Network


Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.

Hotspot


Dive into the research topics where Byron J. Hoogwerf is active.

Publication


Featured researches published by Byron J. Hoogwerf.


Diabetes Care | 2008

Nutrition recommendations and interventions for diabetes: a position statement of the American Diabetes Association.

John P. Bantle; Judith Wylie-Rosett; Ann Albright; Caroline M Apovian; Nathaniel G. Clark; Marion J. Franz; Byron J. Hoogwerf; Alice H. Lichtenstein; Elizabeth J. Mayer-Davis; Arshag D. Mooradian; Madelyn L. Wheeler

Medical nutrition therapy (MNT) is important in preventing diabetes, managing existing diabetes, and preventing, or at least slowing, the rate of development of diabetes complications. It is, therefore, important at all levels of diabetes prevention. MNT is also an integral component of diabetes self-management education (or training). This position statement provides evidence-based recommendations and interventions for diabetes MNT. The previous position statement with accompanying technical review was published in 2002 and modified slightly in 2004. This statement updates previous position statements, focuses on key references published since the year 2000, and uses grading according to the level of evidence available...


The Lancet | 2006

Effect of rosiglitazone on the frequency of diabetes in patients with impaired glucose tolerance or impaired fasting glucose: a randomised controlled trial.

rosiglitazone Medication Trial Investigators; Hertzel C. Gerstein; Salim Yusuf; Jackie Bosch; Janice Pogue; Patrick Sheridan; Dinccag N; Markolf Hanefeld; Byron J. Hoogwerf; Markku Laakso; Mohan; Jonathan E. Shaw; B. Zinman; R R Holman

BACKGROUND Rosiglitazone is a thiazolidinedione that reduces insulin resistance and might preserve insulin secretion. The aim of this study was to assess prospectively the drugs ability to prevent type 2 diabetes in individuals at high risk of developing the condition. METHODS 5269 adults aged 30 years or more with impaired fasting glucose or impaired glucose tolerance, or both, and no previous cardiovascular disease were recruited from 191 sites in 21 countries and randomly assigned to receive rosiglitazone (8 mg daily; n=2365) or placebo (2634) and followed for a median of 3 years. The primary outcome was a composite of incident diabetes or death. Analyses were done by intention to treat. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00095654. FINDINGS At the end of study, 59 individuals had dropped out from the rosiglitazone group and 46 from the placebo group. 306 (11.6%) individuals given rosiglitazone and 686 (26.0%) given placebo developed the composite primary outcome (hazard ratio 0.40, 95% CI 0.35-0.46; p<0.0001); 1330 (50.5%) individuals in the rosiglitazone group and 798 (30.3%) in the placebo group became normoglycaemic (1.71, 1.57-1.87; p<0.0001). Cardiovascular event rates were much the same in both groups, although 14 (0.5%) participants in the rosiglitazone group and two (0.1%) in the placebo group developed heart failure (p=0.01). INTERPRETATION Rosiglitazone at 8 mg daily for 3 years substantially reduces incident type 2 diabetes and increases the likelihood of regression to normoglycaemia in adults with impaired fasting glucose or impaired glucose tolerance, or both.


The Lancet | 2010

Effect of intensive treatment of hyperglycaemia on microvascular outcomes in type 2 diabetes: an analysis of the ACCORD randomised trial

Faramarz Ismail-Beigi; Timothy E. Craven; Mary Ann Banerji; Jan N. Basile; Jorge Calles; Robert M. Cohen; Robert Cuddihy; William C. Cushman; Saul Genuth; Richard H. Grimm; Bruce P. Hamilton; Byron J. Hoogwerf; Diane Karl; Lois A. Katz; Armand Krikorian; Patrick J. O'Connor; Rodica Pop-Busui; Ulrich K. Schubart; Debra L. Simmons; Abraham Thomas; Daniel J. Weiss; Irene Hramiak

