Obesity Research · Vol. 7, No. 1 · 2019 · pp. 24–35 · e-ISSN 2377-8385

A Couple’s Personalized-Care Intervention for Weight-Loss and Diabetes based on DNA and Gut Biome Profiles: A Case Study

Simitha Singh-Rambiritch, Chandana Reddy, Ranjan Sinha, Alicia Nakamoto

DOI: https://doi.org/10.17140/oroj-7-139 · Published 2019-11-28 · Licence: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 · © 2019 The Author(s)

Abstract

Introduction The global prevalence of obesity has reached epidemic proportions. Given the negative strain that obesity and associated chronic diseases, such as type 2 diabetes, put on the healthcare system and the economy, disease management has begun evolving to help individuals change their behaviors. Obesity is often difficult to treat and even harder to maintain. Past studies have failed to show weight loss maintenance over long periods after interventions. To overcome the complexity of obesity, a multifaceted precision care treatment approach should be adopted. Aim The aim of this case study was to assess the health benefits and weight loss journey of a cohabiting Caucasian heterosexual married couple using the Digbi Health personalized obesity management program. A personalized integrative nutrition plan is created based on one’s genetic and gut microbiome obesity risk profile and incorporates daily digital tracking and lifestyle coaching. Never before has a program offered personalized data including genetic, gut microbiome and lifestyle coaching to help people understand the best plan to lose weight and keep it off long term. Method The male subject achieved a total change in weight loss of 15.94%, as well as a reduction in A1C and blood pressure levels and the female subject achieved a 13.65% change in weight loss over a period of four months. The couple have still been able to maintain their weight loss goals four months after completing the program, stating their individual and personalized approach gave them the tools long-term to maintain. Conclusion A supportive environment for cohabiting couples following a personalized weight loss program based on their genetic and gut microbiome profile may help with weight loss and long-term maintenance.

Keywords: Diabetes; Gut microbiome; Obesity; Diet; Physical exercise; Overweight; Body mass index (BMI); Couples; Hypertension

Introduction

The global prevalence of obesity has reached epidemic proportions. Given the negative strain that obesity and associated chronic

diseases, such as type 2 diabetes, put on the healthcare system and the economy, disease management has begun evolving to help

individuals change their behaviors. Obesity is often difficult to treat and even harder to maintain. Past studies have failed to show

weight loss maintenance over long periods after interventions. To overcome the complexity of obesity, a multifaceted precision care

treatment approach should be adopted.

Aim

The aim of this case study was to assess the health benefits and weight loss journey of a cohabiting Caucasian heterosexual married

couple using the Digbi Health personalized obesity management program. A personalized integrative nutrition plan is created based

on one’s genetic and gut microbiome obesity risk profile and incorporates daily digital tracking and lifestyle coaching. Never before

has a program offered personalized data including genetic, gut microbiome and lifestyle coaching to help people understand the best

plan to lose weight and keep it off long term.

Method

The male subject achieved a total change in weight loss of 15.94%, as well as a reduction in A1C and blood pressure levels and the

female subject achieved a 13.65% change in weight loss over a period of four months. The couple have still been able to maintain

their weight loss goals four months after completing the program,

tools long-term to maintain.

Conclusion

A supportive environment for cohabiting couples following a personalized weight loss program based on their genetic and gut mi-

crobiome profile may help with weight loss and long-term maintenance.

Keywords

Diabetes; Gut microbiome; Obesity; Diet; Physical exercise; Overweight; Body mass index (BMI); Couples; Hypertension.

Introduction

besity is a multifactorial disease arising from an at-risk ge-

netic profile, and environmental risk factors, such as

O physical inactivity, insufficient sleep, excessive caloric intake,

medications, socioeconomic status, endocrine disruptors and the

1-5 gastrointestinal microbiome.1-5

cc Copyright 2019 by Singh-Rambiritch S. This is an open-access article distributed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0),

which allows to copy, redistribute, remix, transform, and reproduce in any medium or format, even commercially, provided the original work is properly cited. stating their individual and personalized approach gave them the

Some emerging strategies to help individuals success-

fully change their health behaviors include using personalized

health programs that incorporate one’s physiological information

and lifestyle coaching.6 Researchers have also recently begun

to explore whether relationships and social support networks

can be leveraged to help individuals achieve healthier lifestyles,

weight loss and improve health outcomes.7

According to the World Health Organization (WHO),

overweight and obesity are defined as abnormal or excessive fat

accumulation that presents a risk to health, including diabetes and

cardiovascular disease.8 The National Heart, Lung, and Blood In-

stitute (NHLBI) define a body mass index (BMI) of more than 25

as overweight and an individual is considered obese if the BMI is

above 30, and severely obese if the BMI is above 40.9 Over 70% of

adults in the United States were considered overweight or obese in

the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) 2015-2016

report.10 Today almost 2 out of 3 adults are considered overweight

or obese.11

The 2018 data brief on the National Health and Nutrition

Examination Survey (NHANES) showed that 49.1% of U.S. adults

tried to lose weight in the 2013-2016 time period. A higher per-

centage of women (56.4%) than men (41.7%) tried to lose weight.

Within each age group, 20 and over, 20-39, 40-59 and 60 and over,

the percentage of women trying to lose weight was higher within

each age group and overall for all age groups. The percentage of

adults who tried to lose weight increased with increasing BMI, with

the highest percentage of men and women trying to lose weight in

the obese category. The results showed that 66.7% of adults with

obesity, 49.0% of overweight adults, and 26.5% of underweight

or normal weight adults tried to lose weight. The most commonly

reported methods used amongst adults to lose weight were exercis-

ing (62.9%) and eating less food (62.9%), followed by consuming

more fruits, vegetables, and salads (50.4%). Participants could re-

port more than one method used to lose weight. Most individuals

(88.3%), reported using two or more methods.12

Obesity is associated with major health risks.1,13 Individu-

als are motivated for a variety of reasons to lose weight, including

improving health and appearance. On the basis of these epidemic

dimensions, the issue of overweight and obesity cannot be taken

lightly. There is currently an abundance of research demonstrat-

ing that an individuals’ genetic and gut microbiome makeups are

intrinsically linked to their metabolisms; for example, people with

certain genotypes are able to lose weight faster when on diets high

Table 1. Past Studies Conducted amongst Couples Focusing on Behavioral Change Outcomes

Couple Studies Study Population Results

Longitudinal study in 2015 by Jackson Researcher looked at the influence

18 behavior on health behavioral change in 3722 activity and weight loss, if their partner does too, and

et al couples that were either married or cohabiting with a stronger effect than if the partner had been

Literature review study in 2016 by Mechanisms Study (NORMS).They

19 impact of obesogenic relationships Perry et al

Literature review study in 2007 by Researchers analyzed data of almost 12,000 couples Respondents whose partner reports poor health are

20 using data from the annual Netherlands Health almost three times more likely to report poor health

Monden C Interview Survey (NethHIS)

Cross sectional literature study of

ARIC cohort in 2016 by Cobb et al 3,889 spousal pairs in fat compared to peers with different genetics. Others respond

better to short bursts of intense activity as opposed to long ses-

14-16 sions of moderate activity. Certain ethnic groups, for example,

populations of Asian or African origin, have shown a propensity

for obesity and diabetes even when following a diet deemed nutri-

tious by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA).17

Following dietary recommendations curated to an individual’s

biology may help to optimize people’s health.15 Even more so, is

the support from a spouse when one embarks on a personalized

weight loss program.

Couples, especially cohabiting couples, are known to

be a strong influence on each other’s health, and concordance in

health behavior increases over time. Several studies suggest couple-

focused interventions for health behavior change may be more ef-

18-21 fective than individual interventions (Table 1).

Studies often suggest that adoption of diet modification

and physical exercise in one individual may spread to proximate

others, such as partners, creating a social environment charac-

terized by mutual reinforcement of healthy behavior and weight

18-20 loss. Given the amount of time cohabiting couples spend with

one another, it is logical to assume that modeling of health behav-

iors would occur, such as high-levels of sedentary behavior and

low-levels of physical activity. Also, a strong attachment between

couples may heighten identification with his or her experiences and

18,19 the motivation to conform. The other issue to take into consid-

eration, is that couples are often eating the same food together, but

the same foods may be wrong for the individual genetic profiles

which could end up resulting in poor weight loss maintenance. 1,13

Involving partners in behavior change interventions and

encouraging partners to lose weight together may help improve

health outcomes. Having couples adopt healthy behaviors togeth-

er may be a promising approach, especially when weight gain is

not a consequence of medications or comorbid conditions. Hav-

ing positive reinforcement from a partner or spouse is invaluable

18,19 when tackling obesity and weight loss. Using a program that

Men and women are more likely to make a positive

of a partner's health behavior change, such as increased physical

consistently healthy in that domain.

People observe and may adopt the behaviors of Researchers analyzed data of 401 families from the those around them, whether healthy or unhealthy.

Networks and Obesity: Relationships and

examined the Research suggests that a person who makes a on individual healthy behavior change has a larger impact on behaviors and outcomes looking at three potential others’ positive health behaviors and that adoption social mechanisms influencing obesity; normative of exercise or diet modifications in one individual is body size, social control and behavior modeling likely to spread to others.

than respondents whose partner is in good health.

As the men or women’s BMIs in the study increased,

their spouses BMIs also increased. Spousal BMI simi- Researchers analyzed the data of BMI changes in 21 larities might be driven by the impact of living in a

shared obesogenic environment and by the influence

of one spouse on the other.

sets a person up for weight loss success through personalized nu-

trition, such as the Digbi Health program, is a key component to

improving health and weight loss maintenance. In the instance of

the couple in this case report, this was found to be true.

Case Study

A 58-year Caucasian male with type 2 diabetes and hypertension

was not happy with his primary care physician’s management of

his chronic conditions. He had been receiving treatment from the

same physician for many years and decided to make a change. His

new physician wanted him to make dietary changes to reduce his

weight and increase his physical activity routine.

