BACKGROUND: Recent evidence suggests that the lipid-lowering agent atorvastatin is also a potent immunomodulator. The aim of this study was to investigate the possible effect of atorvastatin on the decline of residual beta cell function in recent-onset type 1 diabetes. METHODS AND FINDINGS: The randomised placebo-controlled Diabetes and Atorvastatin (DIATOR) Trial included 89 patients with newly diagnosed type 1 diabetes and islet autoantibodies (mean age 30 years, 40% females), in 12 centres in Germany. Patients received placebo or 80 mg/d atorvastatin for 18 months. As primary outcome stimulated serum C-peptide levels were determined 90 min after a standardized liquid mixed meal. An intent-to-treat analysis was performed. Fasting and stimulated C-peptide levels were not significantly different between groups at 18 months. However, median fasting serum C-peptide levels dropped from baseline to 12 and 18 months in the placebo group (from 0. 34 to 0.23 and 0.20 nmol/l, p<0.001) versus a nonsignificant decline in the atorvastatin group (from 0.34 to 0.27 and 0.30 nmol/l, ns). Median stimulated C-peptide concentrations declined between baseline and 12 months (placebo from 0.89 to 0.71 nmol/l, atorvastatin from 0.88 to 0.73 nmol/l, p<0.01 each) followed by a major loss by month 18 in the placebo group (to 0.48 nmol/l, p = 0.047) but not in the atorvastatin group (to 0.71 nmol/l, ns). Median levels of total cholesterol and C-reactive protein decreased in the atorvastatin group only (p<0.001 and p = 0.04). Metabolic control was similar between groups. CONCLUSIONS:Atorvastatin treatment did not significantly preserve beta cell function although there may have been a slower decline of beta-cell function which merits further study. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00974740.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Recent evidence suggests that the lipid-lowering agent atorvastatin is also a potent immunomodulator. The aim of this study was to investigate the possible effect of atorvastatin on the decline of residual beta cell function in recent-onset type 1 diabetes. METHODS AND FINDINGS: The randomised placebo-controlled Diabetes and Atorvastatin (DIATOR) Trial included 89 patients with newly diagnosed type 1 diabetes and islet autoantibodies (mean age 30 years, 40% females), in 12 centres in Germany. Patients received placebo or 80 mg/d atorvastatin for 18 months. As primary outcome stimulated serum C-peptide levels were determined 90 min after a standardized liquid mixed meal. An intent-to-treat analysis was performed. Fasting and stimulated C-peptide levels were not significantly different between groups at 18 months. However, median fasting serum C-peptide levels dropped from baseline to 12 and 18 months in the placebo group (from 0. 34 to 0.23 and 0.20 nmol/l, p<0.001) versus a nonsignificant decline in the atorvastatin group (from 0.34 to 0.27 and 0.30 nmol/l, ns). Median stimulated C-peptide concentrations declined between baseline and 12 months (placebo from 0.89 to 0.71 nmol/l, atorvastatin from 0.88 to 0.73 nmol/l, p<0.01 each) followed by a major loss by month 18 in the placebo group (to 0.48 nmol/l, p = 0.047) but not in the atorvastatin group (to 0.71 nmol/l, ns). Median levels of total cholesterol and C-reactive protein decreased in the atorvastatin group only (p<0.001 and p = 0.04). Metabolic control was similar between groups. CONCLUSIONS:Atorvastatin treatment did not significantly preserve beta cell function although there may have been a slower decline of beta-cell function which merits further study. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00974740.
Immunosuppressive treatment of recent onset type 1 diabetes has been shown to slow
the decline of residual beta cell function [1]. Recent trials which reported a
delay in disease progression include autologous stem cell therapy, treatment with
immunomodulatory monoclonal antibodies or vaccination with disease-associated
autoantigens (see ref.2). The latter approach did not cause recognizable
treatment-related adverse effects. Statins have been considered as immunomodulary
agents because of their ability to suppress the expression of adhesion molecules and
MHC class II molecules as well as of inflammatory mediators such as C-reactive
protein [3], [4]. The inhibition
of T-cell activation involves the blockade of the interaction between T-lymphocytes
and antigen presenting cells by binding to an adhesion molecule involved in this
process, LFA-1 [5]. Soluble forms of ICAM-1 – the natural receptor of
LFA-1- were found to be decreased in recent onset type 1 diabeticpatients [6] and to inhibit
type 1 diabetes specific autoantigen T-cell proliferation [7]. Furthermore, administration of
recombinant forms of soluble ICAM-1 was effective in inhibiting insulitis and
diabetes-development in NOD mice [8].Atorvastatin showed beneficial effects in patients with rheumatoid arthritis [9], and in
relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis [10]. Another trial reported an
increase of disease activity for the combination of atorvastatin with
interferon-β [11] whereas one subsequent trial did not find such an adverse
effect [12]. A
third trial reported better outcomes for the combination of atorvastatin with
interferon-β [13].The possible beneficial effect of statin therapy on the beta cell destructive process
in pancreatic islets has been analysed in animal models, with inconsistent results.