BACKGROUND Hyperglycaemia is associated with increased risk of cardiovascular complications in people with type 2 diabetes. We investigated whether reduction of blood glucose concentration decreases the rate of microvascular complications in people with type 2 diabetes. METHODS ACCORD was a parallel-group, randomised trial done in 77 clinical sites in North America. People with diabetes, high HbA(1c) concentrations (>7.5%), and cardiovascular disease (or >or=2 cardiovascular risk factors) were randomly assigned by central randomisation to intensive (target haemoglobin A(1c) [HbA(1c)] of <6.0%) or standard (7.0-7.9%) glycaemic therapy. In this analysis, the prespecified composite outcomes were: dialysis or renal transplantation, high serum creatinine (>291.7 micromol/L), or retinal photocoagulation or vitrectomy (first composite outcome); or peripheral neuropathy plus the first composite outcome (second composite outcome). 13 prespecified secondary measures of kidney, eye, and peripheral nerve function were also assessed. Investigators and participants were aware of treatment group assignment. Analysis was done for all patients who were assessed for microvascular outcomes, on the basis of treatment assignment, irrespective of treatments received or compliance to therapies. ACCORD is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00000620. FINDINGS 10 251 patients were randomly assigned, 5128 to the intensive glycaemia control group and 5123 to standard group. Intensive therapy was stopped before study end because of higher mortality in that group, and patients were transitioned to standard therapy. At transition, the first composite outcome was recorded in 443 of 5107 patients in the intensive group versus 444 of 5108 in the standard group (HR 1.00, 95% CI 0.88-1.14; p=1.00), and the second composite outcome was noted in 1591 of 5107 versus 1659 of 5108 (0.96, 0.89-1.02; p=0.19). Results were similar at study end (first composite outcome 556 of 5119 vs 586 of 5115 [HR 0.95, 95% CI 0.85-1.07, p=0.42]; and second 1956 of 5119 vs 2046 of 5115, respectively [0.95, 0.89-1.01, p=0.12]). Intensive therapy did not reduce the risk of advanced measures of microvascular outcomes, but delayed the onset of albuminuria and some measures of eye complications and neuropathy. Seven secondary measures at study end favoured intensive therapy (p<0.05). INTERPRETATION Microvascular benefits of intensive therapy should be weighed against the increase in total and cardiovascular disease-related mortality, increased weight gain, and high risk for severe hypoglycaemia. FUNDING US National Institutes of Health; National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases; National Institute on Aging; National Eye Institute; Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; and General Clinical Research Centers.


BMJ | 2010

The association between symptomatic, severe hypoglycaemia and mortality in type 2 diabetes: retrospective epidemiological analysis of the ACCORD study

Denise E. Bonds; Michael I. Miller; Richard M. Bergenstal; John B. Buse; Robert P. Byington; Jeff A Cutler; R James Dudl; Faramarz Ismail-Beigi; Angela R. Kimel; Byron J. Hoogwerf; Karen R. Horowitz; Peter J. Savage; Elizabeth R. Seaquist; Debra L. Simmons; William I. Sivitz; Joann M Speril-Hillen; Mary Ellen Sweeney

Objective To determine whether there is a link between hypoglycaemia and mortality among participants in the Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes (ACCORD) trial. Design Retrospective epidemiological analysis of data from the ACCORD trial. Setting Diabetes clinics, research clinics, and primary care clinics. Participants Patients were eligible for the ACCORD study if they had type 2 diabetes, a glycated haemoglobin (haemoglobin A1C) concentration of 7.5% or more during screening, and were aged 40-79 years with established cardiovascular disease or 55-79 years with evidence of subclinical disease or two additional cardiovascular risk factors. Intervention Intensive (haemoglobin A1C <6.0%) or standard (haemoglobin A1C 7.0-7.9%) glucose control. Outcome measures Symptomatic, severe hypoglycaemia, manifest as either blood glucose concentration of less than 2.8 mmol/l (<50 mg/dl) or symptoms that resolved with treatment and that required either the assistance of another person or medical assistance, and all cause and cause specific mortality, including a specific assessment for involvement of hypoglycaemia. Results 10 194 of the 10 251 participants enrolled in the ACCORD study who had at least one assessment for hypoglycaemia during regular follow-up for vital status were included in this analysis. Unadjusted annual mortality among patients in the intensive glucose control arm was 2.8% in those who had one or more episodes of hypoglycaemia requiring any assistance compared with 1.2% for those with no episodes (53 deaths per 1924 person years and 201 deaths per 16 315 person years, respectively; adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 1.41, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.93). A similar pattern was seen among participants in the standard glucose control arm (3.7% (21 deaths per 564 person years) v 1.0% (176 deaths per 17 297 person years); adjusted HR 2.30, 95% CI 1.46 to 3.65). On the other hand, among participants with at least one hypoglycaemic episode requiring any assistance, a non-significantly lower risk of death was seen in those in the intensive arm compared with those in the standard arm (adjusted HR 0.74, 95% 0.46 to 1.23). A significantly lower risk was observed in the intensive arm compared with the standard arm in participants who had experienced at least one hypoglycaemic episode requiring medical assistance (adjusted HR 0.55, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.99). Of the 451 deaths that occurred in ACCORD up to the time when the intensive treatment arm was closed, one death was adjudicated as definitely related to hypoglycaemia. Conclusion Symptomatic, severe hypoglycaemia was associated with an increased risk of death within each study arm. However, among participants who experienced at least one episode of hypoglycaemia, the risk of death was lower in such participants in the intensive arm than in the standard arm. Symptomatic, severe hypoglycaemia does not appear to account for the difference in mortality between the two study arms up to the time when the ACCORD intensive glycaemia arm was discontinued. Trial registration NCT00000620.