At the time of the appointment with his new physician he

reported the following:

• Weight=251 pounds

• BMI=35

• A1c level=9.4

• BP reading=140/90

• Diabetes medication: Januvia; Metformin 500 mg twice a day

• Hypertension medication: Atenolol; Terazosin; Valsartan

• Acid reflux medication: Omeprazole

• Other medications: Aspirin; Multivitamins

The patient also reported suffering from sleep apnea, di-

gestive disorders and acid reflux. He also complained of fatigue

and reported that he had an injured ankle at the time so increasing

physical activity would be difficult. The doctor advised incorporat-

ing a fitness routine and referred him to a fitness center close to his

house.

After an initial assessment at the fitness center his fitness

expert advised him to use the Digbi Health personalized obesity

management program. Due to his injured ankle, he was not able to

start a full fitness routine, but started a low intensity cardio routine

consisting of light walking daily. He signed up for the Digbi Health

program. Next, he sampled his deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) and

gut microbiome and started working with the Digbi Health coach-

es. His spouse, a 65-year-old Caucasian female, whom he had been

married to for over five years, did not suffer from any chronic

conditions, but she did take omeprazole for heartburn and had

her right knee replaced 3-years prior. Occasionally she experienced

slight knee and joint pain. She reported gaining over 15 pounds in

the last five years and wanted to lose weight to look and feel better.

At the time of the initial appointment at the fitness cen-

ter, she weighed 197 pounds and had a BMI of 32.8. She reported

trying a variety of diets over the years with quick results, but often

resulted in gaining the weight back. Being a supportive spouse, and

wanting to make a change herself, she decided to also sign up for

the Digbi Health program and go through the program together

with her husband.

The Digbi Health program is a 24-week program which

uses metabolic markers, body metrics, gut microbiome and genetic profiles to offer more than a one-size-fits-all food and lifestyle

recommendation weight loss program. Participants use the Digbi

Health app to input 10 key lifestyle and wellness markers, includ-

ing weight, sleep, hunger, cravings, stress, meditation, superfoods,

morning energy, foods to avoid and exercise on a daily basis and

take photos of the food they consume.

Individuals will receive a personalized wellness report af-

ter sampling their blood, DNA and gut microbiome. The report

provides a better understanding of an individual’s unique biology

and metabolism and how it interacts with food and lifestyle to im-

pact your health and quality longevity. It also provides a breakdown

of obesity risk based on an individual’s DNA and gut microbiome

profile.22 The program takes the guesswork out of healthy eating

for an individual’s body, lifestyle, gender and age.

Each individual is also assigned a lifestyle coach who will

work personally with the individual through 12 guided sessions at

various intervals. Both the husband and wife went through the full

coaching component of the program. The coaches worked with

the individuals based on their results and advised them on how to

best structure their diet. Individuals have the ability to view a per-

sonalized integrative nutrition plan based on their biophysiological

individuality and work with the Digbi Health lifestyle coaches to

produce modified behavioral changes and favorable weight loss re-

sults.

Personalized integrative nutrition,23 such as the personal-

ized plan from Digbi Health, is important because no two human

beings have the same genetic code. An individual’s genes not only

determine how one looks, height, skin type, but also influences dis-

ease risk, obesity risk, as well as one’s energy and immunity levels.

Genes play a key role in how effectively an individual is processing

carbohydrates, fat, protein and converting them into energy, creat-

ing vitamins, hormones and steroids.24 Our genes also play a role

in how we fight disease, metabolize medication one consumes and

body detoxification and rebuilding cells.25

Methods

The analysis of the saliva DNA sample and fecal gut microbiome

sample is completed after the samples are processed in clinical lab-

oratory improvement amendments (CLIA) accredited laboratory.

Fecal and saliva DNA extraction, purification, next-generation se-

quencing (NGS) library preparation and sequencing is performed

as per the Illumina standard protocol.

DNA Interpretation

The outcome presented in the DNA report are determined by the

number of markers and risk genotypes present in the genome raw

data. Only a few human health conditions are dependent on a sin-

gle gene marker. The vast majority of human traits are influenced

by multiple gene markers. In addition, there is significant interac-

tion between genes and environment such as dietary and lifestyle

factors.

The outcome is a subjective measure and not a clinical

measure. It is the percentage of risk markers present in the ge-

nome data among the maximum possible risk markers in the ge-

nome data. The genetic risk score (GRS) is calculated by analyzing

a large number of risk variants. Unless several of these high-risk

variants are present in the data the outcome could be low or mod-

erate.

For the obesity risk DNA profile of an individual we pro-

file the genes that have been shown to influence nutritional traits

such as, diet and weight management, micronutrient requirements,

food intolerance and several other attributes relevant to nutritional

well-being. The word “likely” is used often in this study. “Likely”

means, it is more likely that one will see the outcome, but other

factors may modify it. The term “average” is also used in this study.

Average implies neither high nor low, rather an intermediate out-

come. For example, average likelihood of injury is an intermediate

level between high and low likelihood. Average can also be under-

stood in the context of “Normal” or “Typical” or “Moderate”.

The risk status of an individual’s markers is typically in-

dicated as low, moderate and high risk. Attributes that are advanta-

geous in nutritional well-being are indicated in green, or as a low

risk, and those are not advantageous, or high risk are in red. Mod-

erate or neutral outcomes are indicated in yellow.

