| Literature DB >> 30919585 |
So Yamamura1, Tomoyasu Fukui1, Yusaku Mori1, Toshiyuki Hayashi1, Takeshi Yamamoto1, Makoto Ohara1, Ayako Fukase1, Hiroto Sasamori2, Tetsuro Kobayashi3, Tsutomu Hirano1.
Abstract
AIMS/Entities:
Keywords: C-X-C motif chemokine 10; Glutamic decarboxylase-65; Type 1 diabetes
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 30919585 PMCID: PMC7663970 DOI: 10.1111/jdi.13052
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Diabetes Investig ISSN: 2040-1116 Impact factor: 4.232
Patient characteristics
| Total | Acute‐onset T1D | Slowly progressive T1D |
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 58 | 27 | 31 | |
| Age (years) | 53.5 ± 15.0 | 46.1 ± 13.2 | 60.0 ± 13.5 | 0.0002 |
| Age at diabetes onset (years) | 41.2 ± 15.8 | 34.4 ± 15.5 | 48.3 ± 13.0 | 0.0009 |
| Duration of disease (years) | 12.1 ± 9.3 | 12.6 ± 10.2 | 11.5 ± 8.6 | NS |
| Height (cm) | 161.2 ± 9.8 | 163.0 ± 9.0 | 159.0 ± 10.4 | NS |
| Bodyweight (kg) | 61.8 ± 13.1 | 59.8 ± 12.1 | 64.1 ± 13.9 | NS |
| Body mass index (kg/m2) | 23.5 ± 4.1 | 22.4 ± 3.5 | 24.8 ± 4.4 | 0.03 |
| Glucose (mg/dL) | 150.6 ± 50.1 | 152.93 ± 59.2 | 148.5 ± 41.3 | NS |
| C‐peptide (ng/mL) | 0.75 ± 0.98 | 0.14 ± 0.25 | 1.29 ± 1.07 | <0.0001 |
| CPI | 0.58 ± 0.83 | 0.11 ± 0.18 | 1.00 ± 0.95 | <0.0001 |
| HbA1c (%) | 8.1 ± 1.7 | 8.1 ± 1.5 | 8.2 ± 1.8 | NS |
| GADA‐RIA titers (IU/mL) | 725.9 ± 3798.8 | 22.0 ± 39.2 | 1338.9 ± 5155.9 | 0.19 |
| GADA‐ELISA titers (IU/mL) | 314.0 ± 582.2 | 339.6 ± 583.2 | 291.8 ± 590.2 | NS |
| IA‐2A titers (AT1, | 3.4 ± 8.7 | 6.1 ± 11.2 | 0.2 ± 0.5 | 0.0089 |
| ZnT‐8A titers (AT1, | 31.2 ± 93.4 | 55.8 ± 122.6 | 1.7 ± 5.7 | 0.04 |
| Total insulin dose/day (units) | 30.4 ± 18.6 | 38.3 ± 17.7 | 23.6 ± 16.7 | 0.004 |
| TDD/BW (units/kg) | 0.5 ± 0.3 | 0.6 ± 0.3 | 0.4 ± 0.3 | 0.003 |
| Thyroid disease, % ( | 30 (15/50) | 26 (7/27) | 35 (8/23) | NS |
Values are presented as the mean ± standard deviation. * † ‡ §
AT1, acute‐onset type 1 diabetes; CPI, C‐peptide index; HbA1c, glycated hemoglobin; NS, not significant; RIA, radioimmunoassay; SP1, slowly‐progressive type 1 diabetes; T1D, type 1 diabetes; TDD/BW, total daily insulin dose/body weight.transporter‐8.
Figure 1Correlation between autoantibodies against glutamic acid decarboxylase‐65 (GADA) titers and C‐peptide index (CPI; 100 × random C‐peptide (ng/mL) / plasma glucose levels [mg/dL]). (a,b) There was no correlation between GADA titers by radioimmunoassay (RIA; n = 58) and enzyme‐linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA; n = 44) and CPI among total type 1 diabetes patients. (c,d) GADA titers by RIA (n = 27) and ELISA (n = 25) were both significantly correlated with CPI in acute‐onset type 1 diabetes patients (P < 0.05). (e,f) GADA titers by RIA (n = 31) and ELISA (n = 19) were not correlated with CPI in slowly progressive type 1 diabetes patients. NS, not significant; T1D, type 1 diabetes.
Figure 2Autoantibodies against glutamic acid decarboxylase‐65 (GADA) titers in patients with acute‐onset type 1 diabetes (T1D) and slowly progressive type 1 diabetes with/without autoimmune thyroiditis (AITD). GADA titers by radioimmunoassay (RIA) and enzyme‐linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) were comparable in both subtypes of type 1 diabetes with/without AITD. AT1D, acute‐onset type 1 diabetes; SPT1D, slowly progressive type 1 diabetes; T1D, type 1 diabetes.
Figure 3Change in residual β‐cell function and autoantibodies against glutamic acid decarboxylase‐65 (GADA) titers over time. C‐peptide index (CPI; 100 × random C‐peptide [ng/mL] / plasma glucose levels [mg/dL]) significantly decreased in (a) acute‐onset type 1 diabetes and (d) slowly progressive type 1 diabetes. GADA titers by radioimmunoassay (RIA) and enzyme‐linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) tended to (b,c) decrease in acute‐onset type 1 diabetes, (e,f) but were almost unchanged in slowly progressive type 1 diabetes. Error bars represent standard deviation. NS, not significant; T1D, type 1 diabetes.
Figure 4Serum C‐X‐C motif chemokine 10 (CXCL10) levels in patients with type 1 diabetes. Serum CXCL10 levels were (a) significantly higher in patients with acute‐onset type 1 diabetes (n = 27) or slowly progressive type 1 diabetes (n = 23) than in non‐diabetic controls, (b,c) and persisted in high levels even in those with chronic duration. Error bars represent standard deviation. NS, not significant; T1D, type 1 diabetes.