How low is really low? Comparison of two C-peptide assays to establish residual C-peptide production in type 1 diabetes

Cohort profile: the 'Biomarkers of heterogeneity in type 1 diabetes' study-a national prospective cohort study of clinical and metabolic phenotyping of individuals with long-standing type 1 diabetes in the Netherlands

PURPOSE

The 'Biomarkers of heterogeneity in type 1 diabetes' study cohort was set up to identify genetic, physiological and psychosocial factors explaining the observed heterogeneity in disease progression and the development of complications in people with long-standing type 1 diabetes (T1D).

PARTICIPANTS

Data and samples were collected in two subsets. A prospective cohort of 611 participants aged ≥16 years with ≥5 years T1D duration from four Dutch Diabetes clinics between 2016 and 2021 (median age 32 years; median diabetes duration 12 years; 59% female; mean glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) 61 mmol/mol (7.7%); 61% on insulin pump; 23% on continuous glucose monitoring (CGM)). Physical assessments were performed, blood and urine samples were collected, and participants completed questionnaires. A subgroup of participants underwent mixed-meal tolerance tests (MMTTs) at baseline (n=169) and at 1-year follow-up (n=104). Genetic data and linkage to medical and administrative records were also available. A second cross-sectional cohort included participants with ≥35 years of T1D duration (currently n=160; median age 64 years; median diabetes duration 45 years; 45% female; mean HbA1c 58 mmol/mol (7.4%); 51% on insulin pump; 83% on CGM), recruited from five centres and measurements, samples and 5-year retrospective data were collected.

FINDINGS TO DATE

Stimulated residual C-peptide was detectable in an additional 10% of individuals compared with fasting residual C-peptide secretion. MMTT measurements at 90 min and 120 min showed good concordance with the MMTT total area under the curve. An overall decrease of C-peptide at 1-year follow-up was observed. Fasting residual C-peptide secretion is associated with a decreased risk of impaired awareness of hypoglycaemia.

FUTURE PLANS

Research groups are invited to consider the use of these data and the sample collection. Future work will include additional hormones, beta-cell-directed autoimmunity, specific immune markers, microRNAs, metabolomics and gene expression data, combined with glucometrics, anthropometric and clinical data, and additional markers of residual beta-cell function.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT04977635.

Fasting and meal-stimulated serum C-peptide in long-standing type 1 diabetes mellitus

AIMS

This study aims to evaluate the stability of C-peptide over time and to compare fasting C-peptide and C-peptide response after mixed-meal tolerance test (MMTT) at T90 or T120 with C-peptide area under the curve (AUC) in long-standing type 1 diabetes.

METHODS

We included 607 type 1 diabetes individuals with diabetes duration >5 years. C-peptide concentrations (ultrasensitive assay) were collected in the fasting state, and in a subpopulation after MMTT (T0, just prior to, T30-T60-T90-T120, 30-120 min after ingestion of mixed-meal) (n = 168). Fasting C-peptide concentrations (in n = 535) at Year 0 and Year 1 were compared. The clinical determinants associated with residual C-peptide secretion and the correspondence of C-peptide at MMTT T90 / T120 and total AUC were assessed.

RESULTS

A total of 153 participants (25%) had detectable fasting serum C-peptide (i.e ≥ 3.8 pmol/L). Fasting C-peptide was significantly lower at Year 1 (p < 0.001, effect size = -0.16). Participants with higher fasting C-peptide had a higher age at diagnosis and shorter disease duration and were less frequently insulin pump users. Overall, 109 of 168 (65%) participants had both non-detectable fasting and post-meal serum C-peptide concentrations. The T90 and T120 C-peptide values at MMTT were concordant with total AUC. In 17 (10%) individuals, C-peptide was only detectable at MMTT and not in the fasting state.

CONCLUSIONS

Stimulated C-peptide was detectable in an additional 10% of individuals compared with fasting in individuals with >5 years of diabetes duration. T90 and T120 MMTT measurements showed good concordance with the MMTT total AUC. Overall, there was a decrease of C-peptide at 1-year follow-up.

Which C-peptide assay do you use? Increasing need for describing C-peptide assay performance

Many C-peptide assays are commercially available for research and routine use. However, not all assays yield consistent results, especially in the low concentration ranges. We searched the literature describing C-peptide measurements to assess which assays are mainly used in the diabetes research field and if they are specified. Percentages of publications on C-peptide measurements in type 1 diabetes (T1D), type 2 diabetes (T2D) and other forms of diabetes were 32%, 54% and 14%, respectively. In only 54% of the publications the used assay was specified. Information on detection limit, measurement range and variation was provided in 12%, 2% and 11% of publications, respectively. In 22% of all publications no C-peptides concentrations were mentioned. This may be a problem especially for T1D research, where measuring very low levels of C-peptide is becoming increasingly important and concordance between assays is low.