroit, MI, as has previously been described in detail elsewhere (14). Patients were at least 18 years old and had a diagnosis of diabetes, which was defined by patient self-report, use of a blood glucose–lowering medication, or based on electronic medical record (EMR) diagnosis. We required that an EMR diagnosis of diabetes or any other medical condition (e.g., hypertension or hyperlipidemia) be coded on at least three separate encounters in the EMR in order to be included as a diagnosis in our database. Among patients diagnosed with diabetes, 85% had an HbA1c ≥6.5% and/or were taking a glucose-lowering medication, 11% had an HbA1c ≥5.7–6.4% (39–46 mmol/mol), and 4% had an HbA1c <5.7% (39 mmol/mol). We excluded persons with a BMI <18.5 kg/m2 (n = 252) and those with prevalent cancer (n = 604).

Total mortality was the primary outcome and was ascertained through a search of the Social Security Death Index with follow-up through the year 2013. A previously described algorithm using a combination of first name, last name, date of birth, and Social Security number was used to perform matching (14). Follow-up was calculated from date of the exercise test to the date of death or through April 2013.

Bruce protocol treadmill stress testing was performed using standard methodology, and the test was stopped if the patient experienced chest pain, dyspnea, or other exercise-limiting symptoms (e.g., chest pain, dyspnea, or dizziness) as determined by the supervising clinician or if the patient requested that the test be stopped. The test could also have been stopped if the patient had an abnormal blood pressure response, significant ST segment changes, or a clinically significant arrhythmia as defined by the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology guidelines (15,16). Each patient’s maximal exercise capacity (e.g., fitness) was estimated by calculating their METs, which were calculated by the Quinton treadmill controller (Q-Stress; Quinton Instrument Company, Bothell, WA) using their peak exercise workload (treadmill speed and grade) achieved during the stress test based on equations published by the American College of Sports Medicine (17). We categorized fitness as low (<6 METs), moderate (6–9.9 METs), and high (≥10 METs), as consistent with our prior work (18). The stress test indication was categorized into common indications based on the physician referral information, which primarily included chest pain, dyspnea, and preoperative evaluation.

A trained nurse and/or clinical exercise physiologist recorded the patients’ demographics and CVD risk factors along with current medication use and past medical history immediately preceding the treadmill stress test. Patients reported their race, height, and current smoking status. Weight was measured at the time of the treadmill stress test, and the EMR recorded weight was used for any missing values. BMI was categorized as normal (18.5–24.9 kg/m2), overweight (25–29.9 kg/m2), or obese (≥30 kg/m2). A diagnosis of hypertension and hyperlipidemia was based on patient self-report, the use of a disease-specific medication, or a database-verified diagnosis. Patients were classified as having a family history of coronary artery disease if they reported a first-degree relative with a history of a clinical coronary artery disease event. Laboratory values for tests performed within 90 days of the stress test were obtained through a retrospective search of the EMR and associated laboratory databases. Hemoglobin A1c values were only available for 5,786 individuals (68%), and fasting glucose values were not available. For patients who participated in the Henry Ford Health System integrated health plan, a retrospective search of the EMR, administrative databases, and/or pharmacy claims files was performed to obtain additional data on medication use and past medical history.

We calculated age-adjusted mortality rates per 1,000 person-years’ follow-up stratified by BMI and fitness group. We also performed progressively adjusted Cox proportional hazards modeling to examine the association of BMI and total mortality within each fitness group. Using Cox proportional hazards modeling, we also examined the association of fitness and total mortality within each BMI group. Model 1 included age, sex, and ethnicity. Model 2 additionally adjusted for hypertension, current smoking, hypertension medication use, lipid-lowering medication use, oral glucose-lowering medication use, and a history of CVD. Model 3 additionally included insulin use. We also used Cox proportional hazards modeling within each fitness group to examine whether there were differences in the relationship between BMI and mortality for prespecified subgroups of interest.

We performed adjusted cubic spline modeling with BMI as a continuous variable and a reference value of BMI of 22.5 kg/m2 (consistent with prior publications) within each fitness group in order to examine the continuous association of BMI with total mortality (19). We also calculated an adjusted cubic spline figure that displays the relative association for each fitness group using a reference value of BMI of 22.5 kg/m2 for the lowest fitness group.

