Clinical and Metabolic Characterization of Adults With Type 2 Diabetes by Age in the Glycemia Reduction Approaches in Diabetes: A Comparative Effectiveness Study (GRADE) Cohort

OBJECTIVE Differences in type 2 diabetes phenotype by age are described, but it is not known whether these differences are seen in a more uniformly defined adult population at a common early stage of care. We sought to characterize age-related clinical and metabolic characteristics of adults with type 2 diabetes on metformin monotherapy, prior to treatment intensification. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS In the Glycemia Reduction Approaches in Diabetes: A Comparative Effectiveness Study (GRADE), participants were enrolled who had type 2 diabetes duration = 65 years) using ANOVA and Pearson chi(2) tests. RESULTS Within the GRADE cohort (n = 5,047), we observed significant differences by age, with younger adults having greater racial diversity, fewer medications for common comorbidities, lower prevalence of CVD, higher weight and BMI, and more pronounced hyperglycemia and diabetic dyslipidemia and with metabolic profile indicating lower insulin sensitivity (inverse fasting insulin [1/(fasting insulin)], HOMA of steady-state insulin sensitivity, Matsuda index) and inadequate beta-cell response (oral disposition index) (P < 0.05 across age categories). CONCLUSIONS Clinical and metabolic characteristics of type 2 diabetes differ by age within the GRADE cohort. Younger adults exhibit more prominent obesity-related characteristics, including higher obesity levels and lower insulin sensitivity and beta-cell compensation. Given the increasing burden of type 2 diabetes and complications, particularly among younger populations, these age-related distinctions may inform risk factor management approaches and treatment priorities. Further study will determine whether age-related differences impact response to therapy

A Multicenter Randomized Trial Evaluating the Insulin-Only Configuration of the Bionic Pancreas in Adults with Type 1 Diabetes

Objective: To evaluate the insulin-only configuration of the iLet(®) bionic pancreas (BP) using insulin aspart or insulin lispro in adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D). Methods: In this multicenter, randomized, controlled trial, 161 adults with T1D (18-79 years old, baseline HbA1c 5.5%-13.1%, 32% using multiple daily injections, 27% using a pump without automation, 5% using a pump with predictive low glucose suspend, and 36% using a hybrid closed loop system before the study) were randomly assigned 2:1 to use the BP (N = 107) with insulin aspart or insulin lispro (BP group) or a standard-of-care (SC) control group (N = 54) using their usual insulin delivery plus continuous glucose monitoring (CGM). The primary outcome was HbA1c at 13 weeks. Results: Mean HbA1c decreased from 7.6% ± 1.2% at baseline to 7.1% ± 0.6% at 13 weeks with BP versus 7.6% ± 1.2% to 7.5% ± 0.9% with SC (adjusted difference = -0.5%, 95% confidence interval -0.6% to -0.3%, P \u3c 0.001). Over 13 weeks, mean time in range 70-180 mg/dL (TIR) increased by 11% (2.6 h/d) and mean CGM glucose was reduced by 16 mg/dL with BP compared with SC (P \u3c 0.001). Improvement in these metrics was seen during the first day of BP use and by the end of the first week reached levels that remained relatively stable through 13 weeks. Analyses of time \u3e180 mg/dL, time \u3e250 mg/dL, and standard deviation of CGM glucose all favored the BP group (P \u3c 0.001). The CGM-measured hypoglycemia was low at baseline (median time \u3c54 mg/dL of 0.21% [3 min/d] for the BP group and 0.11% [1.6 min/d] for the SC group) and not significantly different between groups over the 13 weeks (P = 0.51 for time \u3c70 mg/dL and 0.33 for time \u3c54 mg/dL). There were 7 (6.5% of 107 participants) severe hypoglycemic events in the BP group and 2 events in the SC group (1.9% of 54 participants, P = 0.40). Conclusions: In adults with T1D, use of the BP with insulin aspart or insulin lispro improved HbA1c, TIR, and hyperglycemic metrics without increasing CGM-measured hypoglycemia compared with standard of care. Clinical Trial Registry: clinicaltrials.gov; NCT04200313

Time to Peak Glucose and Peak C-Peptide During the Progression to Type 1 Diabetes in the Diabetes Prevention Trial and TrialNet Cohorts

OBJECTIVE To assess the progression of type 1 diabetes using time to peak glucose or C-peptide during oral glucose tolerance tests (OGTTs) in autoantibody-positive relatives of people with type 1 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS We examined 2-h OGTTs of participants in the Diabetes Prevention Trial Type 1 (DPT-1) and TrialNet Pathway to Prevention (PTP) studies. We included 706 DPT-1 participants (mean ± SD age, 13.84 ± 9.53 years; BMI Z-score, 0.33 ± 1.07; 56.1% male) and 3,720 PTP participants (age, 16.01 ± 12.33 years; BMI Z-score, 0.66 ± 1.3; 49.7% male). Log-rank testing and Cox regression analyses with adjustments (age, sex, race, BMI Z-score, HOMA-insulin resistance, and peak glucose/C-peptide levels, respectively) were performed. RESULTS In each of DPT-1 and PTP, higher 5-year diabetes progression risk was seen in those with time to peak glucose >30 min and time to peak C-peptide >60 min (P < 0.001 for all groups), before and after adjustments. In models examining strength of association with diabetes development, associations were greater for time to peak C-peptide versus peak C-peptide value (DPT-1: χ2 = 25.76 vs. χ2 = 8.62; PTP: χ2 = 149.19 vs. χ2 = 79.98; all P < 0.001). Changes in the percentage of individuals with delayed glucose and/or C-peptide peaks were noted over time. CONCLUSIONS In two independent at-risk populations, we show that those with delayed OGTT peak times for glucose or C-peptide are at higher risk of diabetes development within 5 years, independent of peak levels. Moreover, time to peak C-peptide appears more predictive than the peak level, suggesting its potential use as a specific biomarker for diabetes progression