scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Author

Anny H. Xiang

Bio: Anny H. Xiang is an academic researcher from Kaiser Permanente. The author has contributed to research in topics: Gestational diabetes & Type 2 diabetes. The author has an hindex of 50, co-authored 179 publications receiving 12881 citations. Previous affiliations of Anny H. Xiang include University of Southern California & University of California, Los Angeles.


Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is defined as glucose intolerance of various degrees that is first detected during pregnancy and provides a unique opportunity to study the early pathogenesis of diabetes and to develop interventions to prevent the disease.
Abstract: Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is defined as glucose intolerance of various degrees that is first detected during pregnancy. GDM is detected through the screening of pregnant women for clinical risk factors and, among at-risk women, testing for abnormal glucose tolerance that is usually, but not invariably, mild and asymptomatic. GDM appears to result from the same broad spectrum of physiological and genetic abnormalities that characterize diabetes outside of pregnancy. Indeed, women with GDM are at high risk for having or developing diabetes when they are not pregnant. Thus, GDM provides a unique opportunity to study the early pathogenesis of diabetes and to develop interventions to prevent the disease.

1,960 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
01 Sep 2002-Diabetes
TL;DR: Protection from diabetes in the troglitazone group was closely related to the degree of reduction in endogenous insulin requirements 3 months after randomization and persisted 8 months after study medications were stopped, and was associated with preservation of beta-cell compensation for insulin resistance.
Abstract: Type 2 diabetes frequently results from progressive failure of pancreatic beta-cell function in the presence of chronic insulin resistance. We tested whether chronic amelioration of insulin resistance would preserve pancreatic beta-cell function and delay or prevent the onset of type 2 diabetes in high-risk Hispanic women. Women with previous gestational diabetes were randomized to placebo (n = 133) or the insulin-sensitizing drug troglitazone (400 mg/day; n = 133) administered in double-blind fashion. Fasting plasma glucose was measured every 3 months, and oral glucose tolerance tests (OGTTs) were performed annually to detect diabetes. Intravenous glucose tolerance tests (IVGTTs) were performed at baseline and 3 months later to identify early metabolic changes associated with any protection from diabetes. Women who did not develop diabetes during the trial returned for OGTTs and IVGTTs 8 months after study medications were stopped. During a median follow-up of 30 months on blinded medication, average annual diabetes incidence rates in the 236 women who returned for at least one follow-up visit were 12.1 and 5.4% in women assigned to placebo and troglitazone, respectively (P < 0.01). Protection from diabetes in the troglitazone group 1) was closely related to the degree of reduction in endogenous insulin requirements 3 months after randomization, 2) persisted 8 months after study medications were stopped, and 3) was associated with preservation of beta-cell compensation for insulin resistance. Treatment with troglitazone delayed or prevented the onset of type 2 diabetes in high-risk Hispanic women. The protective effect was associated with the preservation of pancreatic beta-cell function and appeared to be mediated by a reduction in the secretory demands placed on beta-cells by chronic insulin resistance.

1,310 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: It is demonstrated that changes in SA in a number of type 2 diabetic cohorts serve as a quantitative indicator of improvements in insulin sensitivity obtained during TZD treatment, whereas changes in total serum adiponectin levels do not correlate well at the individual level.