We performed multivariable-adjusted logistic regression modeling (model 3) to evaluate the association between 1) per 1 kg/m2 increase in BMI and 2) 1 MET increase in fitness. In addition, we performed interaction testing using BMI and fitness as continuous variables. Statistical analyses were conducted using Stata/SE version 15.1 (Stata Corporation, College Station, TX).

Results

Overall, the mean age was 57.9 years (SD 11.3), 49% of individuals were women, 40% were African American, and there were 1,319 deaths over a mean follow-up of 10.0 years (SD 4.1) (Table 1). In general, individuals who were obese were less likely to exercise to ≥10 METs or have a diagnosis of coronary artery disease, but they were more likely to have traditional CVD risk factors, be prescribed a glucose-lowering medication, and have a higher hemoglobin A1c. Patients in the highest fitness group were younger, were less likely to be a woman, and had a lower prevalence of traditional CVD risk factors (Supplementary Table 1). Patients in the highest fitness group had the lowest age-adjusted mortality rate, and there was little absolute difference in the mortality rate between normal-weight (8/1,000 person-years) and obese patients (5/1,000 person-years) who achieved ≥10 METs (Fig. 1). The age-adjusted mortality rate for patients who achieved <6 METs was more than double that of patients who achieved six to nine METs regardless of BMI. Within each categorical fitness group, there was an ∼30% lower risk for total mortality for patients who were obese compared with normal weight, except for patients in the highest fitness group in whom the association was directionally similar, but not significant (hazard ratio 0.72 [95% CI 0.49–1.10]) (Table 2). For example, within the least fit group (<6 METs), the hazard for total mortality was 0.74 (95% CI 0.60–0.93) for obese compared with normal-weight patients.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 1

Baseline population characteristics overall and by BMI (kg/m2)

Figure 1
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 1

Age-adjusted mortality rate stratified by BMI and fitness.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 2

All-cause mortality hazard ratios (95% CIs) by BMI category (kg/m2)

Within each BMI group, there was an ∼70% lower risk for total mortality for patients in the highest fitness group (≥10 METs) compared with the least fit patients (<6 METs), which was consistent even after adjusting for traditional CVD covariables (Supplementary Table 2). For example, among obese patients, the hazard for total mortality was 0.26 (95% CI 0.20–0.35) for the most fit compared with least fit group.

In adjusted cubic spline modeling, we found a consistent and significantly lower risk for all-cause mortality with higher BMI for patients in the lowest fitness group (Fig. 2). Among patients in the moderate fitness group, the association between BMI and mortality was significant only above a BMI of ∼30 kg/m2. Among patients in the highest fitness group, the association between BMI and all-cause mortality was lower only among patients with a BMI of ∼33–43 kg/m2. We performed additional cubic spline modeling using the lowest fitness group and a BMI of 22.5 kg/m2 as the reference point, which showed a uniformly lower hazard for all-cause mortality among patients with higher fitness levels, and that slope flattened with higher fitness (Supplementary Fig. 1). In addition, the association between BMI and a lower mortality risk flattened with higher fitness. We observed a similar relationship between BMI and mortality for each subgroup across the fitness categories, supporting the consistency of our overall findings (Supplementary Fig. 2).

Figure 2
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 2

Hazard of all-cause mortality with increasing BMI, stratified by fitness.

Multivariable logistic regression modeling showed that for every 1 kg/m2 increase in BMI, there was a 0.96 (95% CI 0.95–0.97; Z score −6.94) lower odds of mortality, while for every 1 MET increase in fitness, there was a 0.76 (95% CI 0.73–0.78; Z score −17.95) lower odds of mortality. Interaction testing using continuous values for BMI and fitness demonstrated a P value of 0.02.

Conclusions

Our results demonstrate that in the overall cohort, there was an inverse relationship between BMI and total mortality for patients with diabetes. However, when we examined this relationship by fitness level, the relationship was only consistently significant among patients in the lowest fitness group. We also found that within each BMI category, there was a significantly lower mortality risk with a higher fitness level. Therefore, while we observed a consistently significant lower risk for total mortality with higher BMI among patients who completed <6 METs, a higher fitness level was associated with an even lower relative risk for total mortality regardless of BMI.