Results and Incorporation of the DNA and Gut Microbiome Profile into the Digbi Health Program Treatment Plan

Gut Microbiome Interpretation

The 16s paired fastq reads of the gut microbiome samples were

quality checked and merged to generate the amplicons. Amplicons

were further processed to calculate the bacterial genus abundance

in each sample using automated data analysis pipeline based on the

Parallel-META 3 pipeline.27 The sample values are compared with

that of a healthy cohort value. The determined abundance of each

bacterial genus was further analyzed to compute the diversity index

using the in house developed python code. Further biochemical

annotation of identified bacterial genera was performed based on

our in-house database.

The associated bacteria are, Akkermansia, Bacteroides, Bi-

fidobacterium, Anaerostipes, Coprococcus, Roseburia, Eubacterium, Rumi-

nococcus and Christensenella. A higher abundance of associated bac-

teria helps to combat weight gain, inflammation, regulates weight,

appetite, fat accumulation. These are associated with weight loss

and leaner body types. A lower abundance of associated bacteria is

detrimental and increases the risk of gaining weight and increases

inflammation.

The negatively associated bacteria are Alistipes, Clostrid-

ium, Faecalibacterium, Lactobacillus, Prevotella and Blautia. A higher

abundance of negatively associated bacteria promotes weight gain,

inflammation and metabolic disorders. A lower abundance of neg-

atively bacteria is beneficial and reduces the risk of gaining weight

and inflammation (Tables 2 and 3).

Table 2. Percentile Range for High to Low Risk Associated Bacteria Used in the Digbi Health Database

Associated

Bacteria

Risk Status Percentile Range Remarks

High Risk 0 to 59.9% Low Abundance of Good Bacteria

Moderate Risk 60 to 79.9% Moderate Abundance

Low Risk 80%-99.9% Normal Abundance

Table 3. Percentile Range for High to Low Risk Negatively Associated Bacteria Used in the Digbi Health Database

Negatively Associated

Bacteria

Percentile Risk Status Remarks Range

High Abundance of Bad High Risk Above 80% Bacteria

Moderate Risk 60 to 79.9% Moderate Abundance

Low Risk 0 to 59.9% Low Abundance

Table 4. Male and Female Subject’s Obesity Risk (DNA) Profile

Markers Genes Risk/Status

MAF, MC4R, MTCH2, SEC16B, NPC1,

LEP, PCSK1, NEGR1, KCTD15, STK33,

Tendency to gain weight BDNF, ADRB21, ADRB2, ADIPOQ, Moderate Risk

TMEM18, UCP3, ADRB1, UCP2,

GNPDA2, SH2B1, ETV5, FTO

Tendency to overeat FTO,TAS2R38, MC4R, DRD2, CLOCK Low Risk

Tendency to prefer fatty foods CD36, CD361 Moderate Risk

TAS1R2,TAS2R381,TAS1R21,

Tendency to prefer sweet foods TAS1R3,TAS2R38, GLUT2,TAS1R31, Moderate Risk

TAS2R382

Tendency to prefer bitter foods TAS2R38,TAS2R382,TAS2R381 Moderate Risk

SEC16B, RBJ, FTO1, FTO, FLJ35779, Carbohydrate intake and weight FAIM2, FABP2, AMY1, LRRN6C, Moderate Risk gain tendency TCF7L2

Saturated fats intake and weight FTO, APOA2 Low Risk gain tendency

Mono unsaturated fats intake NR1D1, ADIPOQ, PPARG High Risk and weight gain tendency

Poly unsaturated fats intake and BDNF Low Risk weight gain tendency

Protein intake and weight loss FTO Low Risk tendency

Tendency to regain weight TFAP2B, PPARG, ADIPOQ, BDNF Moderate Risk

Weight loss or weight gain High Risk INSIG2, FTO, ADRB2 with exercise (Unfavorable)

Exercise motivation BDNF Moderate Risk

Obesity Risk Index risk;

Male Subject

The male subject’s eating pattern prior to starting the program was

slightly high in carbohydrates and processed foods such as chips,

pretzels at snack times late in the evening and he would drink 35

cups of coffee per week.

The results revealed the male subject had a genetic mod-

erate obesity risk of 1.84 with 3 being the highest risk. According to

the genetic markers on genes NR1D1, ADIPOQ, PPARG assessed,

he showed a genetic tendency for a higher BMI on a monoun-

saturated fatty acids (MUFA) diet, but less likely to gain weight on

high polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFA) diet according the mark-

ers assessed on the BDNF gene. His results also revealed he was

highly likely to lose weight with a low carbohydrate intake and high

protein intake according to the markers assessed on the follow-

ing genes SEC16B, RBJ, FTO1, FTO, FLJ35779, FAIM2, FABP2,

AMY1, LRRN6C and TCF7L2. According to the CYP1A2 gene,

the results revealed that the male subject was a slow metabolizer of

caffeine and was advised to reduce his coffee intake to two cups a

day to reduce inflammation and cardiac risk. The male subject did

significantly reduce his caffeine intake.

