Network


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

Hotspot


Dive into the research topics where Saul Genuth is active.

Publication


Featured researches published by Saul Genuth.


The New England Journal of Medicine | 2008

Effects of intensive glucose lowering in type 2 diabetes

Hertzel C. Gerstein; Miller Me; Robert P. Byington; David C. Goff; Bigger Jt; John B. Buse; William C. Cushman; Saul Genuth; Faramarz Ismail-Beigi; Richard H. Grimm; Jeffrey L. Probstfield; Denise G. Simons-Morton; William T. Friedewald

BACKGROUND Epidemiologic studies have shown a relationship between glycated hemoglobin levels and cardiovascular events in patients with type 2 diabetes. We investigated whether intensive therapy to target normal glycated hemoglobin levels would reduce cardiovascular events in patients with type 2 diabetes who had either established cardiovascular disease or additional cardiovascular risk factors. METHODS In this randomized study, 10,251 patients (mean age, 62.2 years) with a median glycated hemoglobin level of 8.1% were assigned to receive intensive therapy (targeting a glycated hemoglobin level below 6.0%) or standard therapy (targeting a level from 7.0 to 7.9%). Of these patients, 38% were women, and 35% had had a previous cardiovascular event. The primary outcome was a composite of nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, or death from cardiovascular causes. The finding of higher mortality in the intensive-therapy group led to a discontinuation of intensive therapy after a mean of 3.5 years of follow-up. RESULTS At 1 year, stable median glycated hemoglobin levels of 6.4% and 7.5% were achieved in the intensive-therapy group and the standard-therapy group, respectively. During follow-up, the primary outcome occurred in 352 patients in the intensive-therapy group, as compared with 371 in the standard-therapy group (hazard ratio, 0.90; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.78 to 1.04; P=0.16). At the same time, 257 patients in the intensive-therapy group died, as compared with 203 patients in the standard-therapy group (hazard ratio, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.01 to 1.46; P=0.04). Hypoglycemia requiring assistance and weight gain of more than 10 kg were more frequent in the intensive-therapy group (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS As compared with standard therapy, the use of intensive therapy to target normal glycated hemoglobin levels for 3.5 years increased mortality and did not significantly reduce major cardiovascular events. These findings identify a previously unrecognized harm of intensive glucose lowering in high-risk patients with type 2 diabetes. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00000620.)


Diabetes Care | 2009

International Expert Committee Report on the Role of the A1C Assay in the Diagnosis of Diabetes

David M. Nathan; B. Balkau; Enzo Bonora; Knut Borch-Johnsen; John B. Buse; Stephen Colagiuri; Mayer B. Davidson; Ralph A. DeFronzo; Saul Genuth; R R Holman; Linong Ji; Sue Kirkman; William C. Knowler; Desmond A. Schatz; Jonathan E. Shaw; Eugene Sobngwi; Michael W. Steffes; Olga Vaccaro; Nicholas J. Wareham; Bernard Zinman; Richard Kahn

Members of the International Expert Committee have recommended that diabetes should be diagnosed if A1C is ≤6.5%, without need to measure the plasma glucose concentration (1). We are concerned that practical limitations will lead to false positives and negatives with this approach. A given A1C instrument may identify some but not other abnormal hemoglobins (http://www.ngsp.org/prog/index2.html). How, therefore, can we be sure whether a hemoglobinopathy is causing (or preventing) diagnosis? Before diagnosis, should we not also exclude iron deficiency anemia, which may increase A1C by 1–1.5%, as well as hemolytic anemia and renal failure or chronic infections, which also lower …


The New England Journal of Medicine | 2000

Retinopathy and nephropathy in patients with type I diabetes four years after a trial of intensive therapy

John M. Lachin; Saul Genuth; Patricia A. Cleary; Matthew D. Davis; David M. Nathan

BACKGROUND Among patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus, intensive therapy (with the aim of achieving near-normal blood glucose and glycosylated hemoglobin concentrations [hemoglobin A1c]) markedly reduces the risk of microvascular complications as compared with conventional therapy. To assess whether these benefits persist, we compared the effects of former and intensive conventional therapy on the recurrence and severity of retinopathy and nephropathy for four years after the end of the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial (DCCT). METHODS At the end of the DCCT, the patients in the conventional-therapy group were offered intensive therapy, and the care of all patients was transferred to their own physicians. Retinopathy was evaluated on the basis of centrally graded fundus photographs in 1208 patients during the fourth year after the DCCT ended, and nephropathy was evaluated on the basis of urine specimens obtained from 1302 patients during the third or fourth year, approximately half of whom were from each treatment group. RESULTS The difference in the median glycosylated hemoglobin values between the conventional-therapy and intensive-therapy groups during the 6.5 years of the DCCT (average, 9.1 percent and 7.2 percent, respectively) narrowed during follow-up (median during 4 years, 8.2 percent and 7.9 percent, respectively, P<0.001). Nevertheless, the proportion of patients who had worsening retinopathy, including proliferative retinopathy, macular edema, and the need for laser therapy, was lower in the intensive-therapy group than in the conventional-therapy group (odds reduction, 72 percent to 87 percent, P<0.001). The proportion of patients with an increase in urinary albumin excretion was significantly lower in the intensive-therapy group. CONCLUSIONS The reduction in the risk of progressive retinopathy and nephropathy resulting from intensive therapy in patients with type 1 diabetes persists for at least four years, despite increasing hyperglycemia.


The New England Journal of Medicine | 2011

Long-Term Effects of Intensive Glucose Lowering on Cardiovascular Outcomes

Hertzel C. Gerstein; Michael I. Miller; Saul Genuth; Faramarz Ismail-Beigi; John B. Buse; David C. Goff; Jeffrey L. Probstfield; William C. Cushman; Henry N. Ginsberg; J. Thomas Bigger; Richard H. Grimm; Robert P. Byington; Yves Rosenberg; William T. Friedewald

BACKGROUND Intensive glucose lowering has previously been shown to increase mortality among persons with advanced type 2 diabetes and a high risk of cardiovascular disease. This report describes the 5-year outcomes of a mean of 3.7 years of intensive glucose lowering on mortality and key cardiovascular events. METHODS We randomly assigned participants with type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease or additional cardiovascular risk factors to receive intensive therapy (targeting a glycated hemoglobin level below 6.0%) or standard therapy (targeting a level of 7 to 7.9%). After termination of the intensive therapy, due to higher mortality in the intensive-therapy group, the target glycated hemoglobin level was 7 to 7.9% for all participants, who were followed until the planned end of the trial. RESULTS Before the intensive therapy was terminated, the intensive-therapy group did not differ significantly from the standard-therapy group in the rate of the primary outcome (a composite of nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, or death from cardiovascular causes) (P=0.13) but had more deaths from any cause (primarily cardiovascular) (hazard ratio, 1.21; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.02 to 1.44) and fewer nonfatal myocardial infarctions (hazard ratio, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.66 to 0.95). These trends persisted during the entire follow-up period (hazard ratio for death, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.03 to 1.38; and hazard ratio for nonfatal myocardial infarction, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.70 to 0.96). After the intensive intervention was terminated, the median glycated hemoglobin level in the intensive-therapy group rose from 6.4% to 7.2%, and the use of glucose-lowering medications and rates of severe hypoglycemia and other adverse events were similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS As compared with standard therapy, the use of intensive therapy for 3.7 years to target a glycated hemoglobin level below 6% reduced 5-year nonfatal myocardial infarctions but increased 5-year mortality. Such a strategy cannot be recommended for high-risk patients with advanced type 2 diabetes. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00000620.).


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.


The New England Journal of Medicine | 2010

Effects of medical therapies on retinopathy progression in type 2 diabetes.