In the multiple low-dose streptozotocin models in CD-1 mice, administration of
simvastatin delayed or protected from the development of insulin-deficient diabetes
[14], whereas
no effect was seen with atorvastatin treatment in C57BL/6 mice [15]. Statin treatment lowered the
incidence of diabetes in the autoimmune diabetic NOD mouse model in one out of three
studies [15]–[17] Treatment with simvastatin prolonged survival of islets
transplanted to NOD mice [14], [18].In view of the disease modifying activity of statins in two human immune-mediated
diseases we initiated the DIATOR (Diabetes and Atorvastatin) Trial investigating the
effects of treatment with atorvastatin in the course of recent-onset type 1
diabetes.
Results
During the years 2004–2006 eighty-nine of the 105 patients with recent-onset
type 1 diabetes screened were identified as eligible. Despite an extension of the
recruitment period and of the number of participating centers the goal of 160
patients was not reached. The decision to stop screening was made by the Study
Committee based on the low recruitment rate of the last 12 months, while still being
blinded for patient allocation to treatment groups. After randomization two patients
in the placebo group were excluded because of not having met the inclusion criteria
of at least one islet autoantibody, leaving 87 patients for the intent-to-treat
analysis. In total, 78% of patients completed the visit at 12 months and
72% the final visit at 18 months (
).
Figure 1
Study flow diagram.
Patients were screened in 12 participating centers by using the inclusion and
exclusion criteria.
Study flow diagram.
Patients were screened in 12 participating centers by using the inclusion and
exclusion criteria.
Baseline Characteristics
The two study groups were comparable with respect to baseline parameters (
). There
also were no significant differences between study centers, or between patients
completing the full study and drop-outs at different time points, with the
exception of higher baseline insulin dose in drop-outs vs. completers (not
shown).
Table 1
Baseline characteristics.
Characteristic
Atorvastatin Group
Placebo Group
Mean age (SD), y
30.0 (6.8)
29.8 (6.5)
Men, n (%)
26 (57
27 (63)
Mean BMI (kg/m2) (SD)
23.4 (3.1)
24.2 (3.0)
Mean HbA1c (%) (SD)
7.8 (1.8)
7.5 (1.6)
Mean insulin dose (IU/kg) (SD)
0.32 (0.18)
0.33 (0.19)
Median fasting C-peptide (nmol/l)(IQR)
0.34 (0.22)
0.34 (0.20)
Median stim. C-peptide (nmol/l)(IQR)a
0.88 (0.66)
0.89 (0.67)
GAD65 autoantibodiesb:
patients positive (n)
42
40
median titer (U/ml) (IQR)
34 (63)
21 (46)
IA-2 autoantibodiesb:
patients positive (n)
25
25
median titer (U/ml) (IQR)
8.6 (16)
6.3 (13)
Islet cell antibodiesb
patients positive (n)
37
30
median titer (JDFU/ml) (IQR)
40 (0)
40 (0)
Patients positive for one autoantibody (n)
7
8
Patients positive for two autoantibodies (n)
14
12
Patients positive for three autoantibodies (n)
23
21
Stimulated serum C-peptide concentrations were determined 90 min
after intake of a standardized liquid mixed meal.
Data on GAD, IA2 and islet cell antibodies were not available from 2,
6 and 4 persons, respectively.
Stimulated serum C-peptide concentrations were determined 90 min
after intake of a standardized liquid mixed meal.Data on GAD, IA2 and islet cell antibodies were not available from 2,
6 and 4 persons, respectively.