The report of the male subject in this case study also Male Subject Female Subject

Remarks Risk/Status Remarks

Likely to gain weight Moderate Risk Likely to gain weight

Less likely to overeat Moderate Risk Likely to overeat

Likely to over consume Less likely to over consume Low Risk high fat foods high fat

Likely to over consume Highly likely to over consume High Risk sweet foods sweet foods

Normal bitter vegetable Normal bitter vegetable prefer- Moderate Risk preference ence

Likely to gain weight on Likely to gain weight on high carb Moderate Risk high carb intake intake

Less likely to gain weight Less likely to gain weight on high Low Risk on high SFA intake SFA intake

Highly likely to gain weight Highly likely to gain weight with High Risk with high MUFA intake high MUFA intake

Less likely to gain weight Less likely to gain weight with high Low Risk with high PUFA intake PUFA intake

Highly likely to lose weight Highly likely to lose weight on Low Risk on high protein intake high protein intake

Likely to regain weight Likely to regain weight after Moderate Risk after weight loss weight loss

May not experience much Low Risk Likely to experience higher weight

weight loss (favorable) loss

Moderate inclination Moderate inclination towards Moderate Risk towards exercise exercise

1.84 (1=Lowest 1.76 (1=Lowest

Moderate Risk risk; 3=Highest Moderate Risk

3=Highest risk) risk)

revealed that he was an unfavorable candidate to experience much

weight loss with exercise, based on his genetic markers. So, he was

advised to continue to exercise, but to focus on dietary means to

reduce weight. His diet included focusing on complex carbohy-

drates such as fruits, vegetables, legumes and whole grains, as well

as increasing intake in grape seed oil, chia seeds, tuna and mackerel

which are rich in polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFA). The male

subject in this case study, had a moderate obesity risk according to

his gut microbiome report and his microbiome diversity score was

8.16 out of 10. A greater microbiome diversity score is associated

with good health.28 The microbiome diversity score is calculated by

normalizing the inverse form of Simpson’s Diversity Index to 10.

Scores range from 0 to 10, with 10 being the most diverse.

Female Subject

The female subject’s eating pattern prior to starting the program

was high in carbohydrates and processed foods such as chips, pret-

zels and protein bars. She also drank 14 cups of coffee a week

before starting the program.

After taking her sample the results revealed that she had

a genetic moderate obesity risk 1.76. Her results also revealed that

she had a genetic tendency for rapid weight regain after a weight

Table 5. Male and Female Subject’s Obesity Risk (Gut Microbiome) Profile

Markers Risk Remarks

Akkermansia High Risk

Bacteroides Low Risk This genus has shown potential to combat weight gain Low Risk

Bifidobacterium High Risk This genus has shown potential to combat weight gain High Risk

Anaerostipes High Risk Associated with weight loss and leaner body types High Risk Associated with weight loss and leaner body types

Coprococcus High Risk Associated with weight loss and leaner body types High Risk Associated with weight loss and leaner body types

Roseburia Low Risk Associated with weight loss and leaner body types Low Risk Associated with weight loss and leaner body types

Eubacterium High Risk Regulates weight and appetite

Ruminococcus High Risk Regulates weight and appetite

Alistipes Low Risk

Clostridium Low Risk

Faecalibacterium Low Risk High abundance increases Obesity/metabolic disorder High Risk

Lactobacillus Low Risk High abundance increases Obesity/metabolic disorder Low Risk

Prevotella Low Risk High abundance increases Obesity/metabolic disorder Low Risk

Firmicutes/ Your gut microbiome’s Firmicutes/Bacteroidetes Ratio Your gut microbiome’s Firmicutes/Bacteroidetes 1.1:1 (ideal range is Bacteroidetes suggest moderate risk of chronic inflammatory risk- Ratio suggest moderate risk of chronic inflammatoless than 0.9:1) Ratio weight gain, aches and pains and headaches.

Obesity Risk 2 (1=Lowest risk;

Index 3=Highest Risk)

The markers are individual traits that ether positively or negatively associate with obesity based on

qualitative relative to the uBiome healthy cohort.

loss program according to the genetic markers on the genes ADI-

POQ, PPARG, TFAP2B and BDNF. She was advised to follow a

healthy lifestyle and eating pattern to ensure better weight main-

tenance. She was also advised to not skip breakfast, but rather to

eat a nutrient dense breakfast, avoid processed foods and sugar

sweetened beverages and include more whole grains, nuts, fruits

and vegetables in her diet. According to the genetic markers on

the genes TAS1R2, TAS2R381, TAS2R38, TAS2R382, GLUT2,

TAS1R21, TAS1R3, TAS1R31 her results revealed a genetic ten-

dency for lower sweet taste perception and overconsumption of

sweet foods. She was advised to drink more water and try to con-

sciously reduce intake of sweets, which she did, and this helped

with her weight loss.

Her genetic report also revealed a favorable response to

weight loss when engaging in regular exercise according to the ge-

netic markers assessed on the genes FTO, ADRB2, INSIG2. Inter-

estingly, similar to her husband, she also showed a genetic tendency

for a higher BMI on a MUFA diet, but less likely to gain weight on

high PUFA diet which would help to make meal planning and food

preparation together as a couple more aligned. Eating the right

food types for their genetic profiles helped with their weight loss.