Emily Y. Chew; Walter T. Ambrosius; Matthew D. Davis; Ronald P. Danis; Sapna Gangaputra; Craig M. Greven; Larry D. Hubbard; Barbara Esser; James Lovato; Letitia H. Perdue; David C. Goff; William C. Cushman; Henry N. Ginsberg; Marshall B. Elam; Saul Genuth; Hertzel C. Gerstein; Ulrich K. Schubart; Lawrence J. Fine

BACKGROUND We investigated whether intensive glycemic control, combination therapy for dyslipidemia, and intensive blood-pressure control would limit the progression of diabetic retinopathy in persons with type 2 diabetes. Previous data suggest that these systemic factors may be important in the development and progression of diabetic retinopathy. METHODS In a randomized trial, we enrolled 10,251 participants with type 2 diabetes who were at high risk for cardiovascular disease to receive either intensive or standard treatment for glycemia (target glycated hemoglobin level, <6.0% or 7.0 to 7.9%, respectively) and also for dyslipidemia (160 mg daily of fenofibrate plus simvastatin or placebo plus simvastatin) or for systolic blood-pressure control (target, <120 or <140 mm Hg). A subgroup of 2856 participants was evaluated for the effects of these interventions at 4 years on the progression of diabetic retinopathy by 3 or more steps on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study Severity Scale (as assessed from seven-field stereoscopic fundus photographs, with 17 possible steps and a higher number of steps indicating greater severity) or the development of diabetic retinopathy necessitating laser photocoagulation or vitrectomy. RESULTS At 4 years, the rates of progression of diabetic retinopathy were 7.3% with intensive glycemia treatment, versus 10.4% with standard therapy (adjusted odds ratio, 0.67; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.51 to 0.87; P=0.003); 6.5% with fenofibrate for intensive dyslipidemia therapy, versus 10.2% with placebo (adjusted odds ratio, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.42 to 0.87; P=0.006); and 10.4% with intensive blood-pressure therapy, versus 8.8% with standard therapy (adjusted odds ratio, 1.23; 95% CI, 0.84 to 1.79; P=0.29). CONCLUSIONS Intensive glycemic control and intensive combination treatment of dyslipidemia, but not intensive blood-pressure control, reduced the rate of progression of diabetic retinopathy. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and others; ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT00000620 for the ACCORD study and NCT00542178 for the ACCORD Eye study.)


JAMA Internal Medicine | 2009

Modern-Day Clinical Course of Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus After 30 Years’ Duration: The Diabetes Control and Complications Trial/Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and Complications and Pittsburgh Epidemiology of Diabetes Complications Experience (1983-2005)

David M. Nathan; Bernard Zinman; Patricia A. Cleary; Jye Yu C Backlund; Saul Genuth; Rachel G. Miller; Trevor J. Orchard

BACKGROUND Clinical treatment goals of type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) have changed since the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial (DCCT) demonstrated reduced long-term complications with intensive diabetes therapy. There have been few longitudinal studies to describe the clinical course of T1DM in the age of intensive therapy. Our objective was to describe the current-day clinical course of T1DM. METHODS An analysis of the cumulative incidence of long-term complications was performed. The DCCT (1983-1993) assigned patients to conventional or intensive therapy. Since 1993, the DCCT has been observational, and intensive therapy was recommended for all patients. The Pittsburgh Epidemiology of Diabetes Complications (EDC) study is an observational study of patients with T1DM from Allegheny County, Pennsylvania. The study population comprised the DCCT T1DM cohort (N = 1441) and a subset of the EDC cohort (n = 161) selected to match DCCT entry criteria. In the DCCT, intensive therapy aimed for a near-normal glycemic level with 3 or more daily insulin injections or an insulin pump. Conventional therapy, with 1 to 2 daily insulin injections, was not designed to achieve specific glycemic targets. Main outcome measures included the incidences of proliferative retinopathy, nephropathy (albumin excretion rate >300 mg/24 h, creatinine level >or=2 mg/dL [to convert to micromoles per liter, multiply by 88.4], or renal replacement), and cardiovascular disease. RESULTS After 30 years of diabetes, the cumulative incidences of proliferative retinopathy, nephropathy, and cardiovascular disease were 50%, 25%, and 14%, respectively, in the DCCT conventional treatment group, and 47%, 17%, and 14%, respectively, in the EDC cohort. The DCCT intensive therapy group had substantially lower cumulative incidences (21%, 9%, and 9%) and fewer than 1% became blind, required kidney replacement, or had an amputation because of diabetes during that time. CONCLUSION The frequencies of serious complications in patients with T1DM, especially when treated intensively, are lower than that reported historically.


