Marcel H. A. Muskiet

Bio: Marcel H. A. Muskiet is an academic researcher from VU University Medical Center. The author has contributed to research in topics: Type 2 diabetes & Liraglutide. The author has an hindex of 19, co-authored 42 publications receiving 4058 citations. Previous affiliations of Marcel H. A. Muskiet include Vanderbilt University Medical Center.

A Randomized Trial of Intensive versus Standard Blood-Pressure Control.

Abstract: BACKGROUND The most appropriate targets for systolic blood pressure to reduce cardiovascular morbidity and mortality among persons without diabetes remain uncertain. METHODS We randomly assigned 9361 persons with a systolic blood pressure of 130 mm Hg or higher and an increased cardiovascular risk, but without diabetes, to a systolic blood-pressure target of less than 120 mm Hg (intensive treatment) or a target of less than 140 mm Hg (standard treatment). The primary composite outcome was myocardial infarction, other acute coronary syndromes, stroke, heart failure, or death from cardiovascular causes. RESULTS At 1 year, the mean systolic blood pressure was 121.4 mm Hg in the intensive-treatment group and 136.2 mm Hg in the standard-treatment group. The intervention was stopped early after a median follow-up of 3.26 years owing to a significantly lower rate of the primary composite outcome in the intensive-treatment group than in the standard-treatment group (1.65% per year vs. 2.19% per year; hazard ratio with intensive treatment, 0.75; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.64 to 0.89; P<0.001). All-cause mortality was also significantly lower in the intensive-treatment group (hazard ratio, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.60 to 0.90; P=0.003). Rates of serious adverse events of hypotension, syncope, electrolyte abnormalities, and acute kidney injury or failure, but not of injurious falls, were higher in the intensive-treatment group than in the standard-treatment group. CONCLUSIONS Among patients at high risk for cardiovascular events but without diabetes, targeting a systolic blood pressure of less than 120 mm Hg, as compared with less than 140 mm Hg, resulted in lower rates of fatal and nonfatal major cardiovascular events and death from any cause, although significantly higher rates of some adverse events were observed in the intensive-treatment group. (Funded by the National Institutes of Health; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01206062.).

Glomerular Hyperfiltration in Diabetes: Mechanisms, Clinical Significance, and Treatment

Abstract: An absolute, supraphysiologic elevation in GFR is observed early in the natural history in 10%-67% and 6%-73% of patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes, respectively. Moreover, at the single-nephron level, diabetes-related renal hemodynamic alterations-as an adaptation to reduction in functional nephron mass and/or in response to prevailing metabolic and (neuro)hormonal stimuli-increase glomerular hydraulic pressure and transcapillary convective flux of ultrafiltrate and macromolecules. This phenomenon, known as glomerular hyperfiltration, classically has been hypothesized to predispose to irreversible nephron damage, thereby contributing to initiation and progression of kidney disease in diabetes. However, dedicated studies with appropriate diagnostic measures and clinically relevant end points are warranted to confirm this assumption. In this review, we summarize the hitherto proposed mechanisms involved in diabetic hyperfiltration, focusing on ultrastructural, vascular, and tubular factors. Furthermore, we review available evidence on the clinical significance of hyperfiltration in diabetes and discuss currently available and emerging interventions that may attenuate this renal hemodynamic abnormality. The revived interest in glomerular hyperfiltration as a prognostic and pathophysiologic factor in diabetes may lead to improved and timely detection of (progressive) kidney disease, and could provide new therapeutic opportunities in alleviating the renal burden in this population.

GLP-1 and the kidney : from physiology to pharmacology and outcomes in diabetes

Abstract: The gastrointestinal tract - the largest endocrine network in human physiology - orchestrates signals from the external environment to maintain neural and hormonal control of homeostasis. Advances in understanding entero-endocrine cell biology in health and disease have important translational relevance. The gut-derived incretin hormone glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) is secreted upon meal ingestion and controls glucose metabolism by modulating pancreatic islet cell function, food intake and gastrointestinal motility, amongst other effects. The observation that the insulinotropic actions of GLP-1 are reduced in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) led to the development of incretin-based therapies - GLP-1 receptor agonists and dipeptidyl peptidase 4 (DPP-4) inhibitors - for the treatment of hyperglycaemia in these patients. Considerable interest exists in identifying effects of these drugs beyond glucose-lowering, possibly resulting in improved macrovascular and microvascular outcomes, including in diabetic kidney disease. As GLP-1 has been implicated as a mediator in the putative gut-renal axis (a rapid-acting feed-forward loop that regulates postprandial fluid and electrolyte homeostasis), direct actions on the kidney have been proposed. Here, we review the role of GLP-1 and the actions of associated therapies on glucose metabolism, the gut-renal axis, classical renal risk factors, and renal end points in randomized controlled trials of GLP-1 receptor agonists and DPP-4 inhibitors in patients with T2DM.

SGLT2 inhibition in the diabetic kidney—from mechanisms to clinical outcome

Abstract: Diabetic kidney disease not only has become the leading cause for ESRD worldwide but also, highly contributes to increased cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in type 2 diabetes. Despite increased efforts to optimize renal and cardiovascular risk factors, like hyperglycemia, hypertension, obesity, and dyslipidemia, they are often insufficiently controlled in clinical practice. Although current drug interventions mostly target a single risk factor, more substantial improvements of renal and cardiovascular outcomes can be expected when multiple factors are improved simultaneously. Sodium-glucose cotransporter type 2 in the renal proximal tubule reabsorbs approximately 90% of filtered glucose. In type 2 diabetes, the maladaptive upregulation of sodium-glucose cotransporter type 2 contributes to the maintenance of hyperglycemia. Inhibiting these transporters has been shown to effectively improve glycemic control through inducing glycosuria and is generally well tolerated, although patients experience more genital infections. In addition, sodium-glucose cotransporter type 2 inhibitors favorably affect body weight, BP, serum uric acid, and glomerular hyperfiltration. Interestingly, in the recently reported first cardiovascular safety trial with a sodium-glucose cotransporter type 2 inhibitor, empagliflozin improved both renal and cardiovascular outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes and established cardiovascular disease. Because the benefits were seen rapidly after initiation of therapy and other glucose-lowering agents, with the exception of liraglutide and semaglutide, have not been able to improve cardiovascular outcome, these observations are most likely explained by effects beyond glucose lowering. In this mini review, we present the drug class of sodium-glucose cotransporter type 2 inhibitors, elaborate on currently available renal and cardiovascular outcome data, and discuss how the effects of these agents on renal physiology may explain the data.

Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes

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.

Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics—2017 Update: A Report From the American Heart Association

Abstract: WRITING GROUP MEMBERS Emelia J. Benjamin, MD, SCM, FAHA Michael J. Blaha, MD, MPH Stephanie E. Chiuve, ScD Mary Cushman, MD, MSc, FAHA Sandeep R. Das, MD, MPH, FAHA Rajat Deo, MD, MTR Sarah D. de Ferranti, MD, MPH James Floyd, MD, MS Myriam Fornage, PhD, FAHA Cathleen Gillespie, MS Carmen R. Isasi, MD, PhD, FAHA Monik C. Jiménez, ScD, SM Lori Chaffin Jordan, MD, PhD Suzanne E. Judd, PhD Daniel Lackland, DrPH, FAHA Judith H. Lichtman, PhD, MPH, FAHA Lynda Lisabeth, PhD, MPH, FAHA Simin Liu, MD, ScD, FAHA Chris T. Longenecker, MD Rachel H. Mackey, PhD, MPH, FAHA Kunihiro Matsushita, MD, PhD, FAHA Dariush Mozaffarian, MD, DrPH, FAHA Michael E. Mussolino, PhD, FAHA Khurram Nasir, MD, MPH, FAHA Robert W. Neumar, MD, PhD, FAHA Latha Palaniappan, MD, MS, FAHA Dilip K. Pandey, MBBS, MS, PhD, FAHA Ravi R. Thiagarajan, MD, MPH Mathew J. Reeves, PhD Matthew Ritchey, PT, DPT, OCS, MPH Carlos J. Rodriguez, MD, MPH, FAHA Gregory A. Roth, MD, MPH Wayne D. Rosamond, PhD, FAHA Comilla Sasson, MD, PhD, FAHA Amytis Towfighi, MD Connie W. Tsao, MD, MPH Melanie B. Turner, MPH Salim S. Virani, MD, PhD, FAHA Jenifer H. Voeks, PhD Joshua Z. Willey, MD, MS John T. Wilkins, MD Jason HY. Wu, MSc, PhD, FAHA Heather M. Alger, PhD Sally S. Wong, PhD, RD, CDN, FAHA Paul Muntner, PhD, MHSc On behalf of the American Heart Association Statistics Committee and Stroke Statistics Subcommittee Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics—2017 Update