The results of the first gut microbiome sample revealed

that the female subject in this case study had a high obesity risk and Male Subject Female Subject

Risk Remarks

This genus has shown potential to combat weight gain This genus has shown potential to combat weight High Risk and inflammation gain and inflammation

This genus has shown potential to combat weight

gain

This genus has shown potential to combat weight

gain

High Risk Regulates weight and appetite

High Risk Regulates weight and appetite

This genus has shown to promote weight gain and This genus has shown to promote weight gain and Low Risk inflammation inflammation

This genus has shown to promote weight gain and This genus has shown to promote weight gain and High Risk inflammation inflammation

High abundance increases Obesity/metabolic

disorder

High abundance increases Obesity/metabolic

disorder

High abundance increases Obesity/metabolic

disorder

1.69:1 (ideal range is

less than 0.9:1) ry risk-weight gain, aches and pains and headaches.

2.28 (1=Lowest risk; Moderate Risk High Risk 3=Highest Risk)

single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) or bacterial genus abundance. Results are

her microbial diversity score was 8.22 out of 10.

Results

Male Subject

After 16 weeks on the program the husband went from 251 pounds

to 207 pounds, achieving a 15.94% weight loss. He went from an

XXL size shirt to a large and lost four inches on his waist going

from a size 38 to 34-inch waist size. He also reported significant

health improvements after visiting his physician at the end of Au-

gust 2019:

• A1c level was 5.7

• BP reading was 109/80

• Total change in weight loss of 15.94%

• New BMI was 28.05 after program completion (reduced from

obese to overweight)

• Dosage change of his metformin-from 2 tablets daily to 1

tablet at night daily

• Stopped taking omeprazole due to relief of heartburn

symptoms

• The dosages of the other medication still remain the same

and will be reviewed by his physician in 6-months

Figure 1. Graph Showing Three-Month Weight Trend of Male Subject from the Start of the Program, Data from the Digbi Health App

Figure 2
Figure 2. Graph Showing That the Probiotic Abundance had Increased between Sample 1 and Sample 2 of the Male Subject, Data from the Digbi Health App An increased abundance of Lactobacillus and Christensella were noted in in abundance of Akkermansia was noted in sample 2. Akkermansia is associated with an increased metabolism.

Figure 3. Graph Showing Three-Month Weight Trend of Female Spouse from the Start of the Program, Data from the Digbi Health App sample 2. Christensenella limits fat accumulation. A significantly high increase

Figure 4. Graph Showing That the Probiotic Abundance was Relatively Unchanged between Sample 1 and Sample 2 of the Female Subject, Data from the Digbi Health App A Decrease in Abundance of Lactobacillus and Christensella were Noted in Sample 2. An Increase in Abundance of Akkermansia was Noted in Sample 2.

After completing 16 weeks on the program the husband

reported being easily able to maintain his weight because he knows

what foods are good for him and he knows the best way to prepare

his foods based on his genetic and gut microbiome profile. He felt

more energized and was able to incorporate strength training into

his fitness routine. He now goes to the gym daily (Figure 1).

A second gut fecal swab sample was taken by both the

husband and wife around the fourth month in the program and

the gut microbiome comparative profile was discussed during the

coaching session.

The results of the second gut microbiome sample re-

vealed that there was a substantial gain in the relative abundance

of “good” probiotic microbes in the gut and this resulted in a de-

creased obesity risk for the male subject. The bacterial microbial

diversity of the gut was largely unchanged (Figure 2).

Female Subject

The wife went from a starting weight of 197 to 170 and lost over

6 inches on her waist going from a size 16 to a size 10 and a total

change in weight loss of 13.65 percent. At the end of the program

she reported having more energy to take longer walks, around 45

minutes 4-5 times a week and has incorporated strength training

into her fitness routine when she goes to the gym, now three days

a week. Her genetic profile also reveals she is more likely to lose

weight with regular exercise. She also reported experiencing less

pain in her knees after the weight loss and she stopped taking the

omeprazole because she rarely suffers with heartburn (Figure 3).

The results of the second gut microbiome sample re-

vealed her bacterial microbial diversity of the gut was largely un-

changed, but her obesity risk moderately decreased, and her pro-

biotic abundance remained relatively unchanged. Her results also

revealed a reduced inflammation risk due to a substantial drop in the short chain fatty acid producing microbe butyrate. She was en-

couraged to increase her intake of fermented food and prebiotic

fiber-rich food including, chicory root, dandelion greens, Jerusa-

lem artichokes, lettuce, endive, asparagus, garlic, onions and leeks

help increase her probiotic abundance. Research has also revealed

that regular exercise can also improve your gut microbiome (Figure

4).29

Discussion

A big challenge of obesity management is not weight loss, but

long-term weight loss maintenance.30 Weight loss maintenance is

often hindered by a complex interaction of biological, behavior-

al, and cognitive factors. The number of couple-based studies

were limited for this case study. More methodologically analyzed

couple-focused interventions are therefore required in order to de-

termine added benefits of couple-based interventions relative to

evidence-based individual interventions based on gut microbiome

and genetic profiles. Most obesity studies have either focused on

genetic profiles alone or gut microbiome alone, not a combina-

tion. Studies, ideally randomized controlled trials, are still needed

looking at a combination of DNA and gut microbiome together.

The Digbi Health program is the only program that provides the

individual with an obesity risk profile based on their genetics and

gut microbiome.

If one is equipped with all the tools needed for success-

ful maintenance and encouraged in a supportive environment, the

chances of regaining weight upon program completion is reduced.

The couple are now in the maintenance phase of their program

and have reported they both feel more energized, are exercising

more regularly, including playing golf together, spending more

time outdoors and feel very empowered to know how to prepare

the right foods for themselves and their bodies. They believe the

coaching sessions were invaluable because it made them feel ac-

countable for what they were eating and when they were eating.

They also reported that having a complete DNA and gut microbi-

ome profile was empowering to help them understand what foods

can be eaten and which ones should be avoided based on their

unique data. They believe that the Digbi Health App helps them to

stick to their goals and stay engaged and focused on their weight

loss journey to improved health. They also realized that following a

one-size-fits-all diet does not benefit individuals because everyone

is different. Five months after completing the program, they con-

tinue to maintain their weight.

This case study was limited to the assessment of one

couple who completed the Digbi Health program. The couple also

had a similar gene nutrition profile so food preparation and eating

the same foods benefited both for weight loss. More investigations

will need to be conducted to evaluate the potential of weight loss

amongst other cohabiting couples on the same program.

Conclusion

Since the sequencing of the human genome through the Human

Genome Project (HGP), the progress of “omics” techniques, in-

cluding gut microbiome analysis, personalized nutrition has been

extended to diseases mediated by gene-environment interactions

such as obesity and metabolic-related diseases such as type 2

diabetes. Growing studies have found that changes in adiposity,

sugar-related blood markers and metabolic response to low-calorie

weight loss diets might be modified by genetic variants related to

obesity, metabolic status, and preference to nutrients.

The gut microbiome has been identified in the past de-

cade as an important factor in obesity and diabetes and the mag-

nitude of its contribution to obesity and its related comorbidities

has aroused curiosity in the scientific community.25 Among the vast

quantity of factors attributed to obesity, environmental, dietary,

lifestyle, genetic, and others including the microbiome continues

to play an important role in the multifactorial approach to its man-

agement.1

In conclusion, we have come to realize there are many

factors that may help an individual lose weight. In particular co-

habiting couples’ close relationships, following a weight loss pro-

gram personalized to their gene and gut microbiome profile, may

provide a more supportive environment for overweight or obese

men and women to initiate the pursuit of weight loss and maintain

healthy dietary practices and increased physical activity.

Acknowledgement

We would like to acknowledge the Prescribe Fit team, a partner in

the Digbi Health Precision Care Network, for their referral of the

couple in this case study to the Digbi Health program.

Conflicts Of Interest

Dr. Singh-Rambiritch reports that fees for the Digbi Health pro-

gram were collected from the couple through the institution, Pre-

scribe Fit, who is one of the Digbi Health partners that supplies

the program to at cost.