Main Outcomes
Median fasting and stimulated C-peptide concentrations did not differ
significantly between atorvastatin and placebo at 18 months (0.30 vs. 0.20
nmol/l, p = 0.40, and 0.71 vs. 0.48 nmol/l,
p = 0.36, respectively) although there was a 50%
difference for fasting and a 48% difference for stimulated C-peptide. The
course of C-peptide secretion over the study period is depicted in
. Median
fasting serum C-peptide levels dropped from baseline to 12 and 18 months in the
placebo group (from 0. 34 to 0.23 and 0.20 nmol/l, p<0.001) whereas they
remained stable in the atorvastatin group (from 0.34 to 0.27 and 0.30 nmol/l,
ns) (
).
Mixed-meal stimulated beta cell secretion initially decreased in both groups
until 12 months (from 0.89 to 0.71 nmol/l in the placebo group, from 0.88 to
0.73 nmol/l in the atoravastatin group, p<0.01 for both) with no further
deterioration until 18 months in the atorvastatin group (0.71 nmol/l), whereas
there was significant further loss of beta cell function in the placebo group
(0.48 nmol/l, p<0.046,
). Additional exploratory analyses were
performed to search for a treatment effect in subgroups defined by center
allocation, high vs. low age, BMI or baseline levels of fasting or stimulated
C-peptide, number of islet autoantibodies. No significant difference for the
primary endpoint at 18 months was found.
Figure 2
Course of C-peptide secretion in the study groups.
Fasting serum C-peptide concentrations (a) were the mean of
two blood samples obtained 5 min apart, samples for stimulated serum
C-peptide (b) were obtained 90 min after a standard liquid
mixed meal. Numbers in columns indicate the IQR. Filled bars,
atorvastatin, empty bars, placebo. Differences between groups were not
significant. Comparison between groups by Mann-Whitey-u-test, within
groups by Wilcoxon signed rank test.
Course of C-peptide secretion in the study groups.
Fasting serum C-peptide concentrations (a) were the mean of
two blood samples obtained 5 min apart, samples for stimulated serum
C-peptide (b) were obtained 90 min after a standard liquid
mixed meal. Numbers in columns indicate the IQR. Filled bars,
atorvastatin, empty bars, placebo. Differences between groups were not
significant. Comparison between groups by Mann-Whitey-u-test, within
groups by Wilcoxon signed rank test.
Efficacy of Atorvastatin Treatment
In the atorvastatin group median baseline concentrations of total cholesterol
(4.04 mmol/l), LDL-cholesterol (2.51 mmol/l) and triglyceride (0.75 mmol/l)
decreased by 3 months and remained at low levels throughout the treatment period
(
).
From baseline to 18 months decreases were 32.2% for total, 52.3%
for LDL-cholesterol, and 26.0% for triglyceride concentrations.
(p<0.001, each). Median HDL-cholesterol levels increased from 1.05 mmol/l at
baseline to 1.22 mmol/l at 18 months (p<0.001). In the placebo group, there
were no significant changes throughout the treatment period.
Figure 3
Effect of atorvastatin on blood lipid levels.
Shown are mean levels of total (black lines) and LDL-cholesterol (blue
lines) (a), HDL-cholesterol (black lines) and triglycerides
(blue lines) (b), bars indicate standard deviation, dotted
lines depict placebo, continuous lines atorvastatin. * p<0.05,
** p<0.01, *** p<0.001 for comparison with
baseline values. Only changes for the atorvastatin group are
significant.
Effect of atorvastatin on blood lipid levels.
Shown are mean levels of total (black lines) and LDL-cholesterol (blue
lines) (a), HDL-cholesterol (black lines) and triglycerides
(blue lines) (b), bars indicate standard deviation, dotted
lines depict placebo, continuous lines atorvastatin. * p<0.05,
** p<0.01, *** p<0.001 for comparison with
baseline values. Only changes for the atorvastatin group are
significant.Changes in immune parameters were determined by comparing serum concentrations at
baseline and 3 months. Median plasma CRP concentrations decreased slightly in
the atorvastatin (from 0.95 (IQR 2.01) to 0.73 mg/l (1.03),
p = 0.03, but not in the placebo group (from 0.88 (1.59) to
0.78 mg/l (1.31)). No significant changes were observed in either group for
median plasma concentrations of the soluble adhesion molecules sICAM-1 and
E-selectin, or serum concentrations of cytokines IFNγ, IL-6, IL-18 cytokine
antagonist IL-1ra, chemokines eotaxin, IP-10, MCP-4, MIP-1β, MDC, IL-8 and
TARC (data not shown). Median concentrations of MCP-1 decreased significantly in
the placebo group (from 431 to 356 pg/ml, p = 0.009) but
not in the atorvastatin group (from 367 to 303 pg/ml, ns).). The only difference
between groups was a 11% higher concentration of IL-1ra at 3 months with
atorvastatin treatment (p = 0.02).
