Dr. Christopher Kramer is New American College of Cardiology President
Kramer begins a one-year term as head of the premiere global cardiovascular organization
WASHINGTON, March 31, 2025 /PRNewswire/ -- Christopher M. Kramer, MD, FACC, today assumed the role of president of the American College of Cardiology, an almost 60,000-member global cardiovascular organization working to transform cardiovascular care and improve heart health for all.
"I see significant challenges and opportunities for the field of cardiology in the coming years, including workforce issues, health equity, diversity and inclusion, and AI-driven solutions, that need to be addressed to achieve ACC's mission of transforming cardiovascular care for all," Kramer said. "I am looking forward to using my term as president to help ACC be a leader on these issues, while getting to know more of our inspiring, diverse membership and hearing their concerns and achievements across the U.S. and throughout the world."
Kramer, whose interest in cardiology began during a summer scholarship program in high school, received his medical degree from the University of California, San Francisco School of Medicine. He completed his residency and chief residency in internal medicine and fellowship in cardiology at the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia. His first faculty appointment was at Allegheny General Hospital in Pittsburgh, then MCP/Hahnemann University School of Medicine in Philadelphia, where he directed the cardiology fellowship before moving in 1999 to the University of Virginia School of Medicine in Charlottesville, Virginia, where he became chief of the Cardiovascular Division in 2019.
Kramer's principal research interest has been the application of cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging to the cardiovascular system in translational and clinical studies. In recognition of his work, he received the Gold Medal from the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance in 2015, reinforcing the impact of his contributions to the field of CMR over his career.
His dedication to the College over a 35-year membership is reflected in his various leadership roles, including vice president, treasurer and chair of ACC's Imaging Council. Kramer was also an associate editor for imaging at JACC and executive editor of JACC: Cardiovascular Imaging. In 2021, Kramer was named a Distinguished Mentor by the ACC, which he has described as "an incredible honor."
Kramer officially assumes the presidency during the Convocation Ceremony at ACC's Annual Scientific Session, taking place March 29 – 31, 2025 in Chicago.
Other new officers for 2025-26 are Vice President Roxana Mehran, MD, FACC; Board of Trustees Members Samuel O. Jones, IV, MD, MPH, FACC; and Geoffrey A. Rose, MD, FACC; Board of Governors Chair David E. Winchester, MD, MS, FACC; and Board of Governors Chair-elect Renuka Jain, MD, FACC.
The American College of Cardiology (ACC) is the global leader in transforming cardiovascular care and improving heart health for all. As the preeminent source of professional medical education for the entire cardiovascular care team since 1949, ACC credentials cardiovascular professionals in over 140 countries who meet stringent qualifications and leads in the formation of health policy, standards and guidelines. Through its world-renowned family of JACC Journals, NCDR registries, ACC Accreditation Services, global network of Member Sections, CardioSmart patient resources and more, the College is committed to ensuring a world where science, knowledge and innovation optimize patient care and outcomes. Learn more at www.ACC.org.