Diabetes | 2008

Effect of Glycemic Exposure on the Risk of Microvascular Complications in the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial—Revisited

John M. Lachin; Saul Genuth; David M. Nathan; Bernard Zinman; Brandy N. Rutledge

OBJECTIVE— The Diabetes Control and Complications Trial (Diabetes 44:968–983, 1995) presented statistical models suggesting that subjects with similar A1C levels had a higher risk of retinopathy progression in the conventional treatment group than in the intensive treatment group. That analysis has been cited to support the hypothesis that specific patterns of glucose variation, in particular postprandial hyperglycemia, contribute uniquely to an increased risk of microvascular complications above and beyond that explained by the A1C level. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS— We performed statistical evaluations of these models and additional analyses to assess whether the original analyses were flawed. RESULTS— Statistically, we show that the original results are an artifact of the assumptions of the statistical model used. Additional analyses show that virtually all (96%) of the beneficial effect of intensive versus conventional therapy on progression of retinopathy is explained by the reductions in the mean A1C levels, similarly for other outcomes. Furthermore, subjects within the intensive and conventional treatment groups with similar A1C levels over time have similar risks of retinopathy progression, especially after adjusting for factors in which they differ. CONCLUSIONS— A1C explains virtually all of the difference in risk of complications between the intensive and conventional groups, and a given A1C level has similar effects within the two treatment groups. While other components of hyperglycemia, such as glucose variation, may contribute to the risk of complications, such factors can only explain a small part of the differences in risk between intensive and conventional therapy over time.


Annals of Internal Medicine | 2011

Individualizing Glycemic Targets in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: Implications of Recent Clinical Trials

Faramarz Ismail-Beigi; Etie S. Moghissi; Margaret Tiktin; Irl B. Hirsch; Silvio E. Inzucchi; Saul Genuth

One of the first steps in the management of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus is setting glycemic goals. Professional organizations advise setting specific hemoglobin A(1c) (HbA(1c)) targets for patients, and individualization of these goals has more recently been emphasized. However, the operational meaning of glycemic goals, and specific methods for individualizing them, have not been well-described. Choosing a specific HbA(1c) target range for a given patient requires taking several factors into consideration, including an assessment of the patients risk for hyperglycemia-related complications versus the risks of therapy, all in the context of the overall clinical setting. Comorbid conditions, psychological status, capacity for self-care, economic considerations, and family and social support systems also play a key role in the intensity of therapy. The individualization of HbA(1c) targets has gained more traction after recent clinical trials in older patients with established type 2 diabetes mellitus failed to show a benefit from intensive glucose-lowering therapy on cardiovascular disease (CVD) outcomes. The limited available evidence suggests that near-normal glycemic targets should be the standard for younger patients with relatively recent onset of type 2 diabetes mellitus and little or no micro- or macrovascular complications, with the aim of preventing complications over the many years of life. However, somewhat higher targets should be considered for older patients with long-standing type 2 diabetes mellitus and evidence of CVD (or multiple CVD risk factors). This review explores these issues further and proposes a framework for considering an appropriate and safe HbA(1c) target range for each patient.


BMJ | 2010

The effects of baseline characteristics, glycaemia treatment approach, and glycated haemoglobin concentration on the risk of severe hypoglycaemia: post hoc epidemiological analysis of the ACCORD study

Michael I. Miller; Denise E. Bonds; Hertzel C. Gerstein; Elizabeth R. Seaquist; Richard M. Bergenstal; Jorge Calles-Escandon; R. Dale Childress; Timothy E. Craven; Robert Cuddihy; George Dailey; Mark N. Feinglos; Farmarz Ismail-Beigi; Joe Largay; Patrick J. O'Connor; Terri Paul; Peter J. Savage; Ulrich K. Schubart; Ajay Sood; Saul Genuth

Objectives To investigate potential determinants of severe hypoglycaemia, including baseline characteristics, in the Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes (ACCORD) trial and the association of severe hypoglycaemia with levels of glycated haemoglobin (haemoglobin A1C) achieved during therapy. Design Post hoc epidemiological analysis of a double 2×2 factorial, randomised, controlled trial. Setting Diabetes clinics, research clinics, and primary care clinics. Participants 10 209 of the 10 251 participants enrolled in the ACCORD study with type 2 diabetes, a haemoglobin A1C concentration of 7.5% or more during screening, and aged 40-79 years with established cardiovascular disease or 55-79 years with evidence of significant atherosclerosis, albuminuria, left ventricular hypertrophy, or two or more additional risk factors for cardiovascular disease (dyslipidaemia, hypertension, current smoker, or obese). Interventions Intensive (haemoglobin A1C <6.0%) or standard (haemoglobin A1C 7.0-7.9%) glucose control. Main outcome measures Severe hypoglycaemia was defined as episodes of “low blood glucose” requiring the assistance of another person and documentation of either a plasma glucose less than 2.8 mmol/l (<50 mg/dl) or symptoms that promptly resolved with oral carbohydrate, intravenous glucose, or glucagon. Results The annual incidence of hypoglycaemia was 3.14% in the intensive treatment group and 1.03% in the standard glycaemia group. We found significantly increased risks for hypoglycaemia among women (P=0.0300), African-Americans (P<0.0001 compared with non-Hispanic whites), those with less than a high school education (P<0.0500 compared with college graduates), aged participants (P<0.0001 per 1 year increase), and those who used insulin at trial entry (P<0.0001). For every 1% unit decline in the haemoglobin A1C concentration from baseline to 4 month visit, there was a 28% (95% CI 19% to 37%) and 14% (4% to 23%) reduced risk of hypoglycaemia requiring medical assistance in the standard and intensive groups, respectively. In both treatment groups, the risk of hypoglycaemia requiring medical assistance increased with each 1% unit increment in the average updated haemoglobin A1C concentration (standard arm: hazard ratio 1.76, 95% CI 1.50 to 2.06; intensive arm: hazard ratio 1.15, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.21). Conclusions A greater drop in haemoglobin A1C concentration from baseline to the 4 month visit was not associated with an increased risk for hypoglycaemia. Patients with poorer glycaemic control had a greater risk of hypoglycaemia, irrespective of treatment group. Identification of baseline subgroups with increased risk for severe hypoglycaemia can provide guidance to clinicians attempting to modify patient therapy on the basis of individual risk. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov number NCT00000620.

Collaboration


Dive into the Saul Genuth's collaboration.

Top Co-Authors

Avatar

John M. Lachin

George Washington University

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Patricia A. Cleary

National Institutes of Health

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Faramarz Ismail-Beigi

Case Western Reserve University

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Wanjie Sun

Case Western Reserve University

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

David R. Sell

Case Western Reserve University

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Vincent M. Monnier

Case Western Reserve University

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Matthew D. Davis

Case Western Reserve University

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

David C. Goff

Colorado School of Public Health

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

John B. Buse

University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

View shared research outputs
Researchain Logo
Decentralizing Knowledge