Metabolic Control
Mean HbA1c levels decreased from baseline to 6 months in both study groups (from
7.8 to 6.6% with atorvastatin, from 7.5 to 6.7% with placebo, both
p<0.001) and stayed at a lower level throughout the treatment period in the
atorvastatin group (6.8% at 18 months), while under placebo treatment
mean values increased and were no more different from baseline at 18 months
(7.1%, p>0.05) (
). However, differences between treatment
groups were not significant at either 12 or 18 months. Mean daily insulin dose
increased in the atorvastatin group from 0.32 IU/kg at baseline to 0.48 IU/kg at
18 months, and in the placebo group from 0.33 to 0.44 IU/kg (both p<0.001).
The rise in insulin dose was more rapid in the atorvastatin group, resulting in
a higher dose at 12 months compared to the placebo group,
p = 0.007 (
).
Figure 4
Metabolic control during the study (HbA1c (a), insulin dose
(b).
Filled bars, atorvastatin, empty bars, placebo. Bars indicate standard
deviation, for HbA1c p-values describe differences of mean values from
baseline determined by ANCOVA with correction for baseline HbA1c and BMI
(which correlated with later HbA1c levels), **, p<0.01;
***, p<0.001. Mean insulin doses per kg bodyweight were
different between groups at 12 months (p = 0.007,
comparison of log-transformed mean values by ANCOVA with correction for
baseline insulin dose and age (which correlated with later insulin
doses).
Metabolic control during the study (HbA1c (a), insulin dose
(b).
Filled bars, atorvastatin, empty bars, placebo. Bars indicate standard
deviation, for HbA1c p-values describe differences of mean values from
baseline determined by ANCOVA with correction for baseline HbA1c and BMI
(which correlated with later HbA1c levels), **, p<0.01;
***, p<0.001. Mean insulin doses per kg bodyweight were
different between groups at 12 months (p = 0.007,
comparison of log-transformed mean values by ANCOVA with correction for
baseline insulin dose and age (which correlated with later insulin
doses).
Safety Results
Dose reductions (from 80 mg/d to 40 mg/d) due to adverse effects occurred for
1–1.7 years in 3 cases: 1 case of myalgia and myopathia (atorvastatin), 1
of arthralgia (placebo) and 1 of increased CPK serum levels (atorvastatin).
Medication was temporarily discontinued in 7 cases because of symptoms lasting
between 1 and 28 days (atorvastatin: Helicobacter infection, bilious colic in
patient with gallstone predisposition, swollen lids with headache, back pain
after moving into a new domicile, respiratory infection with fever; placebo:
muscle pain, blood in stool) Permanent discontinuation of atorvastatin occurred
in three persons, after temporary treatment halt because of intestinal cramps,
because of mildly elevated hepatic enzyme levels or because of neurological
symptoms. In the atorvastatin group, 18 patients (39.1%) reported 64
adverse events vs. 15 patients (34.9%) with 31 adverse events in the
placebo group. In the atorvastatin group 9 of the 64 adverse events in 7
patients were rated as “possibly” or “probably” related
to medication, vs. 4 of the 28 adverse events in 4 placebo patients (difference
not significant). Five events in 4 patients of the atorvastatin group and 3
events in 3 patients of the placebo group were classified as severe adverse
events; none was classified as “possibly” or “probably”
related to medication. All patients recovered or were stabilized. CPK levels
were elevated in 16 patients of the atorvastatin and in 6 patients of the
placebo group. However, in most cases these elevations were of mild character
(maximum 405 U/l in the atorvastatin vs. 321 U/l in the placebo group) and
critical serum levels of >10 times of the upper normal range (i.e. >2000
U/l) were never observed.
