Skip to main content
  • More from ADA
    • Diabetes Care
    • Clinical Diabetes
    • Diabetes Spectrum
    • ADA Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes
    • ADA Scientific Sessions Abstracts
    • BMJ Open Diabetes Research & Care
  • Subscribe
  • Log in
  • My Cart
  • Follow ada on Twitter
  • RSS
  • Visit ada on Facebook
Diabetes

Advanced Search

Main menu

  • Home
  • Current
    • Current Issue
    • Online Ahead of Print
    • ADA Scientific Sessions Abstracts
  • Browse
    • By Topic
    • Issue Archive
    • Saved Searches
    • ADA Scientific Sessions Abstracts
    • Diabetes COVID-19 Article Collection
    • Diabetes Symposium 2020
  • Info
    • About the Journal
    • About the Editors
    • ADA Journal Policies
    • Instructions for Authors
    • Guidance for Reviewers
  • Reprints/Reuse
  • Advertising
  • Subscriptions
    • Individual Subscriptions
    • Institutional Subscriptions and Site Licenses
    • Access Institutional Usage Reports
    • Purchase Single Issues
  • Alerts
    • E­mail Alerts
    • RSS Feeds
  • Podcasts
    • Diabetes Core Update
    • Special Podcast Series: Therapeutic Inertia
    • Special Podcast Series: Influenza Podcasts
    • Special Podcast Series: SGLT2 Inhibitors
    • Special Podcast Series: COVID-19
  • Submit
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Submit Cover Art
    • ADA Journal Policies
    • Instructions for Authors
    • ADA Peer Review
  • More from ADA
    • Diabetes Care
    • Clinical Diabetes
    • Diabetes Spectrum
    • ADA Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes
    • ADA Scientific Sessions Abstracts
    • BMJ Open Diabetes Research & Care

User menu

  • Subscribe
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Diabetes
  • Home
  • Current
    • Current Issue
    • Online Ahead of Print
    • ADA Scientific Sessions Abstracts
  • Browse
    • By Topic
    • Issue Archive
    • Saved Searches
    • ADA Scientific Sessions Abstracts
    • Diabetes COVID-19 Article Collection
    • Diabetes Symposium 2020
  • Info
    • About the Journal
    • About the Editors
    • ADA Journal Policies
    • Instructions for Authors
    • Guidance for Reviewers
  • Reprints/Reuse
  • Advertising
  • Subscriptions
    • Individual Subscriptions
    • Institutional Subscriptions and Site Licenses
    • Access Institutional Usage Reports
    • Purchase Single Issues
  • Alerts
    • E­mail Alerts
    • RSS Feeds
  • Podcasts
    • Diabetes Core Update
    • Special Podcast Series: Therapeutic Inertia
    • Special Podcast Series: Influenza Podcasts
    • Special Podcast Series: SGLT2 Inhibitors
    • Special Podcast Series: COVID-19
  • Submit
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Submit Cover Art
    • ADA Journal Policies
    • Instructions for Authors
    • ADA Peer Review
Perspectives in Diabetes

Guidelines for Intervention Trials in Subjects With Newly Diagnosed Type 1 Diabetes

  1. Carla J. Greenbaum1,
  2. Leonard C. Harrison2 and
  3. on behalf of the Immunology of Diabetes Society
  1. 1Benaroya Research Institute at Virginia Mason, Seattle, Washington
  2. 2Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research, Royal Melbourne Hospital, Victoria, Australia
    Diabetes 2003 May; 52(5): 1059-1065. https://doi.org/10.2337/diabetes.52.5.1059
    PreviousNext
    • Article
    • Figures & Tables
    • Info & Metrics
    • PDF
    Loading

    Type 1, or insulin-dependent diabetes, is an autoimmune disease that culminates in the destruction of insulin-producing β-cells in the islets of the pancreas. Studies in the nonobese diabetic (NOD) mouse model of spontaneous type 1 diabetes provide “proof-of-concept” that the disease is preventable (1). People with type 1 diabetes and their relatives, researchers, government, and industry are eager to move forward and test candidate intervention/prevention therapies in humans. Such therapies may entail risks, including accelerated loss of β-cell function, malignancy, and infection. Scientifically and ethically, investigators are obliged to maximize the information gained from intervention trials and minimize risks. One way of achieving this is by standardizing trial protocols. Standardization of islet autoantibody assays (2–13) and of the intravenous glucose tolerance test for measuring first-phase insulin response (14–18) has been a major advance, allowing stratification for disease risk among relatives. The literature on intervention trials in newly diagnosed type 1 diabetic patients (19–44) reveals that entry criteria, trial design and duration, and outcome measures differ considerably. Adoption of standardized protocols would permit comparative and pooled data analysis and facilitate evaluation of potential therapies.

    Our purpose here is to highlight issues pertaining to trial variables and suggest ways of standardizing protocols for phase I and II intervention trials in newly diagnosed patients. These issues will be discussed under three major headings: trial subjects, trial design, and trial outcome measures.

    SUBJECTS: INCLUSION CRITERIA

    Diagnosis of diabetes

    Background.

    Type 1 diabetes can have different clinical presentations that presumably reflect the nature of the underlying disease pathology, to which we have no direct access. Some patients present acutely with dehydration and ketoacidosis, whereas others have minimal or no symptoms (45,46). Natural history studies have indicated that these differences may correlate with the rate of loss of β-cell function and residual β-cell function, determined by genetic (47–49) and other (50–66) factors that modify disease pathology. However, the relationship between the nature of the clinical presentation and the effectiveness of intervention therapy is not known (Table 1).

    Proposal

    • Define onset of diabetes from time of diagnosis by a physician, based on recognized, e.g., American Diabetes Association, criteria.

    • Document the following at clinical presentation: age, sex, pubertal status, family history of diabetes, blood glucose, bicarbonate, presence or absence of ketoacidosis, weight loss, polyuria, polydypsia, HbA1c, islet autoantibodies, insulin requirement, and HLA typing.

    Age

    Background.

