Trends in HbA1c and other biochemical outcomes of individuals with newly diagnosed type 1 diabetes

BACKGROUND

There is limited data on glycaemic control and cardiovascular risk factor management in newly diagnosed individuals with type 1 diabetes in the first 2 years.

METHODS

Retrospective, single centre study from the North West of England, newly diagnosed with type 1 diabetes between 2014 and 2018 (n = 58). HbA1c, blood pressure, lipids and body mass index (BMI) data were collected from electronic patient records from the time of diagnosis until the end of 2 years, stratified by age 16-24 years or ≥ 25 years at presentation.

RESULTS

For those aged 16-24 years (n = 31), median (IQR), HbA1c improved at 6 months from 83 (63-93) to 51.5 (46-75) mmol/mol (p = 0.001) and remained stable 6-24 months. For those ≥ 25 years (n = 27), HbA1c declined from 91 (70-107) to 65 (50-89) mmol/mol, (p < 0.01) at 6 months and declined further to 52 mmol/mol (44-70) at 24 months. At 24 months, 27.8% of all individuals had an HbA1c ≥ 69 mmol/mol. Approximately, a third met LDL (< 2 mmol/L) and total cholesterol (< 4 mmol/L) targets. A total of 58.6% of individuals were overweight/obese (BMI > 25 kg/m2) at 24 months compared to 45.8% at baseline. There were no significant blood pressure changes during the follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

In both age groups, significant improvement of HbA1c occurred within the first 6 months of diagnosis with no statistical difference between the two groups at any of the time points up to 24 months. Despite significant improvements in HbA1c, majority had levels > 53 mmol/mol at 24 months. Alongside the high incidence of obesity and dyslipidaemia, our data support the need for further intensification of therapy from diagnosis of type 1 diabetes.

A Type 1 Diabetes Genetic Risk Score Predicts Progression of Islet Autoimmunity and Development of Type 1 Diabetes in Individuals at Risk

OBJECTIVE

We tested the ability of a type 1 diabetes (T1D) genetic risk score (GRS) to predict progression of islet autoimmunity and T1D in at-risk individuals.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

We studied the 1,244 TrialNet Pathway to Prevention study participants (T1D patients' relatives without diabetes and with one or more positive autoantibodies) who were genotyped with Illumina ImmunoChip (median [range] age at initial autoantibody determination 11.1 years [1.2-51.8], 48% male, 80.5% non-Hispanic white, median follow-up 5.4 years). Of 291 participants with a single positive autoantibody at screening, 157 converted to multiple autoantibody positivity and 55 developed diabetes. Of 953 participants with multiple positive autoantibodies at screening, 419 developed diabetes. We calculated the T1D GRS from 30 T1D-associated single nucleotide polymorphisms. We used multivariable Cox regression models, time-dependent receiver operating characteristic curves, and area under the curve (AUC) measures to evaluate prognostic utility of T1D GRS, age, sex, Diabetes Prevention Trial-Type 1 (DPT-1) Risk Score, positive autoantibody number or type, HLA DR3/DR4-DQ8 status, and race/ethnicity. We used recursive partitioning analyses to identify cut points in continuous variables.

RESULTS

Higher T1D GRS significantly increased the rate of progression to T1D adjusting for DPT-1 Risk Score, age, number of positive autoantibodies, sex, and ethnicity (hazard ratio [HR] 1.29 for a 0.05 increase, 95% CI 1.06-1.6; P = 0.011). Progression to T1D was best predicted by a combined model with GRS, number of positive autoantibodies, DPT-1 Risk Score, and age (7-year time-integrated AUC = 0.79, 5-year AUC = 0.73). Higher GRS was significantly associated with increased progression rate from single to multiple positive autoantibodies after adjusting for age, autoantibody type, ethnicity, and sex (HR 2.27 for GRS >0.295, 95% CI 1.47-3.51; P = 0.0002).

CONCLUSIONS

The T1D GRS independently predicts progression to T1D and improves prediction along T1D stages in autoantibody-positive relatives.

A pilot interventional study to evaluate the impact of cholecalciferol treatment on HbA1c in type 1 diabetes (T1D)

BACKGROUND

Higher 25(OH)D3 levels are associated with lower HbA1c, but there are limited UK interventional trials assessing the effect of cholecalciferol on HbA1c.