Discussion
The trial did not find a significant effect of atorvastatin treatment with regard to
the primary endpoint, i.e. the comparison of stimulated C-peptide concentrations
between groups at 18 months. Also, the two groups did not differ significantly with
regard to fasting C-peptide levels. In both cases, median C-peptide concentrations
were around 50% higher in the atorvastatin than the placebo group at 18
months, but this difference failed to be significant because of an unexpectedly
large range or standard deviation of C-peptide concentrations measured, in both
groups. In this regard, a major limitation of the trial is that the actual number of
patients recruited was lower than foreseen in the study protocol (total 89 vs.
160).As secondary analysis we compared median C-peptide concentrations over the study
period within a group. There was a significant deterioration of residual beta cell
function in the placebo group but not the atorvastatin group. In the placebo group,
median fasting C-peptide concentrations decreased from baseline by 32% at 12
months and by 41% at 18 months (p<0.001), whereas there was no significant
change in the atorvastatin group. Median stimulated C-peptide concentrations
decreased mildly in both groups by 12 months (by 20% in the placebo group and
by 17% in the atorvastatin group, p<0.01 each). At 18 months median
C-peptide concentrations had further decreased (p = 0.046),
total decrease by 46% of baseline, whereas there was no further deterioration
in the atorvastatin group, total decrease by 19%.These differences were not reflected by lower insulin doses in the atorvastatin
group. Rather, there was a more rapid increase of insulin dosing leading to
significantly higher insulin doses at 12 months although not at 18 months. Some
types of statins have been reported to increase or decrease insulin resistance but a
consistent effect was not noted for atorvastatin in a recent meta-analysis [19]. Partial
preservation of residual beta cell function is considered as clinically relevant
goal also in the absence of lower insulin requirements, because of a lower risk of
complications [20],
[21].Since beta cell function is affected by the concentration of glucose at the start of
the test, the study protocol requested that no mixed meal test should be performed
if fasting blood glucose was outside 4–11 mmol/l. However, even in this
concentration range, ambient glucose may affect the outcome of beta cell function
tests, as suggest by the recent international workshop comparing the liquid mixed
meal with the glucagon assay [22]. There was an inverse relationship between fasting blood
glucose and subsequent peak C-peptide concentrations following the liquid mixed
meal. This means that the higher HbA1c levels (and consequently higher mean fasting
blood glucose levels) in the atorvastatin group at 12 and 18 months probably has led
to a lower C-peptide response, and hence has downsized the difference between the
two groups. Unfortunately, there is no algorithm or formula for adjusting C-peptide
responses for ambient glucose.As expected, regular intake of atorvastatin caused a decrease of total and
LDL-cholesterol levels in serum, a decrease of triglyceride levels and a small
increase of HDL-cholesterol levels. Median concentrations of CRP were low at
baseline, but were further lowered by statin treatment. All of these effects are
consequences of inhibiting the synthesis of mevalonate from acetyl coenzyme A by
hydroxyl-3-methylglutaryl-coenzyme A reductase. This is a rate limiting step in
cholesterol synthesis, and the mevalonate pathway gives rise to a number of
compounds such as farnesyl or geranylgeranyl pyrophosphate which can modify several
transcription factors controlling cell growth, endothelial activity and immune gene
expression [3],
[23]–[26]. The
amelioration of the lipid status by atorvastatin treatment may be considered
advantageous, independent of the slowed loss of beta cell function. The decrease in
systemic CRP levels may indicate a dampening of inflammatory processes, although our
analysis of circulating concentrations of 14 different immune mediators, including
soluble adhesion molecules, cytokines, a cytokine antagonist and chemokines did not
reveal statin-treatment associated changes. This argues against a major effect on
systemic immune reactivity but does not exclude that statin treatment affects
islet-antigen specific cellular immunity, e.g. through an increase of regulatory
T-cell functions in pancreatic islets or draining lymph nodes. Indeed, statin
blockade of the mevalonate pathway has been observed to promote the generation of
Foxp3 positive regulatory T-cells in mice and a shift from autoaggressive Th1 to
more benign Th2 immunity [27]–[30]. Atorvastatin-induced Krüppel-like factor 2
expression may be a critical event for these effects [31]. Besides the immunomodulatory
properties atorvastatin may also target pancreatic islets. A recent study in
streptozotocin treated rat pups reported an increase in the number of small islets
following atorvastatin treatment, suggestive of neogenesis. Since angiogenesis
preceded the increase in beta cell mass, target of atorvastatin may be the
endothelium [32].Atorvastatin was generally well tolerated. Dose reductions or temporary
discontinuation of treatment were reported in 8 cases, in three cases treatment was
permanently discontinued. Elevation of CPK levels were observed more often in the
atorvastatin than in the placebo group (35 vs 14%) but did not reach critical
levels of >2000 U/l.In summary, we report that treatment with atorvastatin over 18 months was safe and
well tolerated in adult patients with recent-onset type 1 diabetes. At 18 months,
the atorvastatin group did not exhibit significantly higher fasting or stimulated
C-peptide concentrations than the placebo group. Secondary analyses of the course of
C-peptide secretion within groups found some preservation of fasting and stimulated
serum C-peptide concentrations in the atorvastatin but not the placebo group. A
comparison with results from the ongoing trial of atorvastatin in children and
adolescents with type 1 diabetes (ClinicalTrials.gov registration number
NCT00529191) will help to judge the potential of this treatment modality.