View original content to download multimedia:https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/dr-christopher-kramer-is-new-american-college-of-cardiology-president-302416215.html
SOURCE American College of Cardiology
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Business Wire
8 hours ago
- Business Wire
Drive Health Names Public Sector Healthcare Veteran as Chief Strategy Officer
PHOENIX--(BUSINESS WIRE)-- Drive Health, a Phoenix-based digital health startup, today announces the appointment of James Stringham as Chief Strategy Officer (CSO). Stringham brings unmatched experience in public sector healthcare, having most recently led organizations like Banner Government Health Plans and Magellan Healthcare through complex, large-scale public sector contracts including AHCCCS Complete Care (ACC) in Arizona and other Medicaid and Medicare initiatives nationwide. "I'm thrilled to join Drive Health, an organization dedicated to bridging these gaps and ensuring equitable healthcare for all. Together, we will bring meaningful change to the communities that need it most." Share With 30 years of experience in healthcare, Stringham is a recognized thought leader, influencing industry dialogue through policy recommendations, advocacy initiatives and engagements at both state and national levels. As CSO, he will oversee the implementation of strategic industry initiatives, foster key partnerships, and collaborate with C-suite officers to identify opportunities for business growth. 'Having worked closely with Jim over the past year, we've seen firsthand his deep understanding of public health and his genuine excitement for our mission at Drive Health,' says Drive Health CEO Kevin Longoria. 'We're thrilled to officially welcome him aboard as we strengthen our partnerships and expand our impact across Medicare and Medicaid programs.' Stringham previously served as the Vice President and CEO of Banner Government Health Plans, overseeing the organization's expansion across central and southern Arizona. Under his leadership, the company served over 300,000 members across various programs, including ACC, Arizona Long Term Care System, Dual Eligible Special Needs Plan, and Banner's Medicare Advantage plans. Before Banner, he served as the National Senior Vice President at Magellan Healthcare. Stringham has also served as a board member of the Association for Community Affiliated Plans, a national organization dedicated to equitably improving the health and well-being of people with limited resources or significant health needs. Stringham says, "I've had the privilege of supporting patients facing chronic conditions - witnessing their resilience while navigating barriers to care and health literacy. These challenges too often stand between individuals and the quality care they deserve. That's why I'm thrilled to join Drive Health, an organization dedicated to bridging these gaps and ensuring equitable healthcare for all. Together, we will bring meaningful change to the communities that need it most." Drive Health's flagship product, Avery, an Agentic Nurse, is an AI-powered Health Assistant designed to address healthcare staffing shortages while empowering clinicians to focus on direct patient care. For more information, visit About Drive Health Drive Health makes healthcare simple and accessible – anytime, anywhere, for everyone. Its mission is to ease the burden on healthcare providers, build trust with consumers, and simplify healthcare through secure, AI-enabled solutions. For more information, visit
Medscape
10 hours ago
- Medscape
Diabetes Status May Not Affect Outcomes of Preventive PCI
The PREVENT trial found preventive percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) combined with optimal medical therapy was more effective than medical therapy alone in reducing major adverse cardiac events in patients with non–flow-limiting vulnerable plaques. The new analysis found patients with non–flow-limiting vulnerable plaques had similar 2-year cardiac outcomes regardless of diabetes status, but those who received preventive PCI combined with optimal medical therapy had lower rates of cardiac events than those who received medical therapy alone. METHODOLOGY: The post hoc analysis of the PREVENT data compared the clinical outcomes of preventive PCI plus optimal medical therapy and medical therapy alone in patients with (n = 490) or without (n = 1116) diabetes. Plaques were defined as non–flow-limiting when the fractional flow reserve was > 0.80; vulnerable plaques were identified using intracoronary imaging. The primary endpoint was a composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, ischemia-driven target vessel revascularization, or hospitalization for unstable or progressive angina at 2 years after randomization; the median follow-up duration was 4.3 years. TAKEAWAY: At 2 years, the incidence of the composite primary endpoint was not significantly different between patients with diabetes and those without the condition (1.8% and 1.9%, respectively; P = .956). = .956). The composite primary endpoint occurred less frequently with preventive PCI than with optimal medical therapy alone for both patients with diabetes (0% vs 3.7%; log-rank P = .003) and those without diabetes (0.5% vs 3.2%; log-rank P < .001). = .003) and those without diabetes (0.5% vs 3.2%; log-rank < .001). The reduced incidence of the primary endpoint with preventive PCI was mainly driven by reduced rates of ischemia-driven target vessel revascularization and hospitalizations for unstable or progressive angina in both patients with diabetes and those without the disorder. IN PRACTICE: 'These findings support that preventive PCI…irrespective of diabetes status, in patients with non–flow-limiting vulnerable coronary plaques,' the researchers wrote. Vulnerable plaques 'may be guilty by association but may not be the sole culprit behind residual cardiovascular risk,' wrote Diana A. Gorog, MD, PhD, of Imperial College London, London, England, in an editorial accompanying the journal article. Such plaques 'may be just one marker of a vulnerable patient, but not the only determinant of risk. Perhaps we need to find better ways of identifying the vulnerable patient, rather than focusing solely on vulnerable plaques,' Gorog added. SOURCE: This study was led by Min Chul Kim of Chonnam National University Hospital in Gwangju, South Korea. It was originally presented at American College of Cardiology (ACC) Scientific Session 2024 and was published online on May 29, 2025, in European Heart Journal . LIMITATIONS: The clinical outcomes were exploratory as the study was powered only for the composite primary endpoint, with event rates lower than anticipated. The researchers did not differentiate between type 1 and type 2 diabetes, which might have limited the generalizability of the findings. Intravascular imaging at follow-up was not performed routinely. DISCLOSURES: This study was funded by the CardioVascular Research Foundation, Abbott, Yuhan Corp, CAH-Cordis, Philips, and Infraredx. Several authors reported receiving research grants, consulting fees, and honoraria from various pharmaceutical and healthcare companies, including the funding agencies.