Annals of Internal Medicine | 2011

Use of Twice-Daily Exenatide in Basal Insulin–Treated Patients With Type 2 Diabetes: A Randomized, Controlled Trial

John B. Buse; Richard M. Bergenstal; Leonard C. Glass; Cory R. Heilmann; Michelle S. Lewis; Anita Y.M. Kwan; Byron J. Hoogwerf; Julio Rosenstock

BACKGROUND Insulin replacement in diabetes often requires prandial intervention to reach hemoglobin A₁(c) (HbA₁(c)) targets. OBJECTIVE To test whether twice-daily exenatide injections reduce HbA₁(c) levels more than placebo in people receiving insulin glargine. DESIGN Parallel, randomized, placebo-controlled trial, blocked and stratified by HbA₁(c) level at site, performed from October 2008 to January 2010. Participants, investigators, and personnel conducting the study were masked to treatment assignments. (ClinicalTrials.gov registration number: NCT00765817) SETTING 59 centers in 5 countries. PATIENTS Adults with type 2 diabetes and an HbA₁(c) level of 7.1% to 10.5% who were receiving insulin glargine alone or in combination with metformin or pioglitazone (or both agents). INTERVENTION Assignment by a centralized, computer-generated, random-sequence interactive voice-response system to exenatide, 10 µg twice daily, or placebo for 30 weeks. MEASUREMENTS The primary outcome was change in HbA₁(c) level. Secondary outcomes included the percentage of participants with HbA₁(c) values of 7.0% or less and 6.5% or less, 7-point self-monitored glucose profiles, body weight, waist circumference, insulin dose, hypoglycemia, and adverse events. RESULTS 112 of 138 exenatide recipients and 101 of 123 placebo recipients completed the study. The HbA₁(c) level decreased by 1.74% with exenatide and 1.04% with placebo (between-group difference, -0.69% [95% CI, -0.93% to -0.46%]; P < 0.001). Weight decreased by 1.8 kg with exenatide and increased by 1.0 kg with placebo (between-group difference, -2.7 kg [CI, -3.7 to -1.7]). Average increases in insulin dosage with exenatide and placebo were 13 U/d and 20 U/d. The estimated rate of minor hypoglycemia was similar between groups. Thirteen exenatide recipients and 1 placebo recipient discontinued the study because of adverse events (P < 0.010); rates of nausea (41% vs. 8%), diarrhea (18% vs. 8%), vomiting (18% vs. 4%), headache (14% vs. 4%), and constipation (10% vs. 2%) were higher with exenatide than with placebo. LIMITATIONS The study was of short duration. There were slight imbalances between groups at baseline in terms of sex, use of concomitant glucose-lowering medications, and HbA₁(c) levels, and more exenatide recipients than placebo recipients withdrew because of adverse events. CONCLUSION Adding twice-daily exenatide injections improved glycemic control without increased hypoglycemia or weight gain in participants with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes who were receiving insulin glargine treatment. Adverse events of exenatide included nausea, diarrhea, vomiting, headache, and constipation. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE Alliance of Eli Lilly and Company and Amylin Pharmaceuticals.