    The natural history of pre- and postclinical type 1 diabetes varies with age. Specifically, the rate of β-cell destruction is inversely related to age (50–53,58). This age effect is directly associated with the number of susceptibility HLA class II (e.g., DR 3,4; DQ 2,8) (47,48,67) and class I (e.g., A24) (49) alleles. The more susceptibility alleles there are, the younger the age of onset and diagnosis, with a more autoaggressive immune response reflected by the number of islet antibodies (68–70). Therefore, the requirement for effective intervention treatment is likely to be more demanding in younger subjects. On the other hand, a slower rate of β-cell destruction in older subjects may indicate a wider window of opportunity for intervention; although, if the process was “regulated,” it would be important that intervention treatment did not jeopardize this.

    Although an upper age limit may delineate classic type 1 diabetes from slowly progressive type 1 diabetes or latent autoimmune diabetes of adults (71–73), the combination of clinical type 2 diabetes and autoantibodies may still occur in children and younger adults (74). Age is also an issue with respect to consent and recruitment.

    Proposal

    • Match subjects in treatment and control groups as closely as possible for age.

    • In phase I trials, enroll only subjects ≥18 years of age.

    • Limit entry to subjects aged <35 years.

    Autoantibodies

    Background.

    Type 1A diabetes is an immune-mediated disease resulting in loss of β-cells. During the past several decades, islet autoantibodies to the GAD65 isoform (GADAb), tyrosine phosphatase-like insulinoma antigen IA2 (IA2Ab), and insulin (IAA) have been identified in individuals at risk for and presenting with clinical disease. Although up to 10% of patients presenting with clinical type 1 diabetes are islet autoantibody-negative (64) and ∼10–15% of patients with clinical type 2 diabetes are autoantibody-positive (71–74), autoantibody measurements remain the best indication that diabetes is immune mediated. Most would agree that the presence of one or more islet autoantibodies (GADAb, IA2Ab, or IAA, measured within 2 weeks of diabetes diagnosis) indicates immune-mediated disease and is a sufficient criterion for entry. More controversial is whether the presence of ICA alone is also a sufficient criterion for entry. Measurement of ICA by immunofluorescence requires a larger sample and is more difficult to perform than newer radioimmunoassays developed for GADAb, IA2Ab, and IAA. In subjects at risk for diabetes, the presence of ICA or any one autoantibody alone may not confer sufficient risk for entry to prevention trials; however, in subjects with diabetes, ICA is a marker of immune-mediated disease. Therefore, a patient with diabetes confirmed positive for ICA in the absence of the other three autoantibodies should also be eligible for study enrollment.

    Proposal

    • Subjects should have at least one of four islet autoantibodies: to GAD65, insulin (if on insulin treatment <2 weeks), IA2, or ICA.

    Time from diagnosis

    Background.

    In general, time from diagnosis is inversely related to C-peptide secretion. However, data from the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial and other studies indicate that some subjects with type 1 diabetes continue to have residual C-peptide, even 5 years after diagnosis (50,53,75–78). Time from diagnosis is therefore not necessarily an accurate index of residual β-cell function. Additionally, measurement of C-peptide secretion when diabetes is poorly controlled is unreliable (see below).

    Two models of the disease have been proposed: in one, clinical onset occurs on a continuum of the immune assault, with β-cell function finally being inadequate to maintain normoglycemia; in the other, the process of β-cell injury becomes abruptly destructive, heralding clinical diagnosis (65,66,79,80). In the latter, initiation of treatment within a short timeframe would be essential. In addition, data from cyclosporin trials suggest that early treatment is beneficial. Thus, investigators may wish to enroll subjects relatively soon after diagnosis in “early-onset trials.”

    Such early-onset trials should be distinguished from those in which the only entry criterion is residual C-peptide secretion. In the latter, matching for time from diagnosis where there is a small number of subjects or randomizing where there is a larger number of subjects would be particularly important to obviate the potential problem of enrolling “survivors” with persisting C-peptide secretion.

    Proposal

    • Document peak C-peptide of ≥0.2 pmol/l after a liquid mixed-meal tolerance test (MMTT) (Sustacal/Boost). This baseline test should only be done after the subject is metabolically stable (at least 2 weeks after diagnosis).

    • Studies defined as early-onset trials should include only subjects <12 weeks from diagnosis. Otherwise, no specific time from diagnosis is recommended.

    TRIAL DESIGN

    Number of subjects

    Background.

    Phase I and II studies are often not large enough to stratify subjects according to important variables (Table 2).

    Proposal

    • Aim to include sufficient numbers of subjects to enable stratification in phase III trials. For smaller trials, collect standardized raw data on all subjects for later combined analysis. Document age, sex, pubertal status, family history of diabetes, time from diagnosis, nature of clinical presentation (see above), HLA, baseline immune marker, and C-peptide status.

    Duration of trial

    Background.

    It is assumed that mixed meal- or glucagon-stimulated C-peptide falls after diagnosis, and power calculations may be predicated on intervention reducing the rate of fall. However, data from control arms of trials in recently diagnosed adults indicate there may be little or no fall in C-peptide over the first year (42,43). Therefore, evaluation out to 1 year after either diagnosis or treatment initiation may fail to accurately reflect outcome, particularly in adults in whom there may only be a minimal fall in C-peptide over this period. Evaluation at this time may, however, provide short-term safety data.

    Proposal

    • Evaluate treatment for at least 2 years, particularly in adults; 1 year may be appropriate for safety.

    Factors that influence outcome measures

    Background.

    Diabetes treatment (24,36,78,81,82), physical activity, diet, time of testing, and other variables influence diabetes control and outcome measures.

    The standard of care for people with diabetes is “tight” control (i.e., HbA1c <7%) (83). In some intervention trials, subjects have been taken off insulin when euglycemia was achieved (84–86). It remains unknown whether continuing insulin therapy even during the honeymoon phase is beneficial, but indirect evidence suggests it is (78,81,82). The failure of parenteral insulin to prevent diabetes does not indicate that insulin treatment is without benefit in subjects with diabetes. Thus, unless a subject has reached an “insulin-free” end point (see below), insulin treatment should be continued.

    Proposal

    • Aim to standardize variables that could influence diabetes control and/or outcome measures.

    • Randomize subjects in phase II and III trials.

    • Aim to placebo control and double mask.

    • Mask blood samples before analysis.