WIRED
a day ago
- WIRED
How One Keto Trial Set Off a New War in the Nutrition World
Jun 4, 2025 7:18 AM A study claimed that people who eat high-fat, low-carb diets weren't seeing their arteries fill up with plaque, despite having high levels of blood cholesterol. Critics disagreed—and all hell broke loose. Photograph: Jonathan Kantor/ Getty Images Whenever the keto diet is discussed, there's going to be beef. But this time it's different. A new research paper on the diet's effects has whipped the nutrition field into a frenzy. Researchers behind the study say it supports keto's health credentials; opponents claim the research shows the exact opposite. Cue public spats on social media, questions about the study's rigor, and calls for it to be withdrawn. 'It's a collective mess,' says Kevin Klatt, an assistant research scientist and instructor in the Department of Nutrition Sciences and Toxicology at UC Berkeley. Published on April 7 in JACC: Advances , the paper examines the relationship between cholesterol and the ketogenic diet—the practice of consuming low-carb, high-fat foods to try to push the body into 'ketosis,' where cells burn fat instead of carbs for energy. Keto diets have become a popular strategy used by millions for losing weight, though detractors have questioned how healthy it is to consistently consume high amounts of fat. The study, by getting to the heart of this question, has received a significant amount of attention. Altmetric, which measures the attention a publication receives in the press and on social media, puts it in the top 5 percent of the papers it tracks—more than 24 million pieces of research. The majority of attention has come from X. According to some keto advocates, the paper's findings are a step towards refuting the widely accepted theory that LDL cholesterol, also referred to as 'low-density lipoprotein' or 'bad' cholesterol, has a causal relationship with heart disease and other cardiovascular conditions. Overturning this hypothesis would undermine long-standing medical advice that people should keep their LDL cholesterol low, and potentially rewrite the rules on consuming fatty foods. The trial recruited 100 subjects who were otherwise healthy but had been following a ketogenic diet for at least 2 years, and who as a result had unusually high cholesterol levels in their blood. Patients who exhibit these characteristics, but who show other signs of being in good cardiometabolic health—having lean physiques, low body fat, low blood pressure, and good insulin sensitivity—are sometimes called Lean Mass Hyper-Responders (LMHRs). The study set out to show if its cohort of LMHRs were developing fatty deposits known as plaque in their arteries, a known risk for people with high levels of LDL cholesterol in their blood. Participants were followed for one year, during which they continued with their keto diets, and their plaque levels were observed at the beginning and end of the study. One of the study's authors is Dave Feldman, a software engineer and entrepreneur without a medical license or training, who has devoted himself to all things keto and cholesterol. In an email to WIRED, Feldman claimed that it was he who coined the term Lean Mass Hyper-Responders, back in 2017. In the past he has organized his own experiments—without the guidance of an institutional board review, which in formal experiments are used to ensure ethical behavior and participant welfare—to try to get the attention of scientists and have them study LMHRs. Feldman's charity, the Citizen Science Foundation, crowdfunded the recent study, which was run through the Californian research organization the Lundquist Institute, with an institutional review board. In a video released on X the day the paper came out, Feldman claimed the study found no association between LDL cholesterol and plaque in the patients, and no association between apolipoprotein B (ApoB) and plaque. (ApoB helps carry fat molecules around the body, and higher levels of it are associated with cardiovascular disease.) These alleged findings run counter to large amounts of already-existing evidence suggesting both LDL and ApoB have a causal relationship with the development of plaque in the arteries. In Feldman's view, the study shows that despite their high levels of LDL cholesterol, the patients' keto diets weren't raising their risk of plaque. However, many doctors and researchers reached the opposite conclusion when looking at the work. On May 7, JACC: Advances published a pre-proof version of a Letter to the Editor, written by two researchers specializing in nutrition, Miguel López-Moreno and José Francisco López-Gil. They highlighted concerns with the study, including what they alleged to be 'selective reporting' of data, the study's lack of a comparator group, the validity of the statistical modeling