Failure to preserve beta-cell function with mycophenolate mofetil and daclizumab combined therapy in patients with new- onset type 1 diabetes

Progressive erosion of β-cell function precedes the onset of hyperglycemia in the NOD mouse model of type 1 diabetes

OBJECTIVE

A progressive decline in insulin responses to glucose was noted in individuals before the onset of type 1 diabetes. We determined whether such abnormalities occurred in prediabetic NOD mice-the prototypic model for human type 1 diabetes.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Morning blood glucose was measured every other day in a cohort of NOD females. Glucose tolerance and insulin secretion were measured longitudinally by intraperitoneal glucose tolerance tests in NOD/ShiLtJ and BALB/cJ mice 6 to 14 weeks of age. Arginine-stimulated insulin secretion and insulin sensitivity were assessed during intraperitoneal arginine or intraperitoneal insulin tolerance tests.

RESULTS

During prediabetes, NOD females displayed a progressive increase in glucose levels followed by an acute onset of hyperglycemia. First-phase insulin responses (FPIRs) during the intraperitoneal glucose tolerance test (IPGTT) declined before loss of glucose tolerance in NOD. The failure of FPIR could be detected, with a decline in peak insulin secretion during IPGTT. Arginine-stimulated insulin secretion remained unchanged during the study period. The decline in insulin secretion in NOD mice could not be explained by changes in insulin sensitivity.

CONCLUSIONS

There was an impressive decline in FPIR before changes in glucose tolerance, suggesting that impairment of FPIR is an early in vivo marker of progressive β-cell failure in NOD mice and human type 1 diabetes. We portend that these phenotypes in NOD mice follow a similar pattern to those seen in humans with type 1 diabetes and validate, in a novel way, the importance of this animal model for studies of this disease.

Antigen-based therapy with glutamic acid decarboxylase (GAD) vaccine in patients with recent-onset type 1 diabetes: a randomised double-blind trial

BACKGROUND

Glutamic acid decarboxylase (GAD) is a major target of the autoimmune response that occurs in type 1 diabetes mellitus. In animal models of autoimmunity, treatment with a target antigen can modulate aggressive autoimmunity. We aimed to assess whether immunisation with GAD formulated with aluminum hydroxide (GAD-alum) would preserve insulin production in recent-onset type 1 diabetes.

METHODS

Patients aged 3-45 years who had been diagnosed with type 1 diabetes for less than 100 days were enrolled from 15 sites in the USA and Canada, and randomly assigned to receive one of three treatments: three injections of 20 μg GAD-alum, two injections of 20 μg GAD-alum and one of alum, or 3 injections of alum. Injections were given subcutaneously at baseline, 4 weeks later, and 8 weeks after the second injection. The randomisation sequence was computer generated at the TrialNet coordinating centre. Patients and study personnel were masked to treatment assignment. The primary outcome was the baseline-adjusted geometric mean area under the curve (AUC) of serum C-peptide during the first 2 h of a 4-h mixed meal tolerance test at 1 year. Secondary outcomes included changes in glycated haemoglobin A(1c) (HbA(1c)) and insulin dose, and safety. Analysis included all randomised patients with known measurements. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00529399.

FINDINGS

145 patients were enrolled and treated with GAD-alum (n=48), GAD-alum plus alum (n=49), or alum (n=48). At 1 year, the 2-h AUC of C-peptide, adjusted for age, sex, and baseline C-peptide value, was 0·412 nmol/L (95% CI 0·349-0·478) in the GAD-alum group, 0·382 nmol/L (0·322-0·446) in the GAD-alum plus alum group, and 0·413 nmol/L (0·351-0·477) in the alum group. The ratio of the population mean of the adjusted geometric mean 2-h AUC of C-peptide was 0·998 (95% CI 0·779-1·22; p=0·98) for GAD-alum versus alum, and 0·926 (0·720-1·13; p=0·50) for GAD-alum plus alum versus alum. HbA(1c), insulin use, and the occurrence and severity of adverse events did not differ between groups.

INTERPRETATION

Antigen-based immunotherapy therapy with two or three doses of subcutaneous GAD-alum across 4-12 weeks does not alter the course of loss of insulin secretion during 1 year in patients with recently diagnosed type 1 diabetes. Although antigen-based therapy is a highly desirable treatment and is effective in animal models, translation to human autoimmune disease remains a challenge.

FUNDING

US National Institutes of Health.

DiaPep277 peptide therapy in the context of other immune intervention trials in type 1 diabetes

INTRODUCTION

Type 1 diabetes (T1D) is characterized by the autoimmune destruction of pancreatic β-cells. The aim of immune intervention is to arrest this autoimmune attack. DiaPep277, a major T-cell epitope of heat shock protein 60 (hsp60), has been shown to be effective in the modulation of the immune response in recent onset T1D and is the main focus of this review in the context of other ongoing trials using different approaches.

AREAS COVERED

The authors performed a literature search of Pubmed listed publications (from the last 10 years) and a website search of the company licensing DiaPep277. DiaPep277 has been investigated in Phase I - III trials in humans. Phase II trials showed a significant preservation of β-cell function in adult T1D patients (but not children) with an absence of adverse effects and not accompanied by lower glycosylated haemoglobin (HbA1c) levels or reduced daily insulin requirement compared with placebo-treated patients.

EXPERT OPINION

Administration of DiaPep277 is safe and represents a promising therapeutic strategy in patients with recent-onset T1D. The results of two large Phase III trials will tell us whether this therapy may change our current approach to treating T1D patients at diagnosis.

Antigen-based immune therapeutics for type 1 diabetes: magic bullets or ordinary blanks?

The ideal drug of modern medicine is the one that achieves its therapeutic target with minimal adverse effects. Immune therapy of Type 1 diabetes (T1D) is no exception, and knowledge of the antigens targeted by pathogenic T cells offers a unique opportunity towards this goal. Different antigen formulations are being considered, such as proteins or peptides, either in their native form or modified ad hoc, DNA plasmids, and cell-based agents. Translation from mouse to human should take into account important differences, particularly in the time scale of autoimmune progression, and intervention. Critical parameters such as administration route, dosing and interval remain largely empirical and need to be further dissected. T1D staging through immune surrogate markers before and after treatment will be key in understanding therapeutic actions and to finally turn ordinary blanks into magic bullets.

Immune and cell therapy in type 1 diabetes: too little too late?

INTRODUCTION

Type 1 diabetes is caused by autoimmune destruction of insulin-producing β-cells. Intensive insulin therapy protects most patients against chronic complications of diabetes, but exposes patients to acute complications like hypoglycaemia and impacts on quality of life. Therapies that aim at protecting or restoring endogenous insulin secretion might help in decreasing the risk of severe hypoglycemia and long-term complications.

AREAS COVERED

This article reviews the literature of clinical immunotherapy and β-cell transplantation in treatment of type 1 diabetes with specific focus on the effect on preserving and restoring β-cell mass.

EXPERT OPINION

Several studies in recent-onset type 1 diabetic patients have provided proof of principle that immunotherapy can preserve residual functional β-cell mass. The observation that this strategy is most effective early in the disease process opens possibilities of arresting and even preventing type 1 diabetes. In patients with too few or no surviving β-cells, current protocols of β-cell transplantation can restore functional β-cell mass up to 25% of levels in healthy controls. Unfortunately, both strategies to date are followed by progressive decline of endogenous insulin secretion later on. Strategies to restore functional β-cell mass to a higher level and to restore immune tolerance are thus needed.

GAD-alum immunotherapy in Type 1 diabetes mellitus

Glutamic acid decarboxylase (GAD)-alum (Diamyd®, Diamyd Medical, Stockholm, Sweden) is an adjuvant-formulated vaccine incorporating recombinant human GAD65, the specific isoform of GAD expressed in human pancreatic β-cells and a major antigen targeted by autoreactive T lymphocytes in Type 1 diabetes mellitus. Intermittent vaccination with this protein is theorized to induce immune tolerance to GAD65, thereby potentially interrupting further β-cell destruction. Hence, clinical trials are ongoing to examine the efficacy and safety of GAD-alum immunotherapy in patients with autoimmune-mediated forms of diabetes, including Type 1 diabetes and latent autoimmune diabetes in adults.

Type 1 Diabetes: Etiology, Immunology, and Therapeutic Strategies

Type 1 diabetes (T1D) is a chronic autoimmune disease in which destruction or damaging of the beta-cells in the islets of Langerhans results in insulin deficiency and hyperglycemia. We only know for sure that autoimmunity is the predominant effector mechanism of T1D, but may not be its primary cause. T1D precipitates in genetically susceptible individuals, very likely as a result of an environmental trigger. Current genetic data point towards the following genes as susceptibility genes: HLA, insulin, PTPN22, IL2Ra, and CTLA4. Epidemiological and other studies suggest a triggering role for enteroviruses, while other microorganisms might provide protection. Efficacious prevention of T1D will require detection of the earliest events in the process. So far, autoantibodies are most widely used as serum biomarker, but T-cell readouts and metabolome studies might strengthen and bring forward diagnosis. Current preventive clinical trials mostly focus on environmental triggers. Therapeutic trials test the efficacy of antigen-specific and antigen-nonspecific immune interventions, but also include restoration of the affected beta-cell mass by islet transplantation, neogenesis and regeneration, and combinations thereof. In this comprehensive review, we explain the genetic, environmental, and immunological data underlying the prevention and intervention strategies to constrain T1D.

Prevention of type 1 diabetes: today and tomorrow

The aim of therapeutic interventions for type 1 diabetes is to suppress pathogenic autoreactivity and to preserve/restore beta-cell mass and function to physiologically sufficient levels to maintain good metabolic control. During the natural history of type 1 diabetes, several strategies have been applied at various stages in the form of primary, secondary or tertiary prevention approaches. Clinical trials using antigen-specific (e.g. DiaPep277, human glutamic acid decarboxylase 65 (GAD65)) or non-specific immune therapies (e.g. anti-CD3 monoclonal antibodies) have shown some benefit in the modulation of the autoimmune process and prevention of the insulin secretion loss in the short term after diagnosis of diabetes. A single long-term effective therapy has not been identified yet, and it is likely that in most cases a rationally designed combinatorial approach using immunotherapeutic methods coupled with islet regeneration or replacement will prove to be most effective.

Immune intervention in children with type 1 diabetes

Not only T cells but also B cells play a role in the autoimmune process. Both monoclonal antiCD3 and antiCD20 antibodies seem efficacious. However, such treatments need to be refined to minimize adverse events. Use of autoantigens to create tolerance is a concept with great potential. GAD65 treatment has shown efficacy without adverse events thus far, and administration of the insulin B chain shows interesting immunologic effects. Other more or less speculative approaches to modulate the immune process need further studies with good design. Risks that are too serious cannot be motivated. In addition, as the beta cells may die even though the autoimmune process is stopped, protective measures may be valuable (eg, active insulin treatment, and perhaps interleukin-1 receptor antagonists to reduce the nonautoimmune inflammation). Combination of immune intervention, protection of the beta cells, and stimulation of regeneration may lead to a milder disease or even a cure in the future, and prevention is no longer unrealistic.

Efforts to prevent and halt autoimmune beta cell destruction

Despite improvements in understanding of the natural history of type 1 diabetes (T1D), an intervention capable of consistently and safely preventing or reversing the disease has not been developed. The inability to cure this disorder is largely because of the complex pathophysiology of T1D, continued struggles to identify its precise etiologic triggers, and voids in understanding of the immunologic mechanisms that specifically target pancreatic beta cells. Rapidly improving technologies for managing T1D require critical discussions about equipoise, especially when considering interventions deemed high risk in terms of their safety. This article reviews the conceptual basis for prevention versus intervention trials in settings of T1D, past experiences of clinical trials studying these purposes, and controversial issues regarding disease interdiction, and seeks to provide a roadmap for future efforts to cure this disorder.

Developing combination immunotherapies for type 1 diabetes: recommendations from the ITN-JDRF Type 1 Diabetes Combination Therapy Assessment Group

Like many other complex human disorders of unknown aetiology, autoimmune-mediated type 1 diabetes may ultimately be controlled via a therapeutic approach that combines multiple agents, each with differing modes of action. The numerous advantages of such a strategy include the ability to minimize toxicities and realize synergies to enhance and prolong efficacy. The recognition that combinations might offer far-reaching benefits, at a time when few single agents have yet proved themselves in well-powered trials, represents a significant challenge to our ability to conceive and implement rational treatment designs. As a first step in this process, the Immune Tolerance Network, in collaboration with the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation, convened a Type 1 Diabetes Combination Therapy Assessment Group, the recommendations of which are discussed in this Perspective paper.

Immunosuppressive therapy exacerbates autoimmunity in NOD mice and diminishes the protective activity of regulatory T cells

Mounting evidence indicates that immunosuppressive therapy and autologous bone marrow transplantation are relatively inefficient approaches to treat autoimmune diabetes. In this study we assessed the impact of immunosuppression on inflammatory insulitis in NOD mice, and the effect of radiation on immunomodulation mediated by adoptive transfer of various cell subsets. Sublethal radiation of NOD females at the age of 14 weeks (onset of hyperglycemia) delayed the onset of hyperglycemia, however two thirds of the mice became diabetic. Adoptive transfer of splenocytes into irradiated NON and NOD mice precipitated disease onset despite increased contents of CD25(+)FoxP3(+) T cells in the pancreas and regional lymphatics. Similar phenotypic changes were observed when CD25(+) T cells were infused after radiation, which also delayed disease onset without affecting its incidence. Importantly, irradiation increased the susceptibility to diabetes in NOD and NON mice (71-84%) as compared to immunomodulation with splenocytes and CD25(+) T cells in naïve recipients (44-50%). Although irradiation had significant and durable influence on pancreatic infiltrates and the fractions of functional CD25(+)FoxP3(+) Treg cells were elevated by adoptive cell transfer, this approach conferred no protection from disease progression. Irradiation was ineffective both in debulking of pathogenic clones and in restoring immune homeostasis, and the consequent homeostatic expansion evolves as an unfavorable factor in attempts to restore self-tolerance and might even provoke uncontrolled proliferation of pathogenic clones. The obstacles imposed by immunosuppression on abrogation of autoimmune insulitis require replacement of non-specific immunosuppressive therapy by selective immunomodulation that does not cause lymphopenia.