The Lancet | 2013

Exenatide once weekly versus liraglutide once daily in patients with type 2 diabetes (DURATION-6): a randomised, open-label study

John B. Buse; Michael A. Nauck; Thomas Forst; Wayne H-H Sheu; Sylvia K. Shenouda; Cory R. Heilmann; Byron J. Hoogwerf; Aijun Gao; Marilyn K. Boardman; Mark Fineman; Lisa Porter; Guntram Schernthaner

BACKGROUND Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists exenatide and liraglutide have been shown to improve glycaemic control and reduce bodyweight in patients with type 2 diabetes. We compared the efficacy and safety of exenatide once weekly with liraglutide once daily in patients with type 2 diabetes. METHODS We did a 26 week, open-label, randomised, parallel-group study at 105 sites in 19 countries between Jan 11, 2010, and Jan 17, 2011. Patients aged 18 years or older with type 2 diabetes treated with lifestyle modification and oral antihyperglycaemic drugs were randomly assigned (1:1), via a computer-generated randomisation sequence with a voice response system, to receive injections of once-daily liraglutide (1·8 mg) or once-weekly exenatide (2 mg). Participants and investigators were not masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was change in glycated haemoglobin (HbA(1c)) from baseline to week 26. Analysis was by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01029886. FINDINGS Of 912 randomised patients, 911 were included in the intention-to-treat analysis (450 liraglutide, 461 exenatide). The least-squares mean change in HbA(1c) was greater in patients in the liraglutide group (-1·48%, SE 0·05; n=386) than in those in the exenatide group (-1·28%, 0·05; 390) with the treatment difference (0·21%, 95% CI 0·08-0·33) not meeting predefined non-inferiority criteria (upper limit of CI <0·25%). The most common adverse events were nausea (93 [21%] in the liraglutide group vs 43 [9%] in the exenatide group), diarrhoea (59 [13%] vs 28 [6%]), and vomiting 48 [11%] vs 17 [4%]), which occurred less frequently in the exenatide group and with decreasing incidence over time in both groups. 24 (5%) patients allocated to liraglutide and 12 (3%) allocated to exenatide discontinued participation because of adverse events. INTERPRETATION Both once daily liraglutide and once weekly exenatide led to improvements in glycaemic control, with greater reductions noted with liraglutide. These findings, plus differences in injection frequency and tolerability, could inform therapeutic decisions for treatment of patients with type 2 diabetes. FUNDING Eli Lilly and Company and Amylin Pharmaceuticals LLC.


Circulation | 2000

Long-Term Effects on Clinical Outcomes of Aggressive Lowering of Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol Levels and Low-Dose Anticoagulation in the Post Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Trial

Genell L. Knatterud; Yves Rosenberg; Lucien Campeau; Nancy L. Geller; Donald B. Hunninghake; Sandra Forman; James S. Forrester; Fredarick L. Gobel; J. Alan Herd; Ann Hickey; Byron J. Hoogwerf; Michael L. Terrin; Carl W. White

Background —The Post Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Trial, designed to compare the effects of 2 lipid-lowering regimens and low-dose anticoagulation versus placebo on progression of atherosclerosis in saphenous vein grafts of patients who had had CABG surgery, demonstrated that aggressive lowering of LDL cholesterol (LDL-C) levels to <100 mg/dL compared with a moderate reduction to 132 to 136 mg/dL decreased the progression of atherosclerosis in grafts. Low-dose anticoagulation did not significantly affect progression. Methods and Results —Approximately 3 years after the last trial visit, Clinical Center Coordinators contacted each patient by telephone to ascertain the occurrence of cardiovascular events and procedures. The National Death Index was used to ascertain vital status for patients who could not be contacted. Vital status was established for all but 3 of 1351 patients. Information on nonfatal events was available for 95% of surviving patients. A 30% reduction in revascularization procedures and 24% reduction in a composite clinical end point were observed in patients assigned to aggressive strategy compared with patients assigned to moderate strategy during 7.5 years of follow-up, P =0. 0006 and 0.001, respectively. Reductions of 35% in deaths and 31% in deaths or myocardial infarctions with low-dose anticoagulation compared with placebo were also observed, P =0.008 and 0.003, respectively. Conclusions —The long-term clinical benefit observed during extended follow-up in patients assigned to the aggressive strategy is consistent with the angiographic findings of delayed atherosclerosis progression in grafts observed during the trial. The apparent long-term benefit of low-dose warfarin remains unexplained.


