Dataset Information

Clinical immunologic interventions for the treatment of type 1 diabetes.

ABSTRACT: Type 1 diabetes is an autoimmune disease, hence the rationale for immunotherapy to halt disease progression. Based on knowledge gained from other autoimmune diseases and from transplantation, the first immunointervention trials used immunosuppressive drugs, e.g., cyclosporin, in patients with recently diagnosed type 1 diabetes. Although remarkable, the effect vanished following drug withdrawal. Efforts were then devoted to devise strategies to induce/restore self-tolerance and avoid chronic immunosuppression. Various approaches were identified from work in spontaneous models of autoimmune diabetes, including the use of ?-cell autoantigens and monoclonal antibodies directed at relevant immune molecules such as costimulatory ligands, T-cell receptor molecules such as CD3, and B cells. Phase II and phase III trials were launched, results of which are now available. Although the endeavor is challenging, the experience gained indicates that immunotherapy appears as the real hope of inducing long-term remission of the disease provided the treatment is started early and that protocols are adapted based on lessons from the past.

SUBMITTER: Chatenoud L

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3405831 | biostudies-literature | 2012 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Clinical immunologic interventions for the treatment of type 1 diabetes.

Chatenoud Lucienne L Warncke Katharina K Ziegler Anette-G AG

Cold Spring Harbor perspectives in medicine 20120801 8

Type 1 diabetes is an autoimmune disease, hence the rationale for immunotherapy to halt disease progression. Based on knowledge gained from other autoimmune diseases and from transplantation, the first immunointervention trials used immunosuppressive drugs, e.g., cyclosporin, in patients with recently diagnosed type 1 diabetes. Although remarkable, the effect vanished following drug withdrawal. Efforts were then devoted to devise strategies to induce/restore self-tolerance and avoid chronic immu ...[more]

PMID: 22908194

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundDiabetes mellitus (DM) is one of the world's greatest health threats with rising prevalence. Global digitalization leads to new digital approaches in diabetes management, such as telemedical interventions. Telemedicine, which is the use of information and communication technologies, may provide medical services over spatial distances to improve clinical patient outcomes by increasing access to diabetes care and medical information.ObjectiveThis study aims to examine whether telemedical interventions effectively improve diabetes control using studies that pooled patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) and type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), and whether the benefits are greater in patients diagnosed with T2DM than in those diagnosed with T1DM. We analyzed the primary outcome glycated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) and the secondary outcomes fasting blood glucose (FBG), blood pressure (BP), body weight, BMI, quality of life (QoL), cost, and time saving.MethodsPublications were systematically identified by searching Cochrane Library, MEDLINE via PubMed, Web of Science Core Collection, Embase, and CINAHL databases for studies published between January 2008 and April 2020, considering systematic reviews (SRs), meta-analyses (MAs), randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and clinical trials (CTs). Study quality was assessed using the A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews, Effective Public Health Practice Project, and National Institute for Health and Care Excellence qualitative checklist. We organized the trials by communication technologies in real-time video or audio interventions, asynchronous interventions, and combined interventions (synchronous and asynchronous communication).ResultsFrom 1116 unique citations, we identified 31 eligible studies (n=15 high, n=14 moderate, n=1 weak, and n=1 critically low quality). We selected 21 SRs and MAs, 8 RCTs, 1 non-RCT, and 1 qualitative study. Of the 10 trials, 3 were categorized as real-time video, 1 as real-time video and audio, 4 as asynchronous, and 2 as combined intervention. Significant decline in HbA1c levels based on pooled T1DM and T2DM patients data ranged from -0.22% weighted mean difference (WMD; 95% CI -0.28 to -0.15; P<.001) to -0.64% mean difference (95% CI -1.01 to -0.26; P<.001). The intervention effect on lowering HbA1c values might be significantly smaller for patients with T1DM than for patients with T2DM. Evidence on the impact on BP, body weight, FBG, cost effectiveness, and time saving was smaller compared with HbA1c but indicated potential in some publications.ConclusionsTelemedical interventions might be clinically effective in improving diabetes control overall, and they might significantly improve HbA1c concentrations. Patients with T2DM could benefit more than patients with T1DM regarding lowering HbA1c levels. Further studies with longer duration and larger cohorts are necessary.