There are a number of reasons that may explain why an inconsistent observation of the obesity paradox has been reported across different studies. For instance, in a study of >3 million people who were linked to the U.K. national mortality database, Bhaskaran et al. (20) demonstrated a higher mortality risk with higher BMI using a reference BMI of 25 kg/m2. However, the median age of individuals in this study was 37 years old, and individuals who were overweight or obese had a median age that was 10 years older than normal-weight individuals. In another study that pooled data from 10 prospective U.S. cohorts, Khan et al. (21) found that obese individuals had a higher risk of CVD morbidity and mortality. However, for men, the cumulative incidence of non-CVD death was slightly lower for obese (20.1) and morbidly obese men (19.1) compared with men with a normal BMI (22.2), and in the overall pooled cohort, overweight individuals had a similar risk of mortality compared with normal-weight individuals.

Our overall results demonstrating an obesity paradox among patients with diabetes are consistent with other cohorts of patients with diabetes. However, these cohorts demonstrated significant interactions that we did not observe in the FIT Project cohort. In a study of 23,842 individuals with type 2 diabetes from the U.K. Biobank cohort, Jenkins et al. (19) demonstrated an obesity paradox. However, they found a significant smoking interaction that nullified the obesity paradox among never smokers, which they attributed to reverse causality and confounding. In our subgroup analysis, we demonstrate that our results are similar for current smokers and nonsmokers. Potential reasons for these different findings include that Jenkins et al. (19) did not exclude individuals with a BMI <18.5 kg/m2, among whom there was the highest percentage of current smokers and patients with a baseline diagnosis of cancer. In an analysis of a Swedish national cohort that included ∼90% of all patients with diabetes, Edqvist et al. (22) demonstrated that the short-term (<5 year) mortality risk was lower for obese patients with a BMI of 30–35 kg/m2, while long-term follow-up (≥5 years) showed a higher mortality risk with higher BMI. We did not observe a difference in the relationship between BMI and mortality for older versus younger individuals with diabetes, which may be attributable to the Swedish cohort only including patients with new-onset diabetes, among whom the mean duration of diabetes was 1.5 years and the mean age of onset was 58 years.

However, our results are consistent with previous data examining the impact of fitness on the obesity paradox among patients in the FIT Project cohort. For example, in an analysis of patients with heart failure by McAuley et al. (13), our group demonstrated a lower mortality risk with higher BMI among individuals who achieved <4 METs during a treadmill stress test, but not among those with a higher fitness level. In a separate analysis of individuals from the FIT Project without CVD or diabetes, we also demonstrated that obese individuals had a lower mortality rate compared with nonobese individuals only among the lower fitness group (23).

One limitation of this study is that we do not have information on each individual’s maximal lifetime BMI or change in BMI, which some have proposed may in part explain the obesity paradox (24). We also do not have information on duration of diabetes, and we have only incomplete information or glucose control, although the median hemoglobin A1c was only 0.3% greater for obese versus normal-weight individuals. Obese patients referred for treadmill stress testing are likely to be healthier compared with obese patients deemed unsuitable for treadmill stress testing, which may have resulted in a higher mortality risk. While we adjusted for age in our Cox proportional hazards models, patients with a BMI ≥30 kg/m2 were ∼4 years younger than patients with a BMI between 18.5 and 25 kg/m2, although this age difference is less than observed in other studies (20). We also do not have measurements of regional adiposity, such as waist-to-hip ratio or imaging-based anthropometry. While BMI does not incorporate measures of fat distribution such as central adiposity, it is the most commonly used measure of obesity/adiposity in clinical practice, closely aligns with DEXA measurement of adiposity, and is an excellent predictor of excess adiposity, especially when BMI ≥30 kg/m2 (25,26). In addition, we do not have information on the percentage of patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes. However, only 21.9% of patients included in this study reported using insulin, and among U.S. adults with diabetes, the prevalence of type 1 diabetes is 5.8% (27). Finally, the observational design of this study cannot determine a cause-and-effect relationship.

Strengths of this study include 1) a nearly equal proportion of men and women; 2) a large proportion of African American patients; 3) a long follow-up period; and 4) a large number of primary outcome events (i.e., deaths). In addition, fitness was assessed using a Bruce protocol treadmill stress test, which is the most common protocol used in clinical practice.