used, and the weakness of using a one-year timeframe. The study was also heavily criticized for seeming to mask its original focus. Originally, it was supposed to look at the percentage change in non-calcified plaque volume (NCPV)—soft plaque that had not yet hardened inside participants' blood vessels—in the participants over the course of the study. A graph of NCPV change appeared in the paper, but measurements were not provided or mentioned. Instead, the paper ended up offering an exploratory analysis—that ApoB does not beget plaque—'that was implausible to do based on the data they had,' says Spencer Nadolsky, a Michigan-based physician specializing in obesity medicine and lipidology. This means the paper 'shouldn't have made it through peer review in the first place,' Nadolsky believes. If researchers leave out the intended goal of a study, critics allege that they could then cobble together any data once the experiment has been done, without clarifying what they were initially looking for, and try to pass this off as evidence of something. Because the study wasn't designed to investigate the alternative hypothesis of the explanatory analysis, there may be flaws in the data being used to support it—biases in how it was obtained, or not enough of it to reach a robust conclusion. 'This is the first thing you're not supposed to do,' says Nadolsky of the decision to shift focus. 'That's why we're hammering them.' 'Interpretative disagreements are far from rare in nutritional science,' wrote Adrian Soto-Mota, lead author of the study, in response to a request for comment from WIRED. He notes that all of the limitations of the study's design were acknowledged in the paper, and says that when they used the alternative statistical model suggested by López-Moreno and López-Gil, this still corroborated the paper's conclusions. Soto-Mata also says the focus wasn't switched. The changes in participants' NCPV were shown in the graph, he says, and notes that these changes were used in 'almost all the analyses in our paper.' Moreover, he says it's wrong to describe the analysis that ApoB does not beget plaque as implausible based on the data gathered. 'Our analysis was carried out by two experts in data analysis, and it was independently reviewed by an expert in statistics during the peer review process,' he says. Nadolsky, though, has called for the paper to be retracted, and co-wrote a response to the research, which has been released as a preprint, which takes issue with the paper's findings, interpretation, and statistical analysis, among other concerns. The response says the study's conclusions—a 'clear example of scientific spin'—are not supported by the data, and have the potential to misinform both doctors and patients about the risks of following a high-fat diet. 'Nothing was spun, and our conclusions remained unchanged after multiple sensitivity analyses and an independent expert data analysis review,' says Soto-Mota. Problems from the Beginning What sets Nadolsky's criticism apart from others' is that he had a part in designing the study. Feldman and Nadolsky had gone back-and-forth for years online about the risks of high cholesterol, with Feldman suggesting that the traditional consensus around its risks might be wrong, particularly for the LMHR population. Instead, Feldman proposed a new alternative theory—the lipid energy model—which he and some of his coauthors on the current paper outlined in a study published in Metabolites in 2022. In this unproven theory, high LDL is thought to be unconcerning in LMHRs because their bodies have become more efficient in transporting cholesterol while running primarily on fat. Nadolsky, though a believer in the consensus view on cholesterol, was still interested in getting some data on the effects of LDL cholesterol in LMHRs, and a study investigating Feldman's theory was a way to reach across the aisle to get it. But in putting together a study to test Feldman's hypothesis they faced difficulty, Nadolsky explains. It would be shot down by an institutional review board, as it would require people with extremely high LDL cholesterol levels to go untreated, when this is known to be potentially dangerous. However, a workaround would be to observe plaque progression in people experiencing diet-induced hypercholesterolemia (high LDL cholesterol due to their keto diet) who were refusing lipid-lowering medications. The recruitment and promotion of the study was done on X via the #LMHRstudy hashtag, in addition to Feldman's LMHR Facebook group, which also called for fundraising contributions—and it was during this process that Nadolsky began to grow concerned. During recruitment, Feldman also presented some of the preliminary data at a low-carb conference, using it 'to try to present that the [LMHR] phenotype was benign, because most of the individuals seemed to not have plaque at baseline,' Nadolsky says. He says that Feldman was doing this to recruit more subjects and donations for the research; but in essence, this was presenting supposed findings of the research before it had been properly conducted. At this point, Nadolsky conferred with multiple scientists and researchers outside of the study, and was advised to wash his hands of the project. 