AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: The aim of this work was to assess the association between continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) data, HbA1c, insulin-dose-adjusted HbA1c (IDAA1c) and C-peptide responses during the first 2 years following diagnosis of type 1 diabetes. METHODS: A secondary analysis was conducted of data collected from a randomised trial assessing the effect of intensive management initiated within 1 week of diagnosis of type 1 diabetes, in which mixed-meal tolerance tests were performed at baseline and at eight additional time points through 24 months. CGM data were collected at each visit. RESULTS: Among 67 study participants (mean age [± SD] 13.3 ± 5.7 years), HbA1c was inversely correlated with C-peptide at each time point (p < 0.001), as were changes in each measure between time points (p < 0.001). However, C-peptide at one visit did not predict the change in HbA1c at the next visit and vice versa. Higher C-peptide levels correlated with increased proportion of CGM glucose values between 3.9 and 7.8 mmol/l and lower CV (p = 0.001 and p = 0.02, respectively) but not with CGM glucose levels <3.9 mmol/l. Virtually all participants with IDAA1c < 9 retained substantial insulin secretion but when evaluated together with CGM, time in the range of 3.9-7.8 mmol/l and CV did not provide additional value in predicting C-peptide levels. CONCLUSIONS/ INTERPRETATION: In the first 2 years after diagnosis of type 1 diabetes, higher C-peptide levels are associated with increased sensor glucose levels in the target range and with lower glucose variability but not hypoglycaemia. CGM metrics do not provide added value over the IDAA1c in predicting C-peptide levels.
RCT Entities:
AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: The aim of this work was to assess the association between continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) data, HbA1c, insulin-dose-adjusted HbA1c (IDAA1c) and C-peptide responses during the first 2 years following diagnosis of type 1 diabetes. METHODS: A secondary analysis was conducted of data collected from a randomised trial assessing the effect of intensive management initiated within 1 week of diagnosis of type 1 diabetes, in which mixed-meal tolerance tests were performed at baseline and at eight additional time points through 24 months. CGM data were collected at each visit. RESULTS: Among 67 study participants (mean age [± SD] 13.3 ± 5.7 years), HbA1c was inversely correlated with C-peptide at each time point (p < 0.001), as were changes in each measure between time points (p < 0.001). However, C-peptide at one visit did not predict the change in HbA1c at the next visit and vice versa. Higher C-peptide levels correlated with increased proportion of CGM glucose values between 3.9 and 7.8 mmol/l and lower CV (p = 0.001 and p = 0.02, respectively) but not with CGM glucose levels <3.9 mmol/l. Virtually all participants with IDAA1c < 9 retained substantial insulin secretion but when evaluated together with CGM, time in the range of 3.9-7.8 mmol/l and CV did not provide additional value in predicting C-peptide levels. CONCLUSIONS/ INTERPRETATION: In the first 2 years after diagnosis of type 1 diabetes, higher C-peptide levels are associated with increased sensor glucose levels in the target range and with lower glucose variability but not hypoglycaemia. CGM metrics do not provide added value over the IDAA1c in predicting C-peptide levels.
Authors: Bruce A Buckingham; Roy W Beck; Katrina J Ruedy; Peiyao Cheng; Craig Kollman; Stuart A Weinzimer; Linda A DiMeglio; Andrew A Bremer; Robert Slover; Martin Cantwell Journal: Diabetes Technol Ther Date: 2013-04-09 Impact factor: 6.118
Authors: Jennifer Sherr; William V Tamborlane; Dongyuan Xing; Eva Tsalikian; Nelly Mauras; Bruce Buckingham; Neil H White; Ana Maria Arbelaez; Roy W Beck; Craig Kollman; Katrina Ruedy Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2012-02-08 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Henrik B Mortensen; Philip Hougaard; Peter Swift; Lars Hansen; Reinhard W Holl; Hilary Hoey; Hilde Bjoerndalen; Carine de Beaufort; Francesco Chiarelli; Thomas Danne; Eugen J Schoenle; Jan Aman Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2009-05-12 Impact factor: 17.152
Authors: Bruce Buckingham; Roy W Beck; Katrina J Ruedy; Peiyao Cheng; Craig Kollman; Stuart A Weinzimer; Linda A DiMeglio; Andrew A Bremer; Robert Slover; William V Tamborlane Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2013-10-15 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Jaquellyne Gurgel Penaforte-Saboia; Carlos Eduardo Barra Couri; Virginia Oliveira Fernandes; Ana Paula Dias Rangel Montenegro; Lívia Aline De Araújo Batista; Lenita Zajdenverg; Carlos Antonio Negrato; Kelen Cristina Ribeiro Malmegrim; Daniela Aparecida Moraes; Juliana Bernardes Elias Dias; Maria Carolina Oliveira; Akhtar Hussain; Marilia Brito Gomes; Renan Magalhães Montenegro Journal: Front Endocrinol (Lausanne) Date: 2019-11-19 Impact factor: 5.555
Authors: Jaquellyne G Penaforte-Saboia; Renan M Montenegro; Carlos E Couri; Livia A Batista; Ana Paula D R Montenegro; Virginia O Fernandes; Hussain Akhtar; Carlos A Negrato; Kelen Cristina Ribeiro Malmegrim; Daniela Aparecida Moraes; Juliana B E Dias; Belinda P Simões; Marilia Brito Gomes; Maria Carolina Oliveira Journal: Front Endocrinol (Lausanne) Date: 2017-11-23 Impact factor: 5.555
Authors: Suzy V Hope; Bridget A Knight; Beverley M Shields; Anita V Hill; Pratik Choudhary; W David Strain; Timothy J McDonald; Angus G Jones Journal: Diabetologia Date: 2017-10-05 Impact factor: 10.122
Authors: Guy S Taylor; Kieran Smith; Tess E Capper; Jadine H Scragg; Ayat Bashir; Anneliese Flatt; Emma J Stevenson; Timothy J McDonald; Richard A Oram; James A Shaw; Daniel J West Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2020-08-03 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Louise A C Millard; Nashita Patel; Kate Tilling; Melanie Lewcock; Peter A Flach; Debbie A Lawlor Journal: Int J Epidemiol Date: 2020-06-01 Impact factor: 7.196