Diabetes Care | 2010

Effects of Cardiac Autonomic Dysfunction on Mortality Risk in the Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes (ACCORD) Trial

Rodica Pop-Busui; Gregory W. Evans; Hertzel Gerstein; Vivian Fonseca; Jerome L. Fleg; Byron J. Hoogwerf; Saul Genuth; Richard H. Grimm; Marshall A. Corson; Ronald J. Prineas

OBJECTIVE Intensive therapy targeting normal blood glucose increased mortality compared with standard treatment in a randomized clinical trial of 10,251 participants with type 2 diabetes at high-risk for cardiovascular disease (CVD) events. We evaluated whether the presence of cardiac autonomic neuropathy (CAN) at baseline modified the effect of intensive compared with standard glycemia treatment on mortality outcomes in the Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes (ACCORD) trial participants. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS CAN was assessed by measures of heart rate variability (HRV) and QT index (QTI) computed from 10-s resting electrocardiograms in 8,135 ACCORD trial participants with valid measurements (mean age 63.0 years, 40% women). Prespecified CAN definitions included a composite of the lowest quartile of HRV and highest QTI quartile in the presence or absence of peripheral neuropathy. Outcomes were all-cause and CVD mortality. Associations between CAN and mortality were evaluated by proportional hazards analysis, adjusting for treatment group allocation, CVD history, and multiple prespecified baseline covariates. RESULTS During a mean 3.5 years follow-up, there were 329 deaths from all causes. In fully adjusted analyses, participants with baseline CAN were 1.55–2.14 times as likely to die as participants without CAN, depending on the CAN definition used (P < 0.02 for all). The effect of allocation to the intensive group on all-cause and CVD mortality was similar in participants with or without CAN at baseline (Pinteraction > 0.7). CONCLUSIONS Whereas CAN was associated with increased mortality in this high-risk type 2 diabetes cohort, these analyses indicate that participants with CAN at baseline had similar mortality outcomes from intensive compared with standard glycemia treatment in the ACCORD cohort.


Diabetes Care | 2011

Risk of Cardiovascular Disease Events in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Prescribed the Glucagon-Like Peptide 1 (GLP-1) Receptor Agonist Exenatide Twice Daily or Other Glucose-Lowering Therapies: A retrospective analysis of the LifeLink database

Jennie H. Best; Byron J. Hoogwerf; William H. Herman; Elise M. Pelletier; Daniel B. Smith; Madé Wenten; Mohamed Hussein

OBJECTIVE To test the hypothesis that exenatide twice daily reduces the relative incidence of cardiovascular disease (CVD) events among patients with type 2 diabetes compared with other glucose-lowering agent(s). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS A retrospective database analysis was performed of the LifeLink database of medical and pharmaceutical insurance claims for June 2005 through March 2009. Patients with no history in the preceding 9 months of myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, or coronary revascularization procedure were assigned to the exenatide-initiated or non–exenatide-initiated cohorts based on the first new prescription filled and reassigned if exenatide was prescribed or discontinued. Incident CVD events (myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, or coronary revascularization procedure) were identified by ICD-9-CM diagnosis codes. Patient outcomes were adjusted for differences in clinical and demographic characteristics and compared using propensity score–weighted discrete time survival analysis with time-varying exposure to exenatide. RESULTS A total of 39,275 patients with type 2 diabetes were treated with exenatide twice daily, and 381,218 patients were treated with other glucose-lowering therapies. Patients who initiated exenatide were more likely to have prior ischemic heart disease, obesity, hyperlipidemia, hypertension, and/or other comorbidities at baseline. Exenatide-treated patients were less likely to have a CVD event than non–exenatide-treated patients (hazard ratio 0.81; 95% CI 0.68–0.95; P = 0.01) and lower rates of CVD-related hospitalization (0.88; 0.79–0.98; P = 0.02) and all-cause hospitalization (0.94; 0.91–0.97; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS Exenatide twice-daily treatment was associated with a lower risk of CVD events and hospitalizations than treatment with other glucose-lowering therapies.


Diabetes Care | 1994

Nutrition principles for the management of diabetes and related complications

Marion J Franz; Edward S. Horton; John P. Bantle; Christine A Beebe; John D. Brunzell; Ann M Coulston; Robert R. Henry; Byron J. Hoogwerf; Peter W. Stacpoole

Health professionals and people with diabetes recognize nutrition therapy as one of the most challenging aspects of diabetes care and education (1). Adherence to meal planning principles requires the person with diabetes to learn specific nutrition recommendations. It may require altering previous patterns of eating and implementing new eating behaviors, which requires motivation for a healthy lifestyle and may also require participation in exercise programs. Finally, individuals must be able to evaluate the effectiveness of these lifestyle changes. Despite these challenges, nutrition is an essential component of successful diabetes management.

Collaboration


Dive into the Byron J. Hoogwerf's collaboration.

Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Lucien Campeau

Montreal Heart Institute

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

J. Alan Herd

Baylor College of Medicine

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

James S. Forrester

Cedars-Sinai Medical Center

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Researchain Logo
Decentralizing Knowledge