    • Review safety and other data by external committee (e.g., a data safety monitoring board), with code broken to investigators and subjects if necessary for reasons of safety. Otherwise, do not break codes for data analysis until termination of the trial.

    • Aim for tight control (e.g., as close to normal HbA1c as possible without causing hypoglycemia).

    • Continue insulin treatment whenever possible (avoiding hypoglycemia) unless subject has reached an insulin-free end point (see below).

    TRIAL OUTCOME MEASURES

    Metabolic tests

    Background.

    Several tests can be used to evaluate β-cell function. C-peptide in healthy subjects can be stimulated by intravenous, intramuscular, or subcutaneous glucagon; intravenous sulfonylurea; intravenous glucagon-like peptide 1; intravenous or oral amino acids; intravenous or oral glucose; or a mixed meal (87–92). During intervention with cyclosporin, subjects with type 1 diabetes had C-peptide responses to a MMTT at a time when intravenous glucose and glucagon responses were absent (93). Most studies have only evaluated the C-peptide response to an oral mixed meal over 2 h, although it has been suggested that a 4-h test may provide additional useful information, because many subjects with impaired β-cell function do not reach a peak C-peptide value during 2 h. Unfortunately, a 4-h MMTT can be difficult to perform, particularly in subjects with minimal residual function due to hypo- and hyperglycemia occurring during the test. Alternatively, intravenous glucagon-stimulated C-peptide has been used in new-onset trials. However, there is limited information regarding the relationship between MMTT and glucagon test results (92–95), and there are no data indicating that one test is preferable to the other. Nonetheless, for the purpose of having standardized end points, the MMTT is the recommended test. If investigators choose to perform intravenous glucagon stimulation of C-peptide, a MMTT should be performed in addition at least at baseline and annually to obtain comparative data (Table 3).

    There are little published data on conditions that affect C-peptide stimulation tests in patients with established type 1 diabetes. An important consideration is the control of diabetes in the peri-test period. Although one study reported no effect of exogenous insulin on the MMTT (96), most protocols advise withholding insulin before the test. Should this only apply to short-acting insulin? What about insulin via the pump? The importance of the prevailing blood glucose level on stimulated C-peptide remains controversial. Some studies suggest no effect (87), whereas others indicate that the test is only valid in the absence of hypoglycemia (94,97) or hyperglycemia (98–100).

    Proposal

    • Evaluate stimulated C-peptide with the liquid MMTT on a quarterly basis.

    • Administer evening insulin as usual but withhold morning insulin of any type. If on the pump, continue the basal rate but withhold the bolus. Conduct the test only if fasting blood glucose is 4–11.1 mmol/l (72–200 mg/dl).

    Immune tests

    Background.

    Antibodies (titer, isotypes, IgG subclasses, and epitope specificity) and T-cell responses (proliferation, activation markers, and cytokine production) may change in response to intervention therapy and therefore provide important mechanistic “surrogate marker” information. However, autoantibody changes cannot be used as an outcome measure because the relationship between changes in these markers and therapeutic benefit is unknown. For example, in the cyclosporin trials, islet antibody levels did not correlate with benefit (101), whereas remission of Graves’ hyperthyroidism (an autoantibody-mediated disease) has been associated with a decrease in autoantibody levels (102,103).

    The place of markers such as IgG autoantibody subclasses (104,105) and islet antigen-reactive T-cell responses (106–108) is not yet clear. Assays for these cells are being evaluated by Immunology of Diabetes Society Workshops (109). T-cell assays require substantial improvement so that reproducible, quantitative, and qualitative responses can be measured.

    Proposal

    • Measure islet autoantibodies and freeze sera/plasma for future studies. Consider freezing blood mononuclear cells for future analysis.

    • Evaluate immune markers in regard to HLA types.

    Primary and secondary outcomes

    Background.

    Studies have reported changes in fasting, peak, and area under curve (AUC) C-peptide values over time. It remains unclear which is most useful. In addition, it is not known whether C-peptide expressed as a function of blood glucose is more reliable. There are prepubertal versus postpubertal/age differences in C-peptide that are often not taken into account.

    Withdrawal of insulin should be done only in the context of preventing hypoglycemia, not as a primary goal of treatment. However, in some subjects, therapy may result in restoration of a euglycemic insulin-free state.

    Proposal

    • Define the primary outcome as a significant difference in the 2-h AUC C-peptide response between treated and control groups over time. In addition, analyze incremental and peak C-peptide responses. Additional analysis, such as time to peak C-peptide response or 4-h AUC for C-peptide, may be an appropriate exploratory outcome.

    • Define secondary outcomes as insulin dose per kilogram and HbA1c level.

    • Subjects at least 1 year from diagnosis on limited amounts of insulin with normal HbA1c levels on two occasions 3 months apart are potentially “insulin-free.” However, before withdrawal of chronic insulin therapy, documentation of normal glucose response is needed. These subjects should undergo a standard oral glucose tolerance test after not receiving insulin for 3 days. The presence of normal glucose tolerance under these conditions indicates an insulin-free state, and chronic insulin administration can be discontinued. Close follow-up with repeated HbA1c and glucose tolerance tests are recommended, with reinstitution of insulin if abnormalities are present.

    CONCLUSION

    These Immunology of Diabetes Society guidelines have been developed to facilitate comparison of intervention therapies. Development and validation of novel assay technologies as well as new data on alternative outcome measures will undoubtedly require modifications to these recommendations in the future, but the principle that standardization of clinical intervention trials benefits patients, families, and investigators will continue to underlie these efforts.

    View this table:
    • View inline
    • View popup
    TABLE 1

    Inclusion criteria

    View this table:
    • View inline
    • View popup
    TABLE 2

    Trial design

    View this table:
    • View inline
    • View popup
    TABLE 3

    Outcome measures

    Acknowledgments

    C.J.G. was supported in part by grants from the Paul G. Allen Foundation Clinical Scholars Program, the Buse Diabetes Clinical Research Chair, and the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation Center. L.C.H. was supported by a Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation Center grant and by the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia.

    The following individuals provided comments on these guidelines: Desmond A. Schatz, George S. Eisenbarth, Jerry P. Palmer, Kevan C. Herold, Paolo Pozzilli, Edwin A. Gale, Hubert Kolb, Olov Rolandsson, Didac Mauricio, Peter G. Colman, and Spiros Fourlanos.

    Footnotes

    • Address correspondence and reprint requests to Carla J. Greenbaum, Benaroya Research Institute at Virginia Mason, Seattle, WA 98101. E-mail: cjgreen{at}vmresearch.org.

      Received for publication 9 May 2002 and accepted in revised form 7 January 2003.

      AUC, area under curve; MMTT, mixed-meal tolerance test.

    • DIABETES

    REFERENCES

    1. ↵
      Atkinson MA, Leiter EH: The NOD mouse model of type 1 diabetes: as good as it gets? Nat Med 5 : 601 –604,1999
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    2. ↵
      Bottazzo G, Gleichmann H: Immunology and Diabetes Workshops: report of the First International Workshop on the Standardization of Cytoplasmic Islet Cell Antibodies. Diabetologia 29 : 125 –126,1986
      OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
    3. Bonifacio E, Lernmark A, Dawkins RL: Serum exchange and use of dilutions have improved precision measurement of islet cell antibodies. J Immunologic Methods 106 : 83 –88,1988
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    4. Boitard C, Bonifacio E, Bottazzo G, Gleichmann H, Molenaar J: Immunology and Diabetes Workshop: report on the Third International (Stage 3) Workshop on the Standardization of Cytoplasmic Islet Cell Antibodies. Diabetologia 31 : 451 –452,1988
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    5. Wilkin T, Palmer J, Kurta A, Bonifacio E, Diaz J-L: The Second International Workshop on the Standardization of Insulin Autoantibody (IAA) Measurement. Diabetologia 31 : 449 –450,1988
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    6. Bonifacio E, Boitard C, Gleichmann H, Shattock MA, Molenaar JL, Bottazzo GF: Assessment of precision, concordance, specificity, and sensitivity of islet cell antibody measurement in 41 assays. Diabetologia 33 : 731 –736,1990
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    7. Lernmark A, Molenaar JL, van Beers WA, Yamaguchi Y, Nagataki S, Ludvigsson J, Maclaren NK: The Fourth International Serum Exchange Workshop to Standardize Cytoplasmic Islet Cell Antibodies: The Immunology and Diabetes Workshops and Participating Laboratories. Diabetologia 34 : 534 –535,1991
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    8. Greenbaum C, Palmer J, Nagataki S, Yamaguchi Y, Molenaar J, VanBeers W, Maclaren N, Lernmark A: Improved specificity of ICA assays in the Fourth International Immunology of Diabetes Serum Exchange Workshop. Diabetes 41 : 1570 –1574,1992
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    9. Greenbaum CJ, Palmer JP, Kuglin B, Kolb H: Insulin autoantibodies measured by radioimmunoassay methodology are more related to insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus that those measured by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay: results of the Fourth International Workshop on the Standardization of Insulin Autoantibody Measurement. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 74 : 1040 –1044,1992
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    10. Greenbaum C, Wilkin T, Palmer J: Fifth International Serum Exchange Workshop for Insulin Autoantibody (IAA) Standardization. Diabetologia 35 : 798 –800,1992
      OpenUrlPubMed
    11. Schmidli RS, Colman PG, Bonifacio E, Bottazzo GF, Harrison LC: High level of concordance between assays for glutamic acid decarboxylase antibodies: the First International Glutamic Acid Decarboxylase Antibody Workshop. Diabetes 43 : 1005 –1009,1994
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    12. Bingley P: Interactions of age, islet cell antibodies, insulin autoantibodies, and first-phase insulin response in predicting risk of progression to IDDM in ICA+ relatives: the ICARUS data set. Diabetes 45 : 1720 –1728,1996
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    13. ↵
      Verge CF, Stenger D, Bonifacio E, Colman PG, Pilcher C, Bingley PJ, Eisenbarth GS: Combined use of autoantibodies (IA-2 autoantibody, GAD autoantibody, insulin autoantibody, cytoplasmic islet cell antibodies) in type 1 diabetes: Combinatorial Islet Autoantibody Workshop. Diabetes 47 : 1857 –1866,1998
      OpenUrlAbstract
    14. ↵
      Colman PG, Stewart V, Kean J, Koschmann M, Alford F, Ward G, Deam D, Harrison LC: Comparison of two commonly used standard intravenous glucose tolerance tests. Diabetes Care 15 : 1053 –1055,1992
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    15. Koschmann M, Alford FP, Ward GM, Walters J, Clolman PG, Harrison LC: Reproducibility of estimating first phase insulin responses to intravenous glucose. Diab Nutr Metab 5 : 73 –79,1992
      OpenUrl
    16. Bingley PJ, Colman P, Eisenbarth GS, Jackson RA, McCulloch DK, Riley WJ, Gale EA: Standardization of IVGTT to predict IDDM. Diabetes Care 15 : 1313 –1316,1992
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    17. McCulloch D, Bingley P, Colman P, Jackson R, Gale E: Comparison of bolus and infusion protocols for determining acute insulin response to intravenous glucose in normal humans. Diabetes Care 16 : 911 –915,1993
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    18. ↵
      McNair PD, Colman PG, Alford A, Harrison LC: Reproducibility of the first phase insulin response to intravenous glucose is not improved by retrograde cannulation and arterialization or the use of a lower glucose dose. Diabetes Care 18 : 1168 –1173,1995
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    19. ↵
      Harrison LC, Colman PG, Dean B, Baxter R, Martin FI: Increase in remission rate in newly diagnosed type 1 diabetic subjects treated with azathioprine. Diabetes 34 : 1306 –1308,1985
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    20. Silverstein J, Maclaren N, Riley W, Spillar R, Radjenovic D, Johnson S: Immunosuppression with azathioprine and prednisone in recent-onset insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. N Engl J Med 319 : 599 –604,1988
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    21. Canadian-European Randomized Trial Group: Cyclosporin-induced remission of IDDM: after early intervention: association of 1 yr of cyclosporin treatment with enhanced insulin secretion. Diabetes 37 : 1574 –1582,1988
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    22. Cook JJ, Hudson I, Harrison LC, Dean B, Colman PG, Werther GA, Warne GL, Court JM: Double-blind controlled trial of azathioprine in children with newly diagnosed type 1 diabetes. Diabetes 38 : 779 –783,1989
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    23. Mendola G, Casamitjana R, Gomis R: Effect of nicotinamide therapy upon B-cell function in newly diagnosed type I (insulin-dependent) diabetic patients. Diabetologia 32 : 160 –162,1989
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    24. ↵
      Shah S, Malone J, Simpson N: A randomized trial of intensive insulin therapy in newly diagnosed insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. N Engl J Med 320 : 550 –554,1989
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    25. Vague P, Picq R, Bernal M, Lassman-Vague V, Vialettes B: Effect of nicotinamide treatment on the residual insulin secretion in type 1 (insulin-dependent) diabetic patients. Diabetologia 32 : 316 –321,1989
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    26. Chase HP, Butler-Simon N, Garg S, McDuffie M, Hoops SL, O’Brien D: A trial of nicotinamide in newly diagnosed patients with type 1 (insulin-dependent) diabetes mellitus. Diabetologia 33 : 444 –446,1990