1,150 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
01 May 2011-Obesity
TL;DR: A new parameter, the body adiposity index (BAI), which can be calculated from hip circumference and height only, can be used in the clinical setting even in remote locations with very limited access to reliable scales and estimates %adiposity directly.
Abstract: Obesity is a growing problem in the United States and throughout the world. It is a risk factor for many chronic diseases. The BMI has been used to assess body fat for almost 200 years. BMI is known to be of limited accuracy, and is different for males and females with similar %body adiposity. Here, we define an alternative parameter, the body adiposity index (BAI = ((hip circumference)/((height)1.5) − 18)). The BAI can be used to reflect %body fat for adult men and women of differing ethnicities without numerical correction. We used a population study, the “BetaGene” study, to develop the new index of body adiposity. %Body fat, as measured by the dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA), was used as a “gold standard” for validation. Hip circumference (R = 0.602) and height (R = −0.524) are strongly correlated with %body fat and therefore chosen as principal anthropometric measures on which we base BAI. The BAI measure was validated in the “Triglyceride and Cardiovascular Risk in African-Americans (TARA)” study of African Americans. Correlation between DXA-derived %adiposity and the BAI was R = 0.85 for TARA with a concordance of C_b = 0.95. BAI can be measured without weighing, which may render it useful in settings where measuring accurate body weight is problematic. In summary, we have defined a new parameter, the BAI, which can be calculated from hip circumference and height only. It can be used in the clinical setting even in remote locations with very limited access to reliable scales. The BAI estimates %adiposity directly.

779 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Lifestyle modification is the primary approach; use of medications for diabetes prevention after GDM remains controversial and family planning enables optimization of health in subsequent pregnancies.
Abstract: Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) carries a small but potentially important risk of adverse perinatal outcomes and a long-term risk of obesity and glucose intolerance in offspring. Mothers with GDM have an excess of hypertensive disorders during pregnancy and a high risk of developing diabetes mellitus thereafter. Diagnosing and treating GDM can reduce perinatal complications, but only a small fraction of pregnancies benefit. Nutritional management is the cornerstone of treatment; insulin, glyburide and metformin can be used to intensify treatment. Fetal measurements complement maternal glucose monitoring in the identification of pregnancies that require such intensification. Glucose testing shortly after delivery can stratify the short-term diabetes risk in mothers. Thereafter, annual glucose and HbA(1c) testing can detect deteriorating glycaemic control, a harbinger of future diabetes mellitus, usually type 2 diabetes mellitus. Interventions that mitigate obesity or its metabolic effects are most potent in preventing or delaying diabetes mellitus. Lifestyle modification is the primary approach; use of medications for diabetes prevention after GDM remains controversial. Family planning enables optimization of health in subsequent pregnancies. Breastfeeding may reduce obesity in children and is recommended. Families should be encouraged to help children adopt lifestyles that reduce the risk of obesity.

467 citations


Cited by
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Attention is focussed on the ROS/RNS-linked pathogenesis of cancer, cardiovascular disease, atherosclerosis, hypertension, ischemia/reperfusion injury, diabetes mellitus, neurodegenerative diseases, rheumatoid arthritis, and ageing.

12,240 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This statement from the American Heart Association and the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute is intended to provide up-to-date guidance for professionals on the diagnosis and management of the metabolic syndrome in adults.
Abstract: The metabolic syndrome has received increased attention in the past few years. This statement from the American Heart Association (AHA) and the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) is intended to provide up-to-date guidance for professionals on the diagnosis and management of the metabolic syndrome in adults. The metabolic syndrome is a constellation of interrelated risk factors of metabolic origin— metabolic risk factors —that appear to directly promote the development of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD).1 Patients with the metabolic syndrome also are at increased risk for developing type 2 diabetes mellitus. Another set of conditions, the underlying risk factors , give rise to the metabolic risk factors. In the past few years, several expert groups have attempted to set forth simple diagnostic criteria to be used in clinical practice to identify patients who manifest the multiple components of the metabolic syndrome. These criteria have varied somewhat in specific elements, but in general they include a combination of both underlying and metabolic risk factors. The most widely recognized of the metabolic risk factors are atherogenic dyslipidemia, elevated blood pressure, and elevated plasma glucose. Individuals with these characteristics commonly manifest a prothrombotic state and a pro-inflammatory state as well. Atherogenic dyslipidemia consists of an aggregation of lipoprotein abnormalities including elevated serum triglyceride and apolipoprotein B (apoB), increased small LDL particles, and a reduced level of HDL cholesterol (HDL-C). The metabolic syndrome is often referred to as if it were a discrete entity with a single cause. Available data suggest that it truly is a syndrome, ie, a grouping of ASCVD risk factors, but one that probably has more than one cause. Regardless of cause, the syndrome identifies individuals at an elevated risk for ASCVD. The magnitude of the increased risk can vary according to which components of the syndrome are …

