scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Author

William H. Herman

Bio: William H. Herman is an academic researcher from University of Michigan. The author has contributed to research in topics: Diabetes mellitus & Type 2 diabetes. The author has an hindex of 93, co-authored 426 publications receiving 39933 citations. Previous affiliations of William H. Herman include Centers for Disease Control and Prevention & Baker IDI Heart and Diabetes Institute.


Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This report supports earlier predictions of the epidemic nature of diabetes in the world during the first quarter of the 21st century and provides a provisional picture of the characteristics of the diabetes epidemic.
Abstract: OBJECTIVE To estimate the prevalence of diabetes and the number of people with diabetes who are ≥20 years of age in all countries of the world for three points in time, i.e., the years 1995, 2000, and 2025, and to calculate additional parameters, such as sex ratio, urban-rural ratio, and the age structure of the diabetic population. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS Age-specific diabetes prevalence estimates were applied to United Nations population estimates and projections for the number of adults aged ≥20 years in all countries of the world. For developing countries, urban and rural populations were considered separately RESULTS Prevalence of diabetes in adults worldwide was estimated to be 4.0% in 1995 and to rise to 5.4% by the year 2025. It is higher in developed than in developing countries. The number of adults with diabetes in the world will rise from 135 million in 1995 to 300 million in the year 2025. The major part of this numerical increase will occur in developing countries. There will be a 42% increase, from 51 to 72 million, in the developed countries and a 170% increase, from 84 to 228 million, in the developing countries. Thus, by the year 2025, >75% of people with diabetes will reside in developing countries, as compared with 62% in 1995. The countries with the largest number of people with diabetes are, and will be in the year 2025, India, China, and the U.S. In developing countries, the majority of people with diabetes are in the age range of 45–64 years. In the developed countries, the majority of people with diabetes are aged ≥65 years. This pattern will be accentuated by the year 2025. There are more women than men with diabetes, especially in developed countries. In the future, diabetes will be increasingly concentrated in urban areas. CONCLUSIONS This report supports earlier predictions of the epidemic nature of diabetes in the world during the first quarter of the 21st century. It also provides a provisional picture of the characteristics of the epidemic. Worldwide surveillance of diabetes is a necessary first step toward its prevention and control, which is now recognized as an urgent priority.

6,420 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Author(s): Saran, Rajiv; Robinson, Bruce; Abbott, Kevin C; Agodoa, Lawrence YC; Ayanian, John; Balkrishnan, Rajesh; Bragg-Gresham, Jennifer; Cao, Jie; Chen, Joline LT; Cope, Elizabeth; Dharmarajan, Sai; Dietrich, Xue; Eckard, Ashley; Eggers, Paul W; Gaber, Charles; Gillen, Daniel;

2,023 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
23 Jul 2015
TL;DR: The greatest need is for agents that enhance insulin sensitivity, halt the progressive pancreatic β-cell failure that is characteristic of T2DM and prevent or reverse the microvascular complications.
Abstract: Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is an expanding global health problem, closely linked to the epidemic of obesity. Individuals with T2DM are at high risk for both microvascular complications (including retinopathy, nephropathy and neuropathy) and macrovascular complications (such as cardiovascular comorbidities), owing to hyperglycaemia and individual components of the insulin resistance (metabolic) syndrome. Environmental factors (for example, obesity, an unhealthy diet and physical inactivity) and genetic factors contribute to the multiple pathophysiological disturbances that are responsible for impaired glucose homeostasis in T2DM. Insulin resistance and impaired insulin secretion remain the core defects in T2DM, but at least six other pathophysiological abnormalities contribute to the dysregulation of glucose metabolism. The multiple pathogenetic disturbances present in T2DM dictate that multiple antidiabetic agents, used in combination, will be required to maintain normoglycaemia. The treatment must not only be effective and safe but also improve the quality of life. Several novel medications are in development, but the greatest need is for agents that enhance insulin sensitivity, halt the progressive pancreatic β-cell failure that is characteristic of T2DM and prevent or reverse the microvascular complications. For an illustrated summary of this Primer, visit: http://go.nature.com/V2eGfN.