Conclusion

Our results demonstrate that a higher BMI at baseline testing was associated with a lower mortality rate among patients with diabetes predominantly when fitness was low (<6 METs) or moderate (6–9.9 METs). We found no evidence of a consistently significant relationship between BMI and mortality among patients with a high fitness level (≥10 METs). Importantly, a higher fitness level was associated with a consistent and significantly lower mortality rate regardless of BMI. Accordingly, fitness significantly affects the association of BMI and mortality risk among patients with diabetes. While weight loss and improved fitness should both be recommended for patients with diabetes, these observational results highlight the need for further research to test whether prevention strategies focusing on improving fitness may potentially provide a greater reduction in mortality than weight-loss interventions.

Article Information

Funding. S.P.W. was supported by the PJ Schafer Memorial Foundation.

Duality of Interest. No potential conflicts of interest relevant to this article were reported.

Author Contributions. S.P.W. wrote the manuscript and researched data. P.A.M. wrote the manuscript and researched data. Z.D. performed statistical analyses and reviewed and edited the manuscript. O.A.O. reviewed and edited the manuscript. C.A.B. reviewed and edited the manuscript. J.K.E. reviewed and edited the manuscript. S.J.K. reviewed and edited the manuscript. M.A.-M. reviewed and edited the manuscript. M.J.B. wrote the manuscript and researched data. S.P.W. is the guarantor of this work and, as such, had full access to all of the data in the study and takes responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis.

Prior Presentation. This study was presented in poster form at the American College of Cardiology’s 68th Annual Scientific Session & Expo, New Orleans, LA, 16–18 March 2019.

Footnotes

  • This article contains Supplementary Data online at https://care.diabetesjournals.org/lookup/suppl/doi:10.2337/dc19-1673/-/DC1.

  • This article is featured in a podcast available at https://www.diabetesjournals.org/content/diabetes-core-update-podcasts.

  • Received August 20, 2019.
  • Accepted December 21, 2019.
  • © 2020 by the American Diabetes Association.
https://www.diabetesjournals.org/content/license

Readers may use this article as long as the work is properly cited, the use is educational and not for profit, and the work is not altered. More information is available at https://www.diabetesjournals.org/content/license.