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    27. Giordano C, Panto F, Amato MP, Sapienza N, Pugliese A, Galluzzo A: Early administration of an immunomodulator and induction of remission in insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. J Autoimmun 3 : 611 –617,1990
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    28. Secchi A, Pastore MR, Sergi A, Pontiroli AE, Pozza G: Prednisone administration in recent onset type 1 diabetes. J Autoimmun 3 : 593 –600,1990
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    29. Skyler JS, Rabinovitch A: Cyclosporine in recent onset type 1 diabetes mellitus: effects on islet beta cell function: Miami Cyclosporine Diabetes Study Group. J Diabetes Complications 6 : 77 –88,1992
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    30. Goday A, Pujol-Borrell R, Fernandez J, Casamitjana R, Rios M, Vilardell E, Gomis R: Effects of a short prednisone regime at clinical onset of type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Res Clin Pract 20 : 39 –46,1993
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    31. Muir A, Schatz D, Maclaren N: Antigen-specific immunotherapy: oral tolerance and subcutaneous immunization in the treatment of insulin-dependent diabetes. Diabetes Metab Rev 9 : 279 –287,1993
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    32. Skyler JS, Lorenz TJ, Schwartz S, Eisenbarth GS, Einhorn D, Palmer JP, Marks JB, Greenbaum C, Saria EA, Byers V: Effects of an anti-CD5 immunoconjugate (CD5-plus) in recent onset type 1 diabetes mellitus: a preliminary investigation: the CD5 Diabetes Project Team. J Diabetes Complications 7 : 224 –232,1993
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    33. Pozzilli P, Visalli N, Signore A, Baroni MG, Buzzetti R, Cavallo MG, Boccuni ML, Fava D, Gragnoli C, Andreani D: Double blind trial of nicotinamide in recent-onset IDDM (the IMDIAB III study). Diabetologia 38 : 848 –852,1995
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    34. Bjork E, Berne C, Kampe O, Wibell L, Oskarsson P, Karlsson FA: Diazoxide treatment at onset preserves residual insulin secretion in adults with autoimmune diabetes. Diabetes 45 : 1427 –1430,1996
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    35. Kohnert KD, Hehmke B, Keilacker H, Ziegler M, Emmrich F, Laube F, Michaelis D: Antibody response to islet antigens in anti-CD4/prednisolone immune intervention of type 1 diabetes. Int J Clin Lab Res 26 : 55 –59,1996
      OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
    36. ↵
      Linn T, Ortac K, Laube H, Federlin K: Intensive therapy in adult insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus is associated with improved insulin sensitivity and reserve: a randomized, controlled, prospective study over 5 years in newly diagnosed patients. Metabolism 45 : 1508 –1513,1996
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    37. Schnell O, Eisfelder B, Standl E, Ziegler AG: High-dose intravenous insulin infusion versus intensive insulin treatment in newly diagnosed IDDM. Diabetes 46 : 1607 –1611,1997
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    38. Coutant R, Landais P, Rosilio M, Johnsen C, Lahlou N, Chatelain P, Carel JC, Ludvigsson J, Boitard C, Bougneres PF: Low dose linomide in type 1 juvenile diabetes of recent onset: a randomised placebo-controlled double blind trial. Diabetologia 41 : 1040 –1046,1998
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    39. Elliott JF, Marlin KL, Couch RM: Effect of Bacillus Calmette-Guerin vaccination on C-peptide secretion in children newly diagnosed with IDDM. Diabetes Care 21 : 1691 –1693,1998
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    40. Allen HF, Klingensmith GJ, Jensen P, Simoes E, Hayward A, Chase HP: Effect of Bacillus Calmette-Guerin vaccination on new-onset type 1 diabetes: a randomized clinical study. Diabetes Care 22 : 1703 –1707,1999
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    41. Buckingham BA, Sandborg CI: A randomized trial of methotrexate in newly diagnosed patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus. Clin Immunol 96 : 86 –90,2000
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    42. ↵
      Chaillous L, Lefevre H, Thivolet C, Boitard C, Lahlou N, Atlan-Gepner C, Bouhanick B, Mogenet A, Nicolino M, Carel JC, Lecomte P, Marechaud R, Bougneres P, Charbonnel B, Sai P: Oral insulin administration and residual beta-cell function in recent-onset type 1 diabetes: a multicentre randomised controlled trial: Diabete Insuline Orale group. Lancet 356 : 545 –549,2000
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    43. ↵
      Pozzilli P, Pitocco D, Visalli N, Cavallo MG, Buzzetti R, Crino A, Spera S, Suraci C, Multari G, Cervoni M, Manca Bitti ML, Matteoli MC, Marietti G, Ferrazzoli F, Cassone Faldetta MR, Giordano C, Sbriglia M, Sarugeri E, Ghirlanda G: No effect of oral insulin on residual β-cell function in recent-onset type 1 diabetes (the IMDIAB VII): IMDIAB Group. Diabetologia 43 : 1000 –1004,2000
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    44. ↵
      Vidal J, Fernandez-Balsells M, Sesmilo G, Aguilera E, Casamitjana R, Gomis R, Conget I: Effects of nicotinamide and intravenous insulin therapy in newly diagnosed type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Care 23 : 360 –364,2000
      OpenUrlAbstract
    45. ↵
      Rjasanowski I, Michaelis D, Besch W, Keilacker H, Ziegler B, Hildmann W: Glucose tolerance behaviour before the onset of type I (insulin-dependent) diabetes in young people as a predictor of the further course of the disease: a retrospective analysis of 33 cases. Diabetes Res Clin Pract 11 : 107 –115,1991
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    46. ↵
      Greenbaum CJ, Cuthbertson D, Krischer JP, the DPT-1 Study Group: Type 1 diabetes manifested solely by 2-h oral glucose tolerance test criteria. Diabetes 50 : 470 –476,2001
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    47. ↵
      Caillat-Zucman S, Garchon HJ, Timsit J, Assan R, Boitard C, Djilali-Saiah I, Bougneres P, Bach JF: Age-dependent HLA genetic heterogeneity of type 1 insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. J Clin Invest 90 : 2242 –2250,1992
    48. ↵
      Tait BD, Harrison LC, Drummond BP, Stewart V, Varney MD, Honeyman MC: HLA antigens and age at diagnosis of insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. Hum Immunol 42 : 116 –122,1995
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    49. ↵
      Honeyman MC, Harrison LC, Drummond B, Colman PG, Tait BD: Analysis of families at risk for insulin-dependent diabetes reveals that HLA antigens influence progression to preclinical disease. Mol Med 1 : 576 –582,1995
      OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
    50. ↵
      Madsbad S, Faber O, Binder C, McNair P, Christiansen C, Transbol I: Prevalence of residual beta-cell function in insulin-dependent diabetics in relation to age at onset and duration of diabetes. Diabetes 27 (Suppl. 1) : 262 –264,1978
    51. Bonora E, Coscelli C, Butturini U: Residual B-cell function in type 1 (insulin-dependent) diabetes mellitus: its relation to clinical and metabolic features. Acta Diabetol Lat 21 : 375 –383,1984
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    52. Sochett EB, Daneman D, Clarson C, Ehrlich RM: Factors affecting and patterns of residual insulin secretion during the first year of type 1 (insulin-dependent) diabetes mellitus in children. Diabetologia 30 : 453 –459,1987
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    53. ↵