'It was clear there was going to be a spin, no matter what the data showed,' Nadolsky claims. Nadolsky filed a complaint with the institutional review board overseeing the study, for ethical concerns. The board, says Soto-Mata, 'allowed the study to proceed after concluding that no ethical transgressions had been made.' The Lundquist Institute did not respond to a request for comment from WIRED. While the study was still in the recruitment phase, Nadolsky left the team. Entrenched Positions Klatt, of UC Berkeley, is extremely well-versed in nutrition research and the current online debates around cholesterol. He's written about this study and its fallout on his personal Substack, and calls Nadolsky a friend. Klatt discussed the study with Nadolsky while it was ongoing, and many aspects concerned him. Klatt brought up issues of undisclosed biases to the Lundquist Institute, the host of the trial, along with Dave Feldman's 'strongly vested interest' in the results of the study that was not properly disclosed, claiming he was 'a conflicted party with no training in the biomedical sciences.' His email to the Institute about these issues went unanswered. 'I think this study has gotten to the point of being extremely unethical,' Klatt says. 'All authors adhered to the conflicts-of-interest disclosure guidelines the journal required,' Soto-Mata says. 'Our study was independently reviewed, approved, and monitored by an expert Research Ethics committee, all its recommendations were followed, and all its standards were met.' While some researchers and physicians are tearing the study apart, or using it to show that keto can have adverse effects, Klatt doesn't draw any strong conclusions. 'People are talking past each other,' he says. Generally speaking, there are two clear camps, with one thinking the traditional lipid hypothesis holds up, and another thinking the new lipid energy model might work. Klatt puts himself in a third camp, asking: 'Why are we trying to interpret this study at all?' 'I'm an editor at the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition,' Klatt says, 'and I would like to believe that we would have rejected this outright without even sending it out for peer review, because it has so many obvious issues.' He is worried about people using this flawed study as proof the consensus on the risks of LDL cholesterol has been 'debunked,' which it has not. One of the study's coauthors, Matthew Budoff, a professor of medicine at UCLA as well as an investigator at the Lundquist Institute, acknowledged in an email to WIRED that there had been 'incredible scrutiny of the data on social media, which is more than expected based on my prior publications.' He noted the research team is seeking to have the paper incorporate corrections, but that this is ultimately at the discretion of the journal. A response to the Letter to the Editor from the coauthors clarifies some of the issues, he wrote. That reply to the Letter to the Editor has now been published—and reveals that the study's data may support the conventional position on the risk of cholesterol after all. The study's authors share that the 'pooled median change' in NCPV in the participants—the rise in the type of plaque the study was set up to investigate, but which originally wasn't explicitly quantified in the paper—was an alarming 42.8 percent. The reply goes on to state that the study's findings were 'compatible with a causal role of ApoB in atherosclerosis'—the build-up of fat in the arteries—which they've 'acknowledged and supported in previous publications.' The letter says that not mentioning this percentage increase in NCPV 'was a sincere oversight, not intentional selective reporting.' But this concession comes after the horse has bolted. Feldman's hypothesis is already appearing in laypeople's research—with the keto diet having been among the most Googled diets in recent years, and keto products a growing multibillion-dollar industry. Answering the query 'What is special about Lean Mass Hyper-Responders,' ChatGPT provides the lipid energy model, Feldman's argument against the consensus on cholesterol, among the initial explanations for why there is so much controversy and interest. There is also a Cholesterol Code documentary in the works—which covers Feldman's personal experience and his research, including this study—which Feldman predicts will be available on a major streaming service sometime this year.