Methods
Ethics statement
The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki, and
approval by the ethics committees of the Ärztekammer Nordrhein was
obtained. All patients provided written informed consent prior to study entry.
The protocol for this trial and supporting CONSORT checklist are available as
supporting information; see Checklist S1 and Protocol
S1.
Study population
In participating centers throughout Germany (n = 12),
patients with newly diagnosed type 1 diabetes were screened for eligibility. In
accordance with current guidelines this new treatment modality was first tried
in adult patients. Inclusion criteria were insulin requiring diabetes for two
weeks to 3 months, tested positive for at least one islet autoantibody (to
glutamic acid decarboxylase (GAD) 65, to insulinoma-associated antigen (IA)-2 or
islet cell antibodies (ICA)), age 18–39 years. Female patients were to use
contraceptive methods. Major exclusion criteria were concomitant other diseases,
use of anti-inflammatory, antihypertensive, lipid-lowering or antidiabetic drugs
other than insulin, a serum creatine phosphokinase (CPK) level >5 times the
upper limit of normal, a serum LDL-cholesterol level >150 mg/dl or any other
conditions considered relevant by the investigator. All patients were of
Caucasian ethnicity.
Procedure
The study was a Phase I trial conducted as randomized, double-blind,
placebo-controlled, outpatient, parallel group study. Patients were assigned to
treatment with either atorvastatin or placebo for a period of 18 months in a
one-to-one manner using a computer-generated randomization list, with
stratification for participating centers. The starting atorvastatin dose was 40
mg/d or a matching number of placebo tablets. After 4 weeks, the dose was
increased to 80 mg/d or matching placebo. Counts of unused tablets were
performed and did not indicate a lack of compliance, defined by >20%
of tablets returned on two consecutive visits. During the study, the
investigators were advised to reduce the dose to 40 mg/d in case of side-effects
(e.g. myalgia). Insulin treatment was continued throughout the study with a
recommended treatment goal of HbA1c below 6.5% from 3 months on.
Follow-up and Outcome Measures
Patients attended visits at 0, 3, 6, 12 and 18 months, without food intake for
the preceding 10 hours. Primary outcome was stimulated C-peptide secretion,
assessed as serum C-peptide concentrations after a standardised liquid mixed
meal (Boost HP® (Mead Johnson, Evansville, IN, USA), 6 ml per kg body weight
with a maximum of 360 ml) which was performed at months 0, 12 and 18. Patients
had to refrain from alcohol intake and unaccustomed strenuous physical activity
for 48 hours prior to the test. In the morning, a capillary blood glucose
measurement was done and the test was performed if fasting blood glucose was
≥4 mmol/l and ≤11.1 mmol/l. The test was performed in the morning between
7 and 10 a.m. The patient should not have taken any short-acting insulin at
least 6 hours prior to the test. A first blood sample was drawn five minutes, a
second one immediately before the liquid meal was taken in (mean value as formal
“time zero”). The test meal had to be ingested within 5 minutes.
