Aims/hypothesis Low-dose IL-2 (ld-IL2) selectively activates and expands regulatory T cells (Tregs) and thus has the potential to skew the regulatory/effector T (Treg/Teff) cell balance towards improved regulation. We investigated which low doses of IL-2 would more effectively and safely activate Tregs during a 1 year treatment in children with recently diagnosed type 1 diabetes. Methods Dose Finding Study of IL-2 at Ultra-low Dose in Children With Recently Diagnosed Type 1 Diabetes (DF-IL2-Child) was a multicentre, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, dose-finding Phase I/II clinical trial conducted in four centres at university hospitals in France: 24 children (7-14 years old) with type 1 diabetes diagnosed within the previous 3 months were randomly assigned 1:1:1:1 to treatment by a centralised randomisation system, leading to a 7/5/6/6 patient distribution of placebo or IL-2 at doses of 0.125, 0.250 or 0.500 million international units (MIU)/m 2 , given daily for a 5 day course and then fortnightly for 1 year. A study number was attributed to patients by an investigator unaware of the randomisation list and all participants as well as investigators and staff involved in the study conduct and analyses were blinded to treatments. The primary outcome was change in Tregs, expressed as a percentage of CD4 + T cells at day 5. It pre-specified that a ≥60% increase in Tregs from baseline would identify Treg high responders. Results There were no serious adverse events. Non-serious adverse events (NSAEs) were transient and mild to moderate. In treated patients vs placebo, the commonest NSAE was injection site reaction (37.9% vs 3.4%), whereas other NSAEs were at the Michelle Rosenzwajg and Randa Salet contributed equally to this study.

No abstract

BackgroundThe incidence of childhood type 1 diabetes (T1D) incidence is rising in many countries, supposedly because of changing environmental factors, which are yet largely unknown. The purpose of the study was to unravel environmental markers associated with T1D.MethodsCases were children with T1D from the French Isis-Diab cohort. Controls were schoolmates or friends of the patients. Parents were asked to fill a 845-item questionnaire investigating the child’s environment before diagnosis. The analysis took into account the matching between cases and controls. A second analysis used propensity score methods.ResultsWe found a negative association of several lifestyle variables, gastroenteritis episodes, dental hygiene, hazelnut cocoa spread consumption, wasp and bee stings with T1D, consumption of vegetables from a farm and death of a pet by old age.ConclusionsThe found statistical association of new environmental markers with T1D calls for replication in other cohorts and investigation of new environmental areas.Trial registrationClinical-Trial.gov NCT02212522. Registered August 6, 2014. Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12889-016-3690-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

No abstract

Objectives The objective of this multicenter cross‐sectional study was to determine predictors of poor glycaemic control in children with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM), particularly with respect to socioeconomic status (SES). Methods Our study population consisted of 1154 children who attended T1DM follow‐up consultation with a pediatric diabetes specialist. Clinical and demographic data were retrieved retrospectively from patients' records. Individual deprivation was defined by an EPICES (Evaluation of the Deprivation and Inequalities of Health in Healthcare Centers) score ≥ 30. Patients were assigned to quintiles of the European Deprivation Index (EDI) based on their area deprivation scores. We used multivariable linear regression models to detect potential associations between glycaemic control and indicators of low SES. Results In total, 33% (n = 376) of patients had an EPICES score ≥ 30 and 23% (n = 268) were in the 5th EDI quintile. Multivariable linear regression analysis showed that poor glycaemic control was associated with both individual (β 0.38; 95%CI 0.26–0.5; p < 0.001) and area deprivation (β 0.26; 95%CI 0.08–0.43; p = 0.004). Demographic factors, body mass index (BMI) and insulin regimen were also independently associated with poor glycaemic control (p < 0.001). Interestingly, access to diabetes technologies was not related to SES or either glycaemic control. Conclusion Low SES is associated with a higher risk of poor glycaemic control, independently of insulin regimen. BMI, age at the time of consultation, duration of diabetes, and insulin regimen. Also have an impact on HbA1c. These parameters need to be considered when developing novel treatment strategies for children with T1DM to better target at‐risk patients.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract