Philip E. Cryer

Bio: Philip E. Cryer is an academic researcher from Washington University in St. Louis. The author has contributed to research in topics: Hypoglycemia & Insulin. The author has an hindex of 88, co-authored 268 publications receiving 27942 citations. Previous affiliations of Philip E. Cryer include Mayo Clinic & Barnes-Jewish Hospital.

Hypoglycemia and Diabetes: A Report of a Workgroup of the American Diabetes Association and The Endocrine Society

Abstract: OBJECTIVE To review the evidence about the impact of hypoglycemia on patients with diabetes that has become available since the past reviews of this subject by the American Diabetes Association and The Endocrine Society and to provide guidance about how this new information should be incorporated into clinical practice. PARTICIPANTS Five members of the American Diabetes Association and five members of The Endocrine Society with expertise in different aspects of hypoglycemia were invited by the Chair, who is a member of both, to participate in a planning conference call and a 2-day meeting that was also attended by staff from both organizations. Subsequent communications took place via e-mail and phone calls. The writing group consisted of those invitees who participated in the writing of the manuscript. The workgroup meeting was supported by educational grants to the American Diabetes Association from Lilly USA, LLC and Novo Nordisk and sponsorship to the American Diabetes Association from Sanofi. The sponsors had no input into the development of or content of the report. EVIDENCE The writing group considered data from recent clinical trials and other studies to update the prior workgroup report. Unpublished data were not used. Expert opinion was used to develop some conclusions. CONSENSUS PROCESS Consensus was achieved by group discussion during conference calls and face-to-face meetings, as well as by iterative revisions of the written document. The document was reviewed and approved by the American Diabetes Association’s Professional Practice Committee in October 2012 and approved by the Executive Committee of the Board of Directors in November 2012 and was reviewed and approved by The Endocrine Society’s Clinical Affairs Core Committee in October 2012 and by Council in November 2012. CONCLUSIONS The workgroup reconfirmed the previous definitions of hypoglycemia in diabetes, reviewed the implications of hypoglycemia on both short- and long-term outcomes, considered the implications of hypoglycemia on treatment outcomes, presented strategies to prevent hypoglycemia, and identified knowledge gaps that should be addressed by future research. In addition, tools for patients to report hypoglycemia at each visit and for clinicians to document counseling are provided.

Hypoglycemia in Diabetes

Abstract: Iatrogenic hypoglycemia causes recurrent morbidity in most people with type 1 diabetes and many with type 2 diabetes, and it is sometimes fatal. The barrier of hypoglycemia generally precludes maintenance of euglycemia over a lifetime of diabetes and thus precludes full realization of euglycemia’s long-term benefits. While the clinical presentation is often characteristic, particularly for the experienced individual with diabetes, the neurogenic and neuroglycopenic symptoms of hypoglycemia are nonspecific and relatively insensitive; therefore, many episodes are not recognized. Hypoglycemia can result from exogenous or endogenous insulin excess alone. However, iatrogenic hypoglycemia is typically the result of the interplay of absolute or relative insulin excess and compromised glucose counterregulation in type 1 and advanced type 2 diabetes. Decrements in insulin, increments in glucagon, and, absent the latter, increments in epinephrine stand high in the hierarchy of redundant glucose counterregulatory factors that normally prevent or rapidly correct hypoglycemia. In insulin-deficient diabetes (exogenous) insulin levels do not decrease as glucose levels fall, and the combination of deficient glucagon and epinephrine responses causes defective glucose counterregulation. Reduced sympathoadrenal responses cause hypoglycemia unawareness. The concept of hypoglycemia-associated autonomic failure in diabetes posits that recent antecedent hypoglycemia causes both defective glucose counterregulation and hypoglycemia unawareness. By shifting glycemic thresholds for the sympathoadrenal (including epinephrine) and the resulting neurogenic responses to lower plasma glucose concentrations, antecedent hypoglycemia leads to a vicious cycle of recurrent hypoglycemia and further impairment of glucose counterregulation. Thus, short-term avoidance of hypoglycemia reverses hypoglycemia unawareness in most affected patients. The clinical approach to minimizing hypoglycemia while improving glycemic control includes 1 ) addressing the issue, 2 ) applying the principles of aggressive glycemic therapy, including flexible and individualized drug regimens, and 3 ) considering the risk factors for iatrogenic hypoglycemia. The latter include factors that result in absolute or relative insulin excess: drug dose, timing, and type; patterns of food ingestion and exercise; interactions with alcohol and other drugs; and altered sensitivity to or clearance of insulin. They also include factors that are clinical surrogates of compromised glucose counterregulation: endogenous insulin deficiency; history of severe hypoglycemia, hypoglycemia unawareness, or both; and aggressive glycemic therapy per se, as evidenced by lower HbA 1c levels, lower glycemic goals, or both. In a patient with hypoglycemia unawareness (which implies recurrent hypoglycemia) a 2- to 3-week period of scrupulous avoidance of hypoglycemia is advisable. Pending the prevention and cure of diabetes or the development of methods that provide glucose-regulated insulin replacement or secretion, we need to learn to replace insulin in a much more physiological fashion, to prevent, correct, or compensate for compromised glucose counterregulation, or both if we are to achieve near-euglycemia safely in most people with diabetes.