      Diabetes Control and Complications Trial Research Group: Effects of age, duration and treatment of insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus on residual β-cell function: observations during eligibility testing for the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial (DCCT). J Clin Endocrinol Metab 65 : 30 –36,1987
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    54. Schiffrin A, Suissa S, Poussier P, Guttmann R, Weitzner G: Prospective study of predictors of beta-cell survival in type 1 diabetes. Diabetes 37 : 920 –925,1988
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    55. Ludvigsson J, Binder C, Mandrup-Poulsen T: Insulin autoantibodies are associated with islet cell antibodies; their relation to insulin antibodies and β-cell function in diabetic children. Diabetologia 31 : 647 –651,1988
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    56. Peig M, Gomis R, Ercilla G, Casamitjana R, Bottazzo GF, Pujol-Borrell R: Correlation between residual beta-cell function and islet cell antibodies in newly diagnosed type I diabetes: follow-up study. Diabetes 38 : 1396 –1401,1989
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    57. Couper JJ, Hudson I, Werther GA, Warne GL, Court JM, Harrison LC: Factors predicting residual beta-cell function in the first year after diagnosis of childhood type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Res Clin Pract 11 : 9 –16,1991
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    58. ↵
      Montanya E, Fernandez-Castaner M, Rosel P, Gomez J, Soler J: Age, sex and ICA influence on beta-cell secretion during the first year after the diagnosis of type 1 diabetes mellitus. Diabet Metab 17 : 460 –468,1991
    59. Schiffrin A, Suissa S, Weitzner G, Poussier P, Lalla D: Factors predicting course of beta-cell function in IDDM. Diabetes Care 15 : 997 –1001,1992
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    60. Hramiak IM, Dupre J, Finegood DT: Determinants of clinical remission in recent-onset IDDM. Diabetes Care 16 : 125 –132,1993
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    61. Yokota I, Shirakawa N, Shima K, Matsuda J, Naito E, Ito M, Kuroda Y: Relationship between GAD antibody and residual beta-cell function in children after overt onset of IDDM. Diabetes Care 19 : 74 –75,1996
      OpenUrlFREE Full Text
    62. Bonfanti R, Bazzigaluppi E, Calori G, Riva MC, Viscardi M, Bognetti E, Meschi F, Bosi E, Chiumello G, Bonifacio E: Parameters associated with residual insulin secretion during the first year of disease in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes mellitus. Diabet Med 15 : 844 –850,1998
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    63. Sabbah E, Savola K, Kulmala P, Veijola R, Vahasalo P, Karjalainen J, Akerblom HK, Knip M: Diabetes-associated autoantibodies in relation to clinical characteristics and natural course in children with newly diagnosed type 1 diabetes: the Childhood Diabetes in Finland Study Group. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 84 : 1534 –1539,1999
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    64. ↵
      Torn C, Landin-Olsson M, Lernmark A, Palmer JP, Arnqvist HJ, Blohme G, Lithner F, Littorin B, Nystrom L, Schersten B, Sundkvist G, Wibell L, Ostman J: Prognostic factors for the course of beta cell function in autoimmune diabetes. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 85 : 4619 –4623,2000
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    65. ↵
      Imagawa A, Hanafusa T, Miyagawa J, Matsuzawa Y: A novel subtype of type 1 diabetes mellitus characterized by a rapid onset and an absence of diabetes-related antibodies: Osaka IDDM Study Group. N Engl J Med 342 : 301 –307,2000
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    66. ↵
      Imagawa A, Hanafusa T, Miyagawa J, Matsuzawa Y: A proposal of three distinct subtypes of type 1 diabetes mellitus based on clinical and pathological evidence. Ann Med 32 : 539 –543,2000
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    67. ↵
      Hoogwerf BJ, Rich SS, Barbosa JJ: Meal-stimulated C-peptide and insulin antibodies in type I diabetic subjects and their nondiabetic siblings characterized by HLA-DR antigens. Diabetes 34 : 440 –445,1985
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    68. ↵
      Bingley P: Interactions of age, islet cell antibodies, insulin autoantibodies, and first-phase insulin response in predicting risk of progression to IDDM in ICA+ relatives: the ICARUS data set: Islet Cell Antibody Register Users Study. Diabetes 45 : 1720 –1728,1996
    69. Verge CF, Gianani R, Kawasaki E, Yu L, Pietropaolo M, Jackson RA, Chase HP, Eisenbarth GS: Prediction of type 1 diabetes in first-degree relatives using a combination of insulin, GAD and ICA512bdc/IA-2 autoantibodies. Diabetes 45 : 926 –933,1996
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    70. ↵
      Torn C, Landin-Olsson M, Lernmark A, Schersten B, Ostman J, Arnqvist HJ, Bjork E, Blohme G, Bolinder J, Eriksson J, Littorin B, Nystrom L, Sundkvist G: Combinations of beta-cell-specific autoantibodies at diagnosis of diabetes in young adults reflects different courses of beta cell damage. Autoimmunity 33 : 115 –120,2001
      OpenUrlPubMed
    71. ↵
      Zimmet PZ, Tuomi T, Mackay IR, Rowley MJ, Knowles W, Cohen M, Lang DA: Latent autoimmune diabetes mellitus in adults (LADA): the role of antibodies to glutamic acid decarboxylase in diagnosis and prediction of insulin dependency. Diabet Med 11 : 299 –303,1994
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    72. Zimmet P, Turner R, McCarty D, Rowley M, Mackay I: Crucial points at diagnosis: type 2 diabetes or slow type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Care 22 (Suppl. 2) : 59 –64,1999
      OpenUrl
    73. ↵
      Carlsson A, Sundkvist G, Groop L, Tuomi T: Insulin and glucagon secretion in patients with slowly progressing autoimmune diabetes (LADA). J Clin Endocrinol Metab 85 : 76 –80,2000
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    74. ↵
      Hathout EH, Thomas W, El-Shahawy M, Nahab F, Mace JW: Diabetic autoimmune markers in children and adolescents with type 2 diabetes. Pediatrics 107 : E102 ,2001
    75. ↵
      Ludvigsson J, Heding LG: Beta-cell function in children with diabetes. Diabetes 27 (Suppl. 1) : 230 –234,1978
    76. Faber O: Beta-cell function and diabetic control in insulin dependent diabetes mellitus. Acta Endocrinol Suppl (Copenh) 272 : 73 –77,1985
      OpenUrl
    77. Faber OK, Binder C: C-peptide: an index of insulin secretion. Diabetes Metab Rev 2 : 331 –345,1986
      OpenUrlPubMed
    78. ↵
      Diabetes Control and Complications Trial Research Group: Effect of intensive therapy on residual beta-cell function in patients with type 1 diabetes in the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial: a randomized, controlled trial. Ann Intern Med 128 : 517 –523,1998
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    79. ↵
      Shimada A, Charlton B, Taylor-Edwards C, Fathman CG: Beta-cell destruction may be a late consequence of the autoimmune process in nonobese diabetic mice. Diabetes 45 : 1063 –1067,1996
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    80. ↵
      Keller R, Eisenbarth GS: Immunopathogenesis of type 1 diabetes mellitus. In Immunotherapy of Diabetes and Selected Autoimmune Diseases. Eisenbarth GS, Ed. Boca Raton, FL, CRC Press,1989 , p. 2 –15
    81. ↵