2017 ESC Guidelines for the management of acute myocardial infarction in patients presenting with ST-segment elevation: The Task Force for the management of acute myocardial infarction in patients presenting with ST-segment elevation of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC).

Abstract: 2017 ESC Guidelines for the management of acute myocardial infarction in patients presenting with ST-segment elevation The Task Force for the management of acute myocardial infarction in patients presenting with ST-segment elevation of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC)

Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics—2019 Update: A Report From the American Heart Association

Abstract: March 5, 2019 e1 WRITING GROUP MEMBERS Emelia J. Benjamin, MD, ScM, FAHA, Chair Paul Muntner, PhD, MHS, FAHA, Vice Chair Alvaro Alonso, MD, PhD, FAHA Marcio S. Bittencourt, MD, PhD, MPH Clifton W. Callaway, MD, FAHA April P. Carson, PhD, MSPH, FAHA Alanna M. Chamberlain, PhD Alexander R. Chang, MD, MS Susan Cheng, MD, MMSc, MPH, FAHA Sandeep R. Das, MD, MPH, MBA, FAHA Francesca N. Delling, MD, MPH Luc Djousse, MD, ScD, MPH Mitchell S.V. Elkind, MD, MS, FAHA Jane F. Ferguson, PhD, FAHA Myriam Fornage, PhD, FAHA Lori Chaffin Jordan, MD, PhD, FAHA Sadiya S. Khan, MD, MSc Brett M. Kissela, MD, MS Kristen L. Knutson, PhD Tak W. Kwan, MD, FAHA Daniel T. Lackland, DrPH, FAHA Tené T. Lewis, PhD Judith H. Lichtman, PhD, MPH, FAHA Chris T. Longenecker, MD Matthew Shane Loop, PhD Pamela L. Lutsey, PhD, MPH, FAHA Seth S. Martin, MD, MHS, FAHA Kunihiro Matsushita, MD, PhD, FAHA Andrew E. Moran, MD, MPH, FAHA Michael E. Mussolino, PhD, FAHA Martin O’Flaherty, MD, MSc, PhD Ambarish Pandey, MD, MSCS Amanda M. Perak, MD, MS Wayne D. Rosamond, PhD, MS, FAHA Gregory A. Roth, MD, MPH, FAHA Uchechukwu K.A. Sampson, MD, MBA, MPH, FAHA Gary M. Satou, MD, FAHA Emily B. Schroeder, MD, PhD, FAHA Svati H. Shah, MD, MHS, FAHA Nicole L. Spartano, PhD Andrew Stokes, PhD David L. Tirschwell, MD, MS, MSc, FAHA Connie W. Tsao, MD, MPH, Vice Chair Elect Mintu P. Turakhia, MD, MAS, FAHA Lisa B. VanWagner, MD, MSc, FAST John T. Wilkins, MD, MS, FAHA Sally S. Wong, PhD, RD, CDN, FAHA Salim S. Virani, MD, PhD, FAHA, Chair Elect On behalf of the American Heart Association Council on Epidemiology and Prevention Statistics Committee and Stroke Statistics Subcommittee