1,757 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Although additional studies are needed to further demonstrate long-term benefits, there is sufficient clinical and mechanistic evidence to support inclusion of metabolic surgery among antidiabetes interventions for people with T2D and obesity.
Abstract: BACKGROUND Despite growing evidence that bariatric/metabolic surgery powerfully improves type 2 diabetes (T2D), existing diabetes treatment algorithms do not include surgical options. AIM The 2nd Diabetes Surgery Summit (DSS-II), an international consensus conference, was convened in collaboration with leading diabetes organizations to develop global guidelines to inform clinicians and policymakers about benefits and limitations of metabolic surgery for T2D. METHODS A multidisciplinary group of 48 international clinicians/scholars (75% nonsurgeons), including representatives of leading diabetes organizations, participated in DSS-II. After evidence appraisal (MEDLINE [1 January 2005–30 September 2015]), three rounds of Delphi-like questionnaires were used to measure consensus for 32 data-based conclusions. These drafts were presented at the combined DSS-II and 3rd World Congress on Interventional Therapies for Type 2 Diabetes (London, U.K., 28–30 September 2015), where they were open to public comment by other professionals and amended face-to-face by the Expert Committee. RESULTS Given its role in metabolic regulation, the gastrointestinal tract constitutes a meaningful target to manage T2D. Numerous randomized clinical trials, albeit mostly short/midterm, demonstrate that metabolic surgery achieves excellent glycemic control and reduces cardiovascular risk factors. On the basis of such evidence, metabolic surgery should be recommended to treat T2D in patients with class III obesity (BMI ≥40 kg/m2) and in those with class II obesity (BMI 35.0–39.9 kg/m2) when hyperglycemia is inadequately controlled by lifestyle and optimal medical therapy. Surgery should also be considered for patients with T2D and BMI 30.0–34.9 kg/m2 if hyperglycemia is inadequately controlled despite optimal treatment with either oral or injectable medications. These BMI thresholds should be reduced by 2.5 kg/m2 for Asian patients. CONCLUSIONS Although additional studies are needed to further demonstrate long-term benefits, there is sufficient clinical and mechanistic evidence to support inclusion of metabolic surgery among antidiabetes interventions for people with T2D and obesity. To date, the DSS-II guidelines have been formally endorsed by 45 worldwide medical and scientific societies. Health care regulators should introduce appropriate reimbursement policies.

707 citations


Cited by
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Findings indicate that the "diabetes epidemic" will continue even if levels of obesity remain constant, and given the increasing prevalence of obesity, it is likely that these figures provide an underestimate of future diabetes prevalence.
Abstract: OBJECTIVE —The goal of this study was to estimate the prevalence of diabetes and the number of people of all ages with diabetes for years 2000 and 2030. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS —Data on diabetes prevalence by age and sex from a limited number of countries were extrapolated to all 191 World Health Organization member states and applied to United Nations’ population estimates for 2000 and 2030. Urban and rural populations were considered separately for developing countries. RESULTS —The prevalence of diabetes for all age-groups worldwide was estimated to be 2.8% in 2000 and 4.4% in 2030. The total number of people with diabetes is projected to rise from 171 million in 2000 to 366 million in 2030. The prevalence of diabetes is higher in men than women, but there are more women with diabetes than men. The urban population in developing countries is projected to double between 2000 and 2030. The most important demographic change to diabetes prevalence across the world appears to be the increase in the proportion of people >65 years of age. CONCLUSIONS —These findings indicate that the “diabetes epidemic” will continue even if levels of obesity remain constant. Given the increasing prevalence of obesity, it is likely that these figures provide an underestimate of future diabetes prevalence.

16,648 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: A WHO Consultation has taken place in parallel with a report by an American Diabetes Association Expert Committee to re‐examine diagnostic criteria and classification of diabetes mellitus and is hoped that the new classification will allow better classification of individuals and lead to fewer therapeutic misjudgements.
Abstract: The classification of diabetes mellitus and the tests used for its diagnosis were brought into order by the National Diabetes Data Group of the USA and the second World Health Organization Expert Committee on Diabetes Mellitus in 1979 and 1980. Apart from minor modifications by WHO in 1985, little has been changed since that time. There is however considerable new knowledge regarding the aetiology of different forms of diabetes as well as more information on the predictive value of different blood glucose values for the complications of diabetes. A WHO Consultation has therefore taken place in parallel with a report by an American Diabetes Association Expert Committee to re-examine diagnostic criteria and classification. The present document includes the conclusions of the former and is intended for wide distribution and discussion before final proposals are submitted to WHO for approval. The main changes proposed are as follows. The diagnostic fasting plasma (blood) glucose value has been lowered to > or =7.0 mmol l(-1) (6.1 mmol l(-1)). Impaired Glucose Tolerance (IGT) is changed to allow for the new fasting level. A new category of Impaired Fasting Glycaemia (IFG) is proposed to encompass values which are above normal but below the diagnostic cut-off for diabetes (plasma > or =6.1 to or =5.6 to <6.1 mmol l(-1)). Gestational Diabetes Mellitus (GDM) now includes gestational impaired glucose tolerance as well as the previous GDM. The classification defines both process and stage of the disease. The processes include Type 1, autoimmune and non-autoimmune, with beta-cell destruction; Type 2 with varying degrees of insulin resistance and insulin hyposecretion; Gestational Diabetes Mellitus; and Other Types where the cause is known (e.g. MODY, endocrinopathies). It is anticipated that this group will expand as causes of Type 2 become known. Stages range from normoglycaemia to insulin required for survival. It is hoped that the new classification will allow better classification of individuals and lead to fewer therapeutic misjudgements.

15,167 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: It was deemed essential to develop an appropriate, uniform terminology and a functional, working classification of diabetes that reflects the current knowledge about the disease.
Abstract: the growth of knowledge regarding the etiology and pathogenesis of diabetes has led many individuals and groups in the diabetes community to express the need for a revision of the nomenclature, diagnostic criteria, and classification of diabetes. As a consequence, it was deemed essential to develop an appropriate, uniform terminology and a functional, working classification of diabetes that reflects the current knowledge about the disease. (1)

11,886 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