References

  1. ↵
    1. Carnethon MR
    . Association of weight status with mortality in adults with incident diabetes (vol 308, pg 581, 2012). JAMA 2012;308:2085
    OpenUrl
  2. ↵
    1. Lin CC,
    2. Li CI,
    3. Liu CS, et al
    . Obesity paradox in associations between body mass index and diabetes-related hospitalization and mortality in patients with type 2 diabetes: retrospective cohort studies. Diabetes Metab 2019;45:564–572
    OpenUrl
  3. ↵
    1. Tobias DK
    . Body-mass index and mortality among adults with incident type 2 diabetes (vol 370, pg 233-44, 2014). N Engl J Med 2014;370:1368
    OpenUrl
  4. ↵
    1. Zahir SF,
    2. Griffin A,
    3. Veerman JL, et al
    . Exploring the association between BMI and mortality in Australian women and men with and without diabetes: the AusDiab study. Diabetologia 2019;62:754–758
    OpenUrl
  5. ↵
    1. Barr ELM,
    2. Zimmet PZ,
    3. Welborn TA, et al
    . Risk of cardiovascular and all-cause mortality in individuals with diabetes mellitus, impaired fasting glucose, and impaired glucose tolerance: the Australian Diabetes, Obesity, and Lifestyle Study (AusDiab). Circulation 2007;116:151–157
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    1. Hillage HL. The Emerging Risk Factors Collaboration
    . Diabetes mellitus, fasting blood glucose concentration, and risk of vascular disease: a collaborative meta-analysis of 102 prospective studies (vol 375, pg 2215, 2010). Lancet 2010;376:958
    OpenUrlPubMed
  6. ↵
    1. Rao Kondapally Seshasai S,
    2. Kaptoge S,
    3. Thompson A, et al.; Emerging Risk Factors Collaboration
    . Diabetes mellitus, fasting glucose, and risk of cause-specific death. N Engl J Med 2011;364:829–841
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  7. ↵
    1. Ortega FB,
    2. Ruiz JR,
    3. Labayen I,
    4. Lavie CJ,
    5. Blair SN
    . The fat but fit paradox: what we know and don’t know about it. Br J Sports Med 2018;52:151–153
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  8. ↵
    1. Hamer M,
    2. Stamatakis E
    . Metabolically healthy obesity and risk of all-cause and cardiovascular disease mortality. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2012;97:2482–2488
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  9. ↵
    1. Grundy SM,
    2. Stone NJ,
    3. Bailey AL, et al
    . 2018 AHA/ACC/AACVPR/AAPA/ABC/ACPM/ADA/AGS/APhA/ASPC/NLA/PCNA guideline on the management of blood cholesterol: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol 2019;73:e285–e350
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  10. ↵
    1. Haffner SM,
    2. Lehto S,
    3. Rönnemaa T,
    4. Pyörälä K,
    5. Laakso M
    . Mortality from coronary heart disease in subjects with type 2 diabetes and in nondiabetic subjects with and without prior myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 1998;339:229–234
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  11. ↵
    1. McAuley PA,
    2. Artero EG,
    3. Sui X, et al
    . The obesity paradox, cardiorespiratory fitness, and coronary heart disease. Mayo Clin Proc 2012;87:443–451
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  12. ↵
    1. McAuley PA,
    2. Keteyian SJ,
    3. Brawner CA, et al
    . Exercise capacity and the obesity paradox in heart failure: the FIT (Henry Ford exercise testing) project. Mayo Clin Proc 2018;93:701–708
    OpenUrl
  13. ↵
    1. Al-Mallah MH,
    2. Keteyian SJ,
    3. Brawner CA,
    4. Whelton S,
    5. Blaha MJ
    . Rationale and design of the Henry Ford exercise testing project (the FIT project). Clin Cardiol 2014;37:456–461
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  14. ↵
    1. Fletcher GF,
    2. Ades PA,
    3. Kligfield P, et al.; American Heart Association Exercise, Cardiac Rehabilitation, and Prevention Committee of the Council on Clinical Cardiology, Council on Nutrition, Physical Activity and Metabolism, Council on Cardiovascular and Stroke Nursing, and Council on Epidemiology and Prevention
    . Exercise standards for testing and training: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association. Circulation 2013;128:873–934
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  15. ↵
    1. Gibbons RJ,
    2. Balady GJ,
    3. Bricker JT, et al.; American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Committee to Update the 1997 Exercise Testing Guidelines)
    . ACC/AHA 2002 guideline update for exercise testing: summary article: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Committee to Update the 1997 Exercise Testing Guidelines). Circulation 2002;106:1883–1892
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  16. ↵
    1. Pescatello LS, American College of Sports Medicine
    . ACSM’s Guidelines for Exercise Testing and Prescription. Philadelphia, Wolters Kluwer/Lippincott Williams & Wilkins Health, 2014, p. 456
  17. ↵
    1. Whelton SP,
    2. Dardari Z,
    3. Handy Marshall C, et al
    . Relation of isolated low high-density lipoprotein cholesterol to mortality and cardiorespiratory fitness (from the Henry Ford exercise testing project [FIT project]). Am J Cardiol 2019;123:1429–1434
    OpenUrl
  18. ↵
    1. Jenkins DA,
    2. Bowden J,
    3. Robinson HA, et al
    . Adiposity-mortality relationships in type 2 diabetes, coronary heart disease, and cancer subgroups in the UK Biobank, and their modification by smoking. Diabetes Care 2018;41:1878–1886
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  19. ↵
    1. Bhaskaran K,
    2. Dos-Santos-Silva I,
    3. Leon DA,
    4. Douglas IJ,
    5. Smeeth L
    . Association of BMI with overall and cause-specific mortality: a population-based cohort study of 3·6 million adults in the UK. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol 2018;6:944–953
    OpenUrl
  20. ↵
    1. Khan SS,
    2. Ning H,
    3. Wilkins JT, et al
    . Association of body mass index with lifetime risk of cardiovascular disease and compression of morbidity. JAMA Cardiol 2018;3:280–287
    OpenUrl
  21. ↵
    1. Edqvist J,
    2. Rawshani A,
    3. Adiels M, et al
    . BMI and mortality in patients with new-onset type 2 diabetes: a comparison with age- and sex-matched control subjects from the general population. Diabetes Care 2018;41:485–493
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  22. ↵
    1. McAuley PA,
    2. Blaha MJ,
    3. Keteyian SJ, et al
    . Fitness, fatness, and mortality: the FIT (Henry Ford exercise testing) project. Am J Med 2016;129:960–965.e1
    OpenUrl
  23. ↵
    1. Xu H,
    2. Cupples LA,
    3. Stokes A,
    4. Liu CT
    . Association of obesity with mortality over 24 years of weight history: findings from the Framingham Heart Study. JAMA Netw Open 2018;1:e184587
    OpenUrl
  24. ↵
    1. Bell JA,
    2. Carslake D,
    3. O’Keeffe LM, et al
    . Associations of body mass and fat indexes with cardiometabolic traits. J Am Coll Cardiol 2018;72:3142–3154
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  25. ↵
    1. Okorodudu DO,
    2. Jumean MF,
    3. Montori VM, et al
    . Diagnostic performance of body mass index to identify obesity as defined by body adiposity: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Obes 2010;34:791–799
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
  26. ↵
    1. Bullard KM,
    2. Cowie CC,
    3. Lessem SE, et al
    . Prevalence of diagnosed diabetes in adults by diabetes type - United States, 2016. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2018;67:359–361
    OpenUrlPubMed
PreviousNext
Back to top
Diabetes Care: 43 (3)