AIMS

(1) To assess the baseline 25(OH)D3 status in a Manchester cohort of children with type 1 diabetes (T1D). (2) To determine the effect of cholecalciferol administration on HbA1c.

METHODS

Children with T1D attending routine clinic appointments over three months in late winter/early spring had blood samples taken with consent. Participants with a 25(OH)D3 level <50 nmol/L were treated with a one-off cholecalciferol dose of 100,000 (2-10 years) or 160,000 (>10 years) units. HbA1c levels before and after treatment were recorded.

RESULTS

Vitamin D levels were obtained from 51 children. 35 were Caucasian, 11 South Asian and 5 from other ethnic groups. 42 were vitamin D deficient, but 2 were excluded from the analysis. All South Asian children were vitamin D deficient, with mean 25(OH)D3 of 28 nmol/L. In Caucasians, there was a negative relationship between baseline 25(OH)D3 level and HbA1c (r = -0.484, P < 0.01). In treated participants, there was no significant difference in mean HbA1c at 3 months (t = 1.010, P = 0.328) or at 1 year (t = -1.173, P = 0.248) before and after treatment. One-way ANCOVA, controlling for age, gender, ethnicity, BMI and diabetes duration showed no difference in Δ HbA1c level.

CONCLUSION

We report important findings at baseline, but in children treated with a stat dose of cholecalciferol, there was no effect on HbA1c. Further studies with larger sample sizes and using maintenance therapy are required.

Low dose (0.05 units/kg/h) is comparable with standard dose (0.1 units/kg/h) intravenous insulin infusion for the initial treatment of diabetic ketoacidosis in children with type 1 diabetes-an observational study

OBJECTIVE

To compare low dose (0.05 units/kg/h) with standard dose (0.1 units/kg/h) intravenous insulin infusion for the treatment of diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) in children with type 1 diabetes.

STUDY DESIGN

Data from five paediatric centres were compared in children who received 0.05 (41 episodes) or 0.1 units/kg/h (52 episodes).

RESULTS

In the low vs. standard dose group, at 6 h following admission, the fall in blood glucose levels [11.3 (95% confidence interval 8.6 to 13.9) vs. 11.8 (8.4 to 15.2) mmol/L, p = 0.86] and rise in pH [0.13 (0.09 to 0.18) vs. 0.11 (0.07 to 0.15), p = 0.78] were similar. These changes were comparable between doses in relation to: severity of initial acidosis, children newly diagnosed with diabetes or aged less than 5 years. After adjustment for other clinical and biochemical covariates, insulin dose was unrelated to the change in pH and blood glucose levels at 6 h following admission. Comparisons of safety data, particularly in relation to abnormal Glasgow Coma Score, were inconclusive.

CONCLUSION

In this observational study, low dose was as effective as standard dose intravenous insulin infusion in the initial treatment (less than 6 h) of DKA in children with type 1 diabetes. A randomised controlled trial is required to show true equivalence between doses and to evaluate potential safety benefits.

Meningococcal disease among children of Indian subcontinent ethnic origin

The rate of meningococcal septicaemia and meningitis was significantly lower in children of Indian subcontinent ethnic origin than in children of other origins over 12 years in the Blackburn area of the UK.

Clinical evaluation of meropenem versus ceftazidime for the treatment of Pseudomonas spp. infections in cystic fibrosis patients

Cystic fibrosis patients (children and young adults) with Pseudomonas spp. chest infections were treated with meropenem or ceftazidime. This study was the first to investigate the use of meropenem in cystic fibrosis. Meropenem was well tolerated with only transient elevations of serum transaminases. No patient experienced nausea and vomiting, even when meropenem was administered as a bolus injection. This allowed home therapy to be used. Meropenem appeared to be at least as active as ceftazidime even at the low doses used. Patients showed a greater improvement in respiratory function on meropenem than ceftazidime. Only one patient (out of 60 courses) failed to respond to meropenem (98% success rate) compared with two failures out of 21 episodes with ceftazidime (90% success rate). There was little emergence of resistance to meropenem even though some patients were treated up to eight times over a 2 year period.