Another blood sample was drawn after 90 min, following the guideline of the
Diabetes Control and Complications Trial [33]. A recent international
workshop found a good correlation between measuring C-peptide levels at this
single time point versus determining the area under the curve [22]. Primary
outcome measure was stimulated serum C-peptide levels at 12 or 18 months. Serum
glucose, C-peptide (immunoenzymatic assay, Biosource/Invitrogen, Karlsruhe,
Germany), lipid and immune parameters were analyzed in a central laboratory.C-reactive protein (CRP) concentrations were determined by an immunonephelometric
assay [34],
all other immune mediators were measured by double-antibody ELISA (sICAM-1,
E-selectin, IL-6, IL-1ra, IFNγ, eotaxin, IP-10, MCP-4, MIP-1β, MDC,
TARC) or bead-based multiplex technology (IL-18, MCP-1, IL-8) [35]. GAD65 and
IA-2 antibodies were determined by radioligand binding assay (CentAK anti-GAD65,
CentAK anti-IA-2, Medipan, Berlin, Germany). ICA was determined by
immunofluorescent staining on human AB- positive pancreatic sections as
described [36]. The immune laboratory participated in
Standardization Workshops DASP 2009 of the International Diabetes Society with
following results: GAD antibody sensitivity 0.72; specificity 0.91; IA-2
antibody sensitivity 0.64, specificity 0.96.
Statistical Analysis
Based on data on C-peptide levels from patient files of the German Diabetes
Center it was calculated that for the primary endpoint 80 patients per group
would allow to recognize a 20% difference between study groups in median
stimulated serum C-peptide levels at 18 months with a type 1 error of
<1%, power 95%. For the actual number of patients recruited,
the p-value was <0.05, power 80%. All patients who received at least
one dose of study treatment were included in the safety analysis. The
statistical evaluation (intent-to-treat analysis) was performed by using
validated software (SAS Version 9.2). Tests for normal distribution were
performed by Kolmogorov-Smirnov. Values with (log-)normal distribution are given
as mean/SD, comparisons between groups were made with unpaired t-test or ANOVA,
or by paired t-test within groups; F-test was used to check whether or not
variances were equal and appropriate tests were used: pooled variance test if
variances were equal, Satterthwaite test if variances were unequal. Comparisons
between groups included all patients, for comparisons within a group only those
patients could be included where baseline and later data were available. Values
without normal distribution are given as median and interquartile range
(compared between groups with Mann-Whitney u-test, within groups with Wilcoxon
signed rank test) Dichotomous/categorical variables are given as proportions
(Fisher's exact or Chi-square test). Missing data were not substituted.
Exploratory analyses were performed for patient subgroups below or above median
age, BMI, stimulated or fasting C-peptide at baseline.(DOC)Click here for additional data file.(PDF)Click here for additional data file.
Authors: X Palomer; L Calpe-Berdiel; J Verdaguer; J Carrillo; X Pastor; D Mauricio; F Blanco-Vaca Journal: Diabetologia Date: 2005-06-30 Impact factor: 10.122
Authors: Norbert Blank; Martin Schiller; Stefan Krienke; Freja Busse; Birgit Schätz; Anthony D Ho; Joachim R Kalden; Hanns-Martin Lorenz Journal: J Immunol Date: 2007-09-15 Impact factor: 5.422
Authors: C Herder; J Baumert; B Thorand; W Koenig; W de Jager; C Meisinger; T Illig; S Martin; H Kolb Journal: Diabetologia Date: 2006-03-11 Impact factor: 10.122
Authors: Carla J Greenbaum; Thomas Mandrup-Poulsen; Paula Friedenberg McGee; Tadej Battelino; Burkhard Haastert; Johnny Ludvigsson; Paolo Pozzilli; John M Lachin; Hubert Kolb Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2008-07-15 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Shannon E Dunn; Sawsan Youssef; Matthew J Goldstein; Thomas Prod'homme; Martin S Weber; Scott S Zamvil; Lawrence Steinman Journal: J Exp Med Date: 2006-02-13 Impact factor: 14.307
Authors: James W Varni; Bradley H Curtis; Linda N Abetz; Kathryn E Lasch; Elisabeth C Piault; Andrea A Zeytoonjian Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2012-12-27 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Muhammad Ismail Shawish; Bahador Bagheri; Vijaya M Musini; Stephen P Adams; James M Wright Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2021-01-22
Authors: Hubert Kolb; Kathrin Lückemeyer; Tim Heise; Christian Herder; Nanette C Schloot; Wolfgang Koenig; Lutz Heinemann; Stephan Martin Journal: PLoS One Date: 2013-08-26 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Alexander Strom; Hubert Kolb; Stephan Martin; Christian Herder; Marie-Christine Simon; Wolfgang Koenig; Tim Heise; Lutz Heinemann; Michael Roden; Nanette C Schloot Journal: PLoS One Date: 2012-03-20 Impact factor: 3.240