References

  1. Stephan P, Häring H-U, Shulze MB. Metabolically healthy obesity: the low-hanging fruit in obesity treatment? Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2018; 6(3): 249-258. doi: 10.1016/S2213-8587(17)30292-9 https://doi.org/10.1016/s2213-8587(17)30292-9
  2. WingRRPhelanS. Long-term weight loss maintenance. AM J Clin Nutr. 2005; 82: 222S-225S. doi: 10.1093/ajcn/82.1.222S10.1093/ajcn/82.1.222s https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcn/82.1.222s
  3. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Adult Obesity Causes and Consequences. Web site. https://www.cdc.gov/obesity/adult/causes.html. Accessed October 8, 2019
  4. RedingerRN. The pathophysiology of obesity and its clinical manifestations. Gastroenterol Hepatol (N Y). 2007; 3(11): 856-863
  5. CatoiAFVodnarDCCorinaA. Gut microbiota, obesity and bariatric surgery: Current knowledge and future perspectives. Curr Pharm Des. 2019; 25(18): 2038-2050. doi: 10.2174/138161282 566619070819043710.2174/138161282 https://doi.org/10.2174/138161282
  6. WoleverRQSimmonsLASforzoGA. A systematic review of the literature on health and wellness coaching: Defining a key behavioral intervention in healthcare. Glob Adv Health Med. 2013; 2(4): 38-57. doi: 10.7453/gahmj.2013.04210.7453/gahmj.2013.042 https://doi.org/10.7453/gahmj.2013.042
  7. Arden-CloseEMcGrathN. Health behaviour change interven- 1,4,22,23,30 tions for couples: A systematic review. Br J Health Psychol. 2017; 22(2): 215-237. doi: 10.1111/bjhp.1222710.1111/bjhp.12227 https://doi.org/10.1111/bjhp.12227
  8. World Health Organization (WHO). Obesity. Web site. https:// www.who.int/topics/obesity/en/. Accessed October 8, 2019
  9. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. Assessing your Weight and Health Risk. Web site. https://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/ health/educational/lose_wt/risk.htm. Accessed October 8, 2019
  10. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Obesity and Overweight. Web site. https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/obesity-overweight.htm. Accessed October 8, 2019
  11. The Nutrition Source. An Epidemic of Obesity: U.S. Obesity Trends. Web site. https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/an-epidemic-of-obesity. Accessed October 8, 2019
  12. MartinCBHerrickKASarafraziNOgdenCL. Attempts to lose weight among adults in the United States, 2013-2016. NCHS Data Brief. 2018; (313): 1-8
  13. ContiCR. Obesity and weight loss. Eur Cardiol. 2018; 13(2): 93-94. doi: 10.15420/ecr.2018.13.2.EO110.15420/ecr.2018.13.2.eo1 https://doi.org/10.15420/ecr.2018.13.2.eo1
  14. HeianzaYQiL. Gene-diet interaction and precision nutrition in obesity. Int J Mol Sci. 2017; 18(4): 787. doi: 10.3390/ijms1804078710.3390/ijms18040787 https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms18040787
  15. Sirisinha, S. The potential impact of gut microbiota on your health: Current status and future challenges. Asian Pac J Allergy Immunol. 2016; 34: 249-264. doi: 10.12932/AP0803 https://doi.org/10.12932/ap0803
  16. MacLeanPSBlundellJEMennellaJABatterhamRL. Biological control of appetite: A daunting complexity. Obesity (Silver Spring). 2017; 25 Suppl 1(Suppl 1): S8-S16. doi: 10.1002/oby.2177110.1002/oby.21771 https://doi.org/10.1002/oby.21771
  17. KumaniykaSK. Obesity in minority populations: An epidemiological assessment. Obes Res. 1994; 2(2): 166-182
  18. JacksonSESteptoeAWardleJ. The influence of partner’s behavior on health behavior change: The English Longitudinal Study of Ageing. JAMA Intern Med. 2015; 175(3): 385-392. doi: 10.1001/ jamainternmed.2014.7554
  19. PerryBCiciurkaiteGBradyCFGarciaJ. Partner influence in diet and exercise behaviors: Testing behavior modeling, social control, and normative body size. PLoS One. 2016; 11(12): e0169193. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.016919310.1371/journal.pone.0169193 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0169193
  20. MondenC. Partners in health? Exploring resemblance in health between partners in married and cohabiting couples. Sociol Health Illn. 2007; 29(3): 391-411. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9566.2007.01003.x10.1111/j.1467-9566.2007.01003.x https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9566.2007.01003.x
  21. CobbLKMcAdams-DeMarcoMAGudzuneKA. Changes in body mass index and obesity risk in married couples over 25 years: The ARIC cohort study. Am J Epidemiol. 2016; 183(5): 435-443. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwv11210.1093/aje/kwv112 https://doi.org/10.1093/aje/kwv112
  22. CastanerOGodayAParkYM. The gut microbiome profile in obesity: A systematic review. Int J Endocrinol. 2018; 4095789. doi: 10.1155/2018/409578910.1155/2018/4095789 https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/4095789
  23. QiL. Personalized nutrition and obesity. Ann Med. 2014; 46(5): 247-252. doi: 10.3109/07853890.2014.89180210.3109/07853890.2014.891802 https://doi.org/10.3109/07853890.2014.891802
  24. MeadMN. Nutrigenomics: The genome--food interface. Environ Health Perspect. 2007; 115(12): A582-A589. doi: 10.1289/ ehp.115-a582
  25. AhmedSZhouZZhouJChenSQ. Pharmacogenomics of drug metabolizing enzymes and transporters: Relevance to precision medicine. Genomics Proteomics Bioinformatics. 2016; 14(5): 298- 313. doi: 10.1016/j.gpb.2016.03.008 ™ illumina. Nextera™ crude lysate protocol for metagenomic next-generation sequencing. Web site. https://www.illumina. com/content/dam/illumina-marketing/documents/products/appnotes/nextera-dna-flex-crude-lysate-770-2018-006.pdf. Accessed October 8, 201910.1016/j.gpb.2016.03.008 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gpb.2016.03.008
  26. JingGSunZWangH. Parallel-META 3: Comprehensive taxonomical and functional analysis platform for efficient comparison of microbial communities. Nature Scientific Reports. 2017; 7: 40371. doi: 10.1038/srep4037110.1038/srep40371 https://doi.org/10.1038/srep40371
  27. LozuponeCAStombaughJIGordonJIJanssonJKKnightR. Diversity, stability and resilience of the human gut microbiota. Nature. 2012; 489(7415): 220-230. doi: 10.1038/nature1155010.1038/nature11550 https://doi.org/10.1038/nature11550
  28. CerdáBPérezMPérez-SantiagoJD. Gut microbiota modification: Another piece in the puzzle of the benefits of physical exercise in health? Front. Physiol. 2016; 7: 51. doi: 10.3389/ fphys.2016.00051
  29. KraschnewskiJLBoanJEspositoJ. Long-term weight loss maintenance in the United States. Int J Obes (Lond). 2010; 34(11): 1644-1654. doi: 10.1038/ijo.2010.9410.1038/ijo.2010.94 https://doi.org/10.1038/ijo.2010.94
  30. Montesi L, El Ghoch M, Brodosi L, Calugi S, Marchesini G, Grave RD. Long-term weight loss maintenance for obesity: a multidisciplinary approach. Diabetes Metab Syndr Obes. 2016; 9: 37-46. doi: 10.2147/DMSO.S89836 https://doi.org/10.2147/dmso.s89836