To evaluate the contemporary prevalence of diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN) in participants with type 1 diabetes in the T1D Exchange Clinic Registry throughout the U.S. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODSDPN was assessed with the Michigan Neuropathy Screening Instrument Questionnaire (MNSIQ) in adults with ‡5 years of type 1 diabetes duration. A score of ‡4 defined DPN. Associations of demographic, clinical, and laboratory factors with DPN were assessed. RESULTSAmong 5,936 T1D Exchange participants (mean 6 SD age 39 6 18 years, median type 1 diabetes duration 18 years [interquartile range 11, 31], 55% female, 88% non-Hispanic white, mean glycated hemoglobin [HbA 1c ] 8.1 6 1.6% [65.3 6 17.5 mmol/mol]), DPN prevalence was 11%. Compared with those without DPN, DPN participants were older, had higher HbA 1c , had longer duration of diabetes, were more likely to be female, and were less likely to have a college education and private insurance (all P < 0.001). DPN participants also were more likely to have cardiovascular disease (CVD) (P < 0.001), worse CVD risk factors of smoking (P 5 0.008), hypertriglyceridemia (P 5 0.002), higher BMI (P 5 0.009), retinopathy (P 5 0.004), reduced estimated glomerular filtration rate (P 5 0.02), and Charcot neuroarthropathy (P 5 0.002). There were no differences in insulin pump or continuous glucose monitor use, although DPN participants were more likely to have had severe hypoglycemia (P 5 0.04) and/or diabetic ketoacidosis (P < 0.001) in the past 3 months. CONCLUSIONSThe prevalence of DPN in this national cohort with type 1 diabetes is lower than in prior published reports but is reflective of current clinical care practices. These data also highlight that nonglycemic risk factors, such as CVD risk factors, severe hypoglycemia, diabetic ketoacidosis, and lower socioeconomic status, may also play a role in DPN development.Diabetic neuropathy is a prevalent complication in patients with diabetes and a major cause of morbidity and mortality (1). Among the various forms of diabetic neuropathy, distal symmetric polyneuropathy (DPN) and diabetic autonomic neuropathies are by far the most studied (1).
OBJECTIVE This study evaluated the effects of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) combined with family behavioral intervention (CGM+FBI) and CGM alone (Standard-CGM) on glycemic outcomes and parental quality of life compared with blood glucose monitoring (BGM) in children ages 2 to <8 years with type 1 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS This was a multicenter (N = 14), 6-month, randomized controlled trial including 143 youth 2 to <8 years of age with type 1 diabetes. Primary analysis included treatment group comparisons of percent time in range (TIR) (70–180 mg/dL) across follow-up visits. RESULTS Approximately 90% of participants in the CGM groups used CGM ≥6 days/week at 6 months. Between-group TIR comparisons showed no significant changes: CGM+FBI vs. BGM 3.2% (95% CI −0.5, 7.0), Standard-CGM vs. BGM 0.5% (−2.6 to 3.6), CGM+FBI vs. Standard-CGM 2.7% (−0.6, 6.1). Mean time with glucose level <70 mg/dL was reduced from baseline to follow-up in the CGM+FBI (from 5.2% to 2.6%) and Standard-CGM (5.8% to 2.5%) groups, compared with 5.4% to 5.8% with BGM (CGM+FBI vs. BGM, P < 0.001, and Standard-CGM vs. BGM, P < 0.001). No severe hypoglycemic events occurred in the CGM+FBI group, one occurred in the Standard-CGM group, and five occurred in the BGM group. CGM+FBI parents reported greater reductions in diabetes burden and fear of hypoglycemia compared with Standard-CGM (P = 0.008 and 0.04) and BGM (P = 0.02 and 0.002). CONCLUSIONS CGM used consistently over a 6-month period in young children with type 1 diabetes did not improve TIR but did significantly reduce time in hypoglycemia. The FBI benefited parental well-being.
Objective To determine the roles of complement C4A and C4B gene CNVs and their plasma protein concentrations in residual insulin secretion and loss of pancreatic beta-cell function in new-onset type 1 diabetes patients. Methods We studied 34 patients of European ancestry with new-onset type 1 diabetes, aged between 3 and 17 years (10.7±3.45), at Nationwide Children's Hospital in Columbus, Ohio. Gene copy-number and size variations of complement C4A and C4B were determined by genomic Southern blot analyses. C4A and C4B protein phenotypes were elucidated by immunofixation and radial immunodiffusion. Two-digit HLA-DRB1 genotypes were determined by sequence-specific PCR. At 1 month and 9-month post diagnosis, stimulated C-peptide levels were measured after a standardized mixed-meal tolerance test. Results The diploid gene copy-numbers of C4A varied from 0 to 4, and those of C4B from 0 to 3. Patients with higher copy-number of C4A or higher C4A plasma protein concentrations at diagnosis had higher C-peptide levels at 1 month post diagnosis (p=0.008; p=0.008). When controlled by the Z-score of body-mass index, C4A copy-numbers, C4A protein concentrations, the age of disease-onset, the number of HLA-DR3 but not DR4 alleles were significant parameters in determining C-peptide levels. At 9-month post diagnosis, 42.3% of patients remained in partial remission, and these patients were characterized by lower total C4B copy-numbers or lower C4B protein concentrations (p=0.02, p=0.0004). Conclusions C4A appears to associate with the protection of residual beta-cell function in new-onset type 1 diabetes; C4B is correlated with the end of disease remission at 9-month post diagnosis.
Insurance type and family composition have significant associative effects on glycemic control and insulin management that may be mitigated by insulin pump therapy. Identifying and addressing factors such as availability of resources, family education, and adult support and supervision, may help improve glycemic control in high-risk pediatric diabetes patients.
Introduction: To address the lack of medical education on lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.