9,982 citations

01 Jan 2014
TL;DR: These standards of care are intended to provide clinicians, patients, researchers, payors, and other interested individuals with the components of diabetes care, treatment goals, and tools to evaluate the quality of care.
Abstract: XI. STRATEGIES FOR IMPROVING DIABETES CARE D iabetes is a chronic illness that requires continuing medical care and patient self-management education to prevent acute complications and to reduce the risk of long-term complications. Diabetes care is complex and requires that many issues, beyond glycemic control, be addressed. A large body of evidence exists that supports a range of interventions to improve diabetes outcomes. These standards of care are intended to provide clinicians, patients, researchers, payors, and other interested individuals with the components of diabetes care, treatment goals, and tools to evaluate the quality of care. While individual preferences, comorbidities, and other patient factors may require modification of goals, targets that are desirable for most patients with diabetes are provided. These standards are not intended to preclude more extensive evaluation and management of the patient by other specialists as needed. For more detailed information, refer to Bode (Ed.): Medical Management of Type 1 Diabetes (1), Burant (Ed): Medical Management of Type 2 Diabetes (2), and Klingensmith (Ed): Intensive Diabetes Management (3). The recommendations included are diagnostic and therapeutic actions that are known or believed to favorably affect health outcomes of patients with diabetes. A grading system (Table 1), developed by the American Diabetes Association (ADA) and modeled after existing methods, was utilized to clarify and codify the evidence that forms the basis for the recommendations. The level of evidence that supports each recommendation is listed after each recommendation using the letters A, B, C, or E.

9,618 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Since the 1990 NIH-sponsored conference on polycystic ovary syndrome, it has become appreciated that the syndrome encompasses a broader spectrum of signs and symptoms of ovarian dysfunction than those defined by the original diagnostic criteria.

8,217 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This statement from the American Heart Association and the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute is intended to provide up-to-date guidance for professionals on the diagnosis and management of the metabolic syndrome in adults.
Abstract: The metabolic syndrome has received increased attention in the past few years. This statement from the American Heart Association (AHA) and the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) is intended to provide up-to-date guidance for professionals on the diagnosis and management of the metabolic syndrome in adults. The metabolic syndrome is a constellation of interrelated risk factors of metabolic origin— metabolic risk factors —that appear to directly promote the development of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD).1 Patients with the metabolic syndrome also are at increased risk for developing type 2 diabetes mellitus. Another set of conditions, the underlying risk factors , give rise to the metabolic risk factors. In the past few years, several expert groups have attempted to set forth simple diagnostic criteria to be used in clinical practice to identify patients who manifest the multiple components of the metabolic syndrome. These criteria have varied somewhat in specific elements, but in general they include a combination of both underlying and metabolic risk factors. The most widely recognized of the metabolic risk factors are atherogenic dyslipidemia, elevated blood pressure, and elevated plasma glucose. Individuals with these characteristics commonly manifest a prothrombotic state and a pro-inflammatory state as well. Atherogenic dyslipidemia consists of an aggregation of lipoprotein abnormalities including elevated serum triglyceride and apolipoprotein B (apoB), increased small LDL particles, and a reduced level of HDL cholesterol (HDL-C). The metabolic syndrome is often referred to as if it were a discrete entity with a single cause. Available data suggest that it truly is a syndrome, ie, a grouping of ASCVD risk factors, but one that probably has more than one cause. Regardless of cause, the syndrome identifies individuals at an elevated risk for ASCVD. The magnitude of the increased risk can vary according to which components of the syndrome are …

6,107 citations