In this Issue

March 2020, 43(3)
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • About the Cover
  • Index by Author
  • Masthead (PDF)
Sign up to receive current issue alerts
View Selected Citations (0)
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about Diabetes Care.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Association of BMI, Fitness, and Mortality in Patients With Diabetes: Evaluating the Obesity Paradox in the Henry Ford Exercise Testing Project (FIT Project) Cohort
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from Diabetes Care
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the Diabetes Care web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Association of BMI, Fitness, and Mortality in Patients With Diabetes: Evaluating the Obesity Paradox in the Henry Ford Exercise Testing Project (FIT Project) Cohort
Seamus P. Whelton, Paul A. McAuley, Zeina Dardari, Olusola A. Orimoloye, Clinton A. Brawner, Jonathan K. Ehrman, Steven J. Keteyian, Mouaz Al-Mallah, Michael J. Blaha
Diabetes Care Mar 2020, 43 (3) 677-682; DOI: 10.2337/dc19-1673

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Add to Selected Citations
Share

Association of BMI, Fitness, and Mortality in Patients With Diabetes: Evaluating the Obesity Paradox in the Henry Ford Exercise Testing Project (FIT Project) Cohort
Seamus P. Whelton, Paul A. McAuley, Zeina Dardari, Olusola A. Orimoloye, Clinton A. Brawner, Jonathan K. Ehrman, Steven J. Keteyian, Mouaz Al-Mallah, Michael J. Blaha
Diabetes Care Mar 2020, 43 (3) 677-682; DOI: 10.2337/dc19-1673
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Introduction
    • Research Design and Methods
    • Results
    • Conclusions
    • Article Information
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Tables
  • Suppl Material
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

Cited By...

More in this TOC Section

  • Impact of Obesity on Measures of Cardiovascular and Kidney Health in Youth With Type 1 Diabetes as Compared With Youth With Type 2 Diabetes
  • Serum Galectin-3 and Subsequent Risk of Coronary Heart Disease in Subjects With Childhood-Onset Type 1 Diabetes: A Cohort Study
  • OGTT Glucose Response Curves, Insulin Sensitivity, and β-Cell Function in RISE: Comparison Between Youth and Adults at Randomization and in Response to Interventions to Preserve β-Cell Function
Show more Cardiovascular and Metabolic Risk

Similar Articles

Subjects

  • Exercise

Navigate

  • Current Issue
  • Standards of Care Guidelines
  • Online Ahead of Print
  • Archives
  • Submit
  • Subscribe
  • Email Alerts
  • RSS Feeds

More Information

  • About the Journal
  • Instructions for Authors
  • Journal Policies
  • Reprints and Permissions
  • Advertising
  • Privacy Policy: ADA Journals
  • Copyright Notice/Public Access Policy
  • Contact Us

Other ADA Resources

  • Diabetes
  • Clinical Diabetes
  • Diabetes Spectrum
  • Scientific Sessions Abstracts
  • Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes
  • BMJ Open - Diabetes Research & Care
  • Professional Books
  • Diabetes Forecast

 

  • DiabetesJournals.org
  • Diabetes Core Update
  • ADA's DiabetesPro
  • ADA Member Directory
  • Diabetes.org

© 2021 by the American Diabetes Association. Diabetes Care Print ISSN: 0149-5992, Online ISSN: 1935-5548.