Project description:Background: Comparative efficacy of different pharmacist based interventions on glycemic control of type 2 diabetes patients is unclear. This review aimed to evaluate and compare the efficacy of different pharmacist based interventions on clinical outcomes of type 2 diabetes patients. Methods: A systematic search was conducted across five databases from date of database inception to September 2017. All randomized clinical trials evaluating the efficacy of pharmacist based interventions on type 2 diabetes patients were included for network meta-analysis (NMA). The protocol is available with PROSPERO (CRD42017078854). Results: A total of 43 studies, involving 6259 type 2 diabetes patients, were included. NMA demonstrated that all interventions significantly lowered glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) levels compared to usual care, but there was no statistical evidence from this study that one intervention was significantly better than the other for reducing HbA1c levels. Pharmacist based diabetes education plus pharmaceutical care showed maximum efficacy for reducing HbA1c levels [-0.86, 95% CI -0.983, -0.727; p < 0.001]. Pharmacist based diabetes education plus pharmaceutical care was observed to be statistically significant in lowering levels of systolic blood pressure [-4.94; 95%CI -8.65, -1.23] and triglycerides levels [-0.26, 95%CI -0.51, -0.01], as compared to the interventions which involved diabetes education by pharmacist, and for body mass index (BMI) [-0.57; 95%CI -1.25, -0.12] in comparison to diabetes education by health care team involving pharmacist as member. Conclusion: The findings of this review demonstrate that all interventions had a significantly positive effect on HbA1c, but there was no statistical evidence from this study that one intervention was significantly better than the other for achieving glycemic control.Pharmacist based diabetes education plus pharmaceutical care showed maximum efficacy on HbA1c and rest of the clinical outcomes.

Project description:BackgroundIntensive diabetes treatment reduces the risk of developing albuminuria in individuals with type 1 diabetes. Effects on the long-term clinical course of kidney disease remain to be defined. We aimed to compare the long-term effects of intensive versus conventional treatment on incident albuminuria.MethodsFor this long-term follow-up study of the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial (DCCT) we assessed the effect of intensive diabetes treatment on albuminuria during 18 years after the completion of the trial. During the DCCT (1983-1993), 1441 participants with type 1 diabetes were randomly assigned to receive either intensive treatment (with the goal of achieving levels of glycaemia as close to the non-diabetic range as safely possible) or conventional treatment (aimed at prevention of symptoms of hyperglycaemia and hypoglycaemia). At the end of the DCCT, all participants were instructed in intensive treatment, and all participants were invited to join the observational Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and Complications (EDIC) study. Mean HbA1c during the EDIC study was similar in the two groups of patients who differed in their treatment assignment during the DCCT. Albumin excretion rate was measured every other year during the EDIC study. Microalbuminuria was defined as an albumin excretion rate of 30 mg per 24 h or higher on two consecutive study visits and macroalbuminuria as an albumin excretion rate of 300 mg per day or higher. We estimated glomerular filtration rate from annual serum creatinine measurements throughout DCCT and the EDIC study. The DCCT is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00360815, and the EDIC study, with number NCT00360893.FindingsDuring years 1-18 of EDIC, we noted 191 new cases of microalbuminuria (71 in the group receiving intensive treatment during DCCT and 120 in the group receiving conventional treatment during DCCT; risk reduction 45%, 95% CI 26-59) and 117 new cases of macroalbuminuria (31 intensive, 86 conventional; 61%, 41-74). At year 17-18 of EDIC, the prevalence of albumin excretion rate of 30 mg per 24 h or higher was 18·4% in participants assigned to intensive treatment during the DCCT, compared with 24·9% in participants assigned to conventional treatment (p=0·02). During years 1-18 of EDIC, we recorded 84 cases of sustained estimated glomerular filtration rate lower than 60 mL/min per 1·73m(2) (31 intensive, 53 conventional; risk reduction 44%, 95% CI 12-64).InterpretationIn individuals with type 1 diabetes, intensive diabetes treatment yields durable renal benefits that persist for at least 18 years after its application. Ultimately, such benefits should result in fewer patients requiring renal replacement therapy.FundingNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Disease.

Dataset Information

Clinical immunologic interventions for the treatment of type 1 diabetes.

Publications

Clinical immunologic interventions for the treatment of type 1 diabetes.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets