Go to JCI Insight
  • About
  • Editors
  • Consulting Editors
  • For authors
  • Publication ethics
  • Alerts
  • Advertising
  • Job board
  • Subscribe
  • Contact
  • Current issue
  • Past issues
  • By specialty
    • COVID-19
    • Cardiology
    • Gastroenterology
    • Immunology
    • Metabolism
    • Nephrology
    • Neuroscience
    • Oncology
    • Pulmonology
    • Vascular biology
    • All ...
  • Videos
    • Conversations with Giants in Medicine
    • Author's Takes
  • Reviews
    • View all reviews ...
    • Immune Environment in Glioblastoma (Feb 2023)
    • Korsmeyer Award 25th Anniversary Collection (Jan 2023)
    • Aging (Jul 2022)
    • Next-Generation Sequencing in Medicine (Jun 2022)
    • New Therapeutic Targets in Cardiovascular Diseases (Mar 2022)
    • Immunometabolism (Jan 2022)
    • Circadian Rhythm (Oct 2021)
    • View all review series ...
  • Viewpoint
  • Collections
    • In-Press Preview
    • Commentaries
    • Research letters
    • Letters to the editor
    • Editor's notes
    • Editorials
    • Viewpoint
    • Top read articles
  • Clinical Medicine
  • JCI This Month
    • Current issue
    • Past issues

  • Current issue
  • Past issues
  • Specialties
  • Reviews
  • Review series
  • Conversations with Giants in Medicine
  • Author's Takes
  • In-Press Preview
  • Commentaries
  • Research letters
  • Letters to the editor
  • Editorials
  • Viewpoint
  • Top read articles
  • About
  • Editors
  • Consulting Editors
  • For authors
  • Publication ethics
  • Alerts
  • Advertising
  • Job board
  • Subscribe
  • Contact
β Cell death and dysfunction during type 1 diabetes development in at-risk individuals
Kevan C. Herold, … , Jerry P. Palmer, the Type 1 Diabetes TrialNet Study Group
Kevan C. Herold, … , Jerry P. Palmer, the Type 1 Diabetes TrialNet Study Group
Published February 2, 2015
Citation Information: J Clin Invest. 2015;125(3):1163-1173. https://doi.org/10.1172/JCI78142.
View: Text | PDF
Clinical Medicine Clinical trials

β Cell death and dysfunction during type 1 diabetes development in at-risk individuals

  • Text
  • PDF
Abstract

Role of the funding source: Funding from the NIH was used for support of the participating clinical centers and the coordinating center. The funding source did not participate in the collection or the analysis of the data.

BACKGROUND. The β cell killing that characterizes type 1 diabetes (T1D) is thought to begin years before patients present clinically with metabolic decompensation; however, this primary pathologic process of the disease has not been measured.

METHODS. Here, we measured β cell death with an assay that detects β cell–derived unmethylated insulin (INS) DNA. Using this assay, we performed an observational study of 50 participants from 2 cohorts at risk for developing T1D from the TrialNet Pathway to Prevention study and of 4 subjects who received islet autotransplants.

RESULTS. In at-risk subjects, those who progressed to T1D had average levels of unmethylated INS DNA that were elevated modestly compared with those of healthy control subjects. In at-risk individuals that progressed to T1D, the observed increases in unmethylated INS DNA were associated with decreases in insulin secretion, indicating that the changes in unmethylated INS DNA are indicative of β cell killing. Subjects at high risk for T1D had levels of unmethylated INS DNA that were higher than those of healthy controls and higher than the levels of unmethylated INS DNA in the at-risk progressor and at-risk nonprogressor groups followed for 4 years. Evaluation of insulin secretory kinetics also distinguished high-risk subjects who progressed to overt disease from those who did not.

CONCLUSION. We conclude that a blood test that measures unmethylated INS DNA serves as a marker of active β cell killing as the result of T1D-associated autoimmunity. Together, the data support the concept that β cell killing occurs sporadically during the years prior to diagnosis of T1D and is more intense in the peridiagnosis period.

TRIAL REGISTRATION. Clinicaltrials.gov NCT00097292.

FUNDING. Funding was from the NIH, the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation, and the American Diabetes Association.

Authors

Kevan C. Herold, Sahar Usmani-Brown, Tara Ghazi, Jasmin Lebastchi, Craig A. Beam, Melena D. Bellin, Michel Ledizet, Jay M. Sosenko, Jeffrey P. Krischer, Jerry P. Palmer

×

Figure 4

β Cell death and glucose tolerance in high-risk individuals.

Options: View larger image (or click on image) Download as PowerPoint
β Cell death and glucose tolerance in high-risk individuals.
(A) The lev...
(A) The level of unmethylated INS DNA to methylated INS DNA measured by ddPCR in serum samples from the first visit (n = 27; results from 3 samples were unavailable for technical reasons) was compared with age-matched nondiabetic control subjects (HC) (****P < 0.0001, Student’s t test). The dashed line represents the mean + 2 SD of the nondiabetic control subjects (n = 32) is shown. The dashed line represents the mean + 2 SD of the nondiabetic control subjects. (B) Comparison of ratios in high-risk subjects, progressors, and nonprogressors from the PTP study and healthy control subjects. Data shown are the least squares (mean ± SEM) from the mixed model (using ID as a class variable). Ratios were higher in the high-risk group compared with the others (P < 0.0001, ANOVA; ****P < 0.0001). (C) Change in glucose AUC during OGTTs performed on 2 visits in high-risk participants. The second test was performed 94 ± 15 days after the first. Groups were designated by the outcome of the OGTT at the second visit. One-third of subjects had a normal glucose tolerance test when they returned (Nl), one-third repeated the finding of dysglycemia (AbnGT), and one-third showed a diabetic glucose tolerance test (DM). Change in glucose AUC during the 2-hour OGTT is shown (n = 10 each, P = 0.0002, ANOVA; **P < 0.01, ****P < 0.0001, Bonferroni multiple comparison test). (D) Ratios at the time of the first visit are shown for those who returned with a normal (n = 10), an abnormal (n = 8), and a diabetic (n = 9) OGTT and compared with the ratios in controls (mean + SEM; **P < 0.01, ***P < 0.001, ****P < 0.0001 vs. controls, Bonferroni multiple comparison test and ANOVA). Ratios were elevated in each subgroup compared with controls but were not significantly different between groups.

Copyright © 2023 American Society for Clinical Investigation
ISSN: 0021-9738 (print), 1558-8238 (online)

Sign up for email alerts