Norepinephrine and Epinephrine Release and Adrenergic Mediation of Smoking-Associated Hemodynamic and Metabolic Events

Abstract: We studied the effects of cigarette smoking, sham smoking and smoking during adrenergic blockade in 10 subjects to determine whether smoking released the sympathetic neurotransmitter norepinephrine, as well as the adrenomedullary hormone epinephrine, and whether smoking-associated hemodynamic and metabolic changes were mediated through adrenergic mechanisms. Smoking-associated increments in mean (±S.E.M.) plasma norepinephrine (227±23 to 324±39 pg per milliliter, P<0.01) and epinephrine (44±4 to 113±27 pg per milliliter, P<0.05) were demonstrated. Smoking-associated increments in pulse rate, blood pressure, blood glycerol and blood lactate/pyruvate ratio were prevented by adrenergic blockade; increments in plasma growth hormone and cortisol were not. Since significant smoking-associated increments, in pulse rate, blood pressure and blood lactate/pyruvate ratio, preceded measurable increments in plasma catecholamine concentrations, but were adrenergically mediated, these changes should be attribut...

Evaluation and Management of Adult Hypoglycemic Disorders: An Endocrine Society Clinical Practice Guideline

Abstract: Objective: The aim is to provide guidelines for the evaluation and management of adults with hypoglycemic disorders, including those with diabetes mellitus. Evidence: Using the recommendations of the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system, the quality of evidence is graded very low (⊕○○○), low (⊕⊕○○), moderate (⊕⊕⊕○), or high (⊕⊕⊕⊕). Conclusions: We recommend evaluation and management of hypoglycemia only in patients in whom Whipple’s triad—symptoms, signs, or both consistent with hypoglycemia, a low plasma glucose concentration, and resolution of those symptoms or signs after the plasma glucose concentration is raised—is documented. In patients with hypoglycemia without diabetes mellitus, we recommend the following strategy. First, pursue clinical clues to potential hypoglycemic etiologies—drugs, critical illnesses, hormone deficiencies, nonislet cell tumors. In the absence of these causes, the differential diagnosis narrows to accidental, surreptitious, or even...

Hypoglycaemia: the limiting factor in the glycaemic management of Type I and Type II diabetes

Abstract: Hypoglycaemia is the limiting factor in the glycaemic management of diabetes. Iatrogenic hypoglycaemia is typically the result of the interplay of insulin excess and compromised glucose counterregulation in Type I (insulin-dependent) diabetes mellitus. Insulin concentrations do not decrease and glucagon and epinephrine concentrations do not increase normally as glucose concentrations decrease. The concept of hypoglycaemia-associated autonomic failure (HAAF) in Type I diabetes posits that recent antecedent iatrogenic hypoglycaemia causes both defective glucose counterregulation (by reducing the epinephrine response in the setting of an absent glucagon response) and hypoglycaemia unawareness (by reducing the autonomic and the resulting neurogenic symptom responses). Perhaps the most compelling support for HAAF is the finding that as little as 2 to 3 weeks of scrupulous avoidance of hypoglycaemia reverses hypoglycaemia unawareness and improves the reduced epinephrine component of defective glucose counterregulation in most affected patients. The mediator and mechanism of HAAF are not known but are under active investigation. The glucagon response to hypoglycaemia is also reduced in patients approaching the insulin deficient end of the spectrum of Type II (non-insulin-dependent) diabetes mellitus, and glycaemic thresholds for autonomic (including epinephrine) and symptomatic responses to hypoglycaemia are shifted to lower plasma glucose concentrations after hypoglycaemia in Type II diabetes. Thus, patients with advanced Type II diabetes are also at risk for HAAF. While it is possible to minimise the risk of hypoglycaemia by reducing risks -- including a 2 to 3 week period of scrupulous avoidance of hypoglycaemia in patients with hypoglycaemia unawareness -- methods that provide glucose-regulated insulin replacement or secretion are needed to eliminate hypoglycaemia and maintain euglycaemia over a lifetime of diabetes.

Diagnosis and Management of the Metabolic Syndrome An American Heart Association/National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Scientific Statement

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 …

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.

Guidelines for the Early Management of Patients With Acute Ischemic Stroke A Guideline for Healthcare Professionals From the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association

Abstract: Background and Purpose—The authors present an overview of the current evidence and management recommendations for evaluation and treatment of adults with acute ischemic stroke. The intended audienc...

How do glucocorticoids influence stress responses? Integrating permissive, suppressive, stimulatory, and preparative actions.

Abstract: The secretion of glucocorticoids (GCs) is a classic endocrine response to stress. Despite that, it remains controversial as to what purpose GCs serve at such times. One view, stretching back to the time of Hans Selye, posits that GCs help mediate the ongoing or pending stress response, either via basal levels of GCs permitting other facets of the stress response to emerge efficaciously, and/or by stress levels of GCs actively stimulating the stress response. In contrast, a revisionist viewpoint posits that GCs suppress the stress response, preventing it from being pathologically overactivated. In this review, we consider recent findings regarding GC action and, based on them, generate criteria for determining whether a particular GC action permits, stimulates, or suppresses an ongoing stressresponse or, as an additional category, is preparative for a subsequent stressor. We apply these GC actions to the realms of cardiovascular function, fluid volume and hemorrhage, immunity and inflammation, metabolism, neurobiology, and reproductive physiology. We find that GC actions fall into markedly different categories, depending on the physiological endpoint in question, with evidence for mediating effects in some cases, and suppressive or preparative in others. We then attempt to assimilate these heterogeneous GC actions into a physiological whole. (Endocrine Reviews 21: 55‐ 89, 2000)