OBJECTIVEEndogenous insulin secretion, measured by C-peptide area under the curve (AUC), can be tested using both the glucagon stimulation test (GST) and the mixed-meal tolerance test (MMTT). This study compares these two stimulation methods using long-term data from patients newly diagnosed with type 1 diabetes or with latent autoimmune diabetes.RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODSA recently completed phase 3 intervention study with DiaPep277 demonstrated improved glycemic control and a significant treatment effect of glucagon-stimulated C-peptide secretion. Unexpectedly, MMTT failed to detect differences between the treated and control groups. Data from 343 patients in two balanced-randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trials of DiaPep277 were used to compare and correlate between GST- and MMTT-derived C-peptide AUC. Pearson's correlations were calculated for absolute C-peptide AUC at baseline and 12 and 24 months and for long-term changes in AUC (AUC).RESULTSThe absolute AUC values obtained at any single time point by the two tests were well correlated in both data sets (r = 0.74-0.9). However, the correlations between the AUC were much weaker (r = 0.39-0.58). GST-stimulated C-peptide secretion was stable over the fasting glucose range permitted for the test (4-11.1 mmol/L), but MMTT-stimulated C-peptide secretion decreased over the same range, implying differences in sensitivity to glucose.CONCLUSIONSMeasurement of long-term changes in stimulated C-peptide, reflecting endogenous insulin secretion, during the course of intervention trials may be affected by the method of stimulation, possibly reflecting different sensitivities to the physiological status of the tested subject.

Evaluation of Long- Term Treatment Effect in a Type 1 Diabetes Intervention Trial: Differences After Stimulation With Glucagon or a Mixed Meal

Pozzilli P;
2014-01-01

Abstract

OBJECTIVEEndogenous insulin secretion, measured by C-peptide area under the curve (AUC), can be tested using both the glucagon stimulation test (GST) and the mixed-meal tolerance test (MMTT). This study compares these two stimulation methods using long-term data from patients newly diagnosed with type 1 diabetes or with latent autoimmune diabetes.RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODSA recently completed phase 3 intervention study with DiaPep277 demonstrated improved glycemic control and a significant treatment effect of glucagon-stimulated C-peptide secretion. Unexpectedly, MMTT failed to detect differences between the treated and control groups. Data from 343 patients in two balanced-randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trials of DiaPep277 were used to compare and correlate between GST- and MMTT-derived C-peptide AUC. Pearson's correlations were calculated for absolute C-peptide AUC at baseline and 12 and 24 months and for long-term changes in AUC (AUC).RESULTSThe absolute AUC values obtained at any single time point by the two tests were well correlated in both data sets (r = 0.74-0.9). However, the correlations between the AUC were much weaker (r = 0.39-0.58). GST-stimulated C-peptide secretion was stable over the fasting glucose range permitted for the test (4-11.1 mmol/L), but MMTT-stimulated C-peptide secretion decreased over the same range, implying differences in sensitivity to glucose.CONCLUSIONSMeasurement of long-term changes in stimulated C-peptide, reflecting endogenous insulin secretion, during the course of intervention trials may be affected by the method of stimulation, possibly reflecting different sensitivities to the physiological status of the tested subject.
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12610/12566
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 12
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 10
social impact