      Kobayashi T, Nakanishi K, Murase T, Kosaka K: Small doses of subcutaneous insulin as a strategy for preventing slowly progressive beta-cell failure in islet cell antibody-positive patients with clinical features of NIDDM. Diabetes 45 : 622 –626,1996
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    82. ↵
      Montanya E, Fernandez-Castaner M, Soler J: Improved metabolic control preserved beta-cell function two years after diagnosis of insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. Diabetes Metab 23 : 314 –319,1997
      OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
    83. ↵
      Diabetes Control and Complications Trial Research Group: The effect of intensive treatment of diabetes on the development and progression of long-term complications in insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. N Engl J Med 329 : 977 –986,1993
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    84. ↵
      Canadian-European Randomized Control Trial Group: Cyclosporin-induced remission of IDDM after early intervention: association of 1 yr of cyclosporin treatment with enhanced insulin secretion. Diabetes 37 : 1574 –1582,1988
    85. Feutren G, Papoz L, Assan R, Vialettes B, Karsenty G, Vexiau P, Du RH, Rodier M, Sirmai J, Lallemand A: Cyclosporin increases the rate and length of remissions in insulin-dependent diabetes of recent onset: results of a multicentre double-blind trial. Lancet 2 : 119 –124,1986
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    86. ↵
      Pozzilli P, Visalli N, Boccuni ML, Baroni MG, Buzzetti-R FE, Signore A, Cavallo MG, Andreani D, Lucentini L, et al.: Randomized trial comparing nicotinamide and nicotinamide plus cyclosporin in recent onset insulin-dependent diabetes (IMDIAB 1): The IMDIAB Study Group. Diabet Med 11 : 98 –104,1994
      OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
    87. ↵
      Mirel RD, Ginsberg-Fellner F, Horwitz DL, Rayfield EJ: C-peptide reserve in insulin-dependent diabetes: comparative responses to glucose, glucagon and tolbutamide. Diabetologia 19 : 183 –188,1980
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    88. Menchini M, Meschi F, Lambiase R, Puzzovio M, Del Guercio MJ, Chiumello G: C-peptide response to arginine stimulation in diabetic children. J Pediatr 96 : 362 –366,1980
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    89. Scheen AJ, Castillo MJ, Lefebvre PJ: Assessment of residual insulin secretion in diabetic patients using the intravenous glucagon stimulatory test: methodological aspects and clinical applications. Diabetes Metab 22 : 397 –406,1996
      OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
    90. Rakotoambinina B, Timsit J, Deschamps I, Laborde K, Gautier D, Jos J, Boitard C, Robert JJ: Insulin responses to intravenous glucose, intravenous arginine and a hyperglycaemic clamp in ICA-positive subjects with different degrees of glucose tolerance. Diabetes Metab 23 : 43 –50,1997
      OpenUrlPubMed
    91. Sjoberg S, Gunnarsson R, Ostman J: Residual C-peptide production in type I diabetes mellitus: a comparison of different methods of assessment and influence on glucose control. Acta Med Scand 214 : 231 –237,1983
      OpenUrlPubMed
    92. ↵
      Heinze E, Beischer W, Keller L, Winkler G, Teller WM, Pfeiffer EF: C-peptide secretion during the remission phase of juvenile diabetes. Diabetes 27 : 670 –676,1978
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    93. ↵
      Skyler JS, Rabinovitch A: Cyclosporine in recent onset type I diabetes mellitus: effects on islet beta cell function: Miami Cyclosporine Diabetes Study Group. J Diabetes Complications 2 : 77 –88,1992
    94. ↵
      Ronnemaa T: Practical aspects in performing the glucagon test in the measurement of C-peptide secretion in diabetic patients. Scand J Clin Lab Invest 46 : 345 –349,1986
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    95. ↵
      Pasquali R, Buratti P, Biso P, Patrono D, Capelli M, Pasqui F, Melchionda N: Estimation of B-cell function by the urinary excretion rate of C-peptide in diabetic patients: comparison with C-peptide response to glucagon and to a mixed meal. Diabetes Metab 13 : 44 –51,1987
      OpenUrl
    96. ↵
      Daneman D, Clarson C: Residual beta-cell function in children with type 1 diabetes: measurement and impact on glycemic control. Clin Invest Med 10 : 484 –487,1987
      OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
    97. ↵
      Arnold-Larsen S, Madsbad S, Kuhl C: Reproducibility of the glucagon test. Diabet Med 4 : 299 –303,1987
      OpenUrlPubMed
    98. ↵
      Ludvigsson J: Methodological aspects on C-peptide measurements. Acta Med Scand Suppl 671 : 53 –59,1983
      OpenUrlPubMed
    99. Madsbad S, Sauerbrey N, Moller-Jensen B, Krarup T, Kuhl C: Outcome of the glucagon test depends upon the prevailing blood glucose concentration in type I (insulin-dependent) diabetic patients. Acta Med Scand 222 : 71 –74,1987
      OpenUrlPubMed
    100. ↵
      Gjessing HJ, Reinholdt B, Faber OK, Pedersen O: The effect of acute hyperglycemia on the plasma C-peptide response to intravenous glucagon or to a mixed meal in insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. Acta Endocrinol (Copenh) 124 : 556 –562,1991
    101. ↵
      Mandrup-Poulsen T, Molvig J, Andersen HU, Helqvist S, Spinas GA, Munck M: Lack of predictive value of islet cell antibodies, insulin antibodies, and HLA-DR phenotype for remission in cyclosporin-treated IDDM patients: the Canadian-European Randomized Control Trial Group. Diabetes 39 : 204 –210,1990
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    102. ↵
      McGregor AM, Petersen MM, McLachlan SM, Rooke P, Smith BR, Hall R: Carbimazole and the autoimmune response in Graves’ disease. N Engl J Med 303 : 302 –307,1980
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    103. ↵
      Kahaly G, Pitz S, Muller-Forell W, Hommel G: Randomized trial of intravenous immunoglobulins versus prednisolone in Graves’ ophthalmopathy. Clin Exp Immunol 106 : 197 –202,1996
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    104. ↵
      Couper JJ, Harrison LC, Aldis JE, Colman PG, Honeyman MC, Ferrante A: IgG subclass antibodies to glutamic acid decarboxylase and risk for progression to clinical insulin-dependent diabetes. Human Immunol 59 : 493 –499,1998
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    105. ↵
      Bonifacio E, Scirpoli M, Kredel K, Fuchtenbusch M, Ziegler AG: Early autoantibody responses in prediabetes are IgG1 dominated and suggest antigen-specific regulation. J Immunol 163 : 525 –532,1999
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    106. ↵
      Harrison LC, Chu XS, DeAizpurua HJ, Graham M, Honeyman MC, Colman PG: Islet-reactive T cells are a marker of pre-clinical insulin-dependent diabetes. J Clin Invest 89 : 1161 –1165,1992
    107. Durinovic-Bellò I, Hummel M, Ziegler A: Cellular immune response to diverse islet cell antigens in IDDM. Diabetes 45 : 795 –800,1996
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    108. ↵
      Honeyman MC, Brusic V, Stone N, Harrison LC: Neural network-based prediction of candidate T-cell epitopes. Nature Biotech 16 : 966 –970,1998
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    109. ↵
      Roep BO, Atkinson MA, van Endert PM, Gottlieb PA, Wilson SB, Sachs JA: Autoreactive T cell responses in insulin-dependent (type 1) diabetes mellitus: report of the First International Workshop for Standardization of T cell Assays. J Autoimmun 13 : 267 –282,1999
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    PreviousNext
    Back to top

    In this Issue

    May 2003, 52(5)
    • Table of Contents
    • Index by Author
    Sign up to receive current issue alerts
    View Selected Citations (0)
    Print
    Download PDF
    Article Alerts
    Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
    Email Article

    Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about Diabetes.

    NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

    Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
    Guidelines for Intervention Trials in Subjects With Newly Diagnosed Type 1 Diabetes
    (Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from Diabetes
    (Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the Diabetes web site.
    CAPTCHA
    This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
    Citation Tools
    Guidelines for Intervention Trials in Subjects With Newly Diagnosed Type 1 Diabetes
    Carla J. Greenbaum, Leonard C. Harrison
    Diabetes May 2003, 52 (5) 1059-1065; DOI: 10.2337/diabetes.52.5.1059

    Citation Manager Formats

    • BibTeX
    • Bookends
    • EasyBib
    • EndNote (tagged)
    • EndNote 8 (xml)
    • Medlars
    • Mendeley
    • Papers
    • RefWorks Tagged
    • Ref Manager
    • RIS
    • Zotero
    Add to Selected Citations
    Share

    Guidelines for Intervention Trials in Subjects With Newly Diagnosed Type 1 Diabetes
    Carla J. Greenbaum, Leonard C. Harrison
    Diabetes May 2003, 52 (5) 1059-1065; DOI: 10.2337/diabetes.52.5.1059
    del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
    • Tweet Widget
    • Facebook Like
    • Google Plus One

    Jump to section

    • Article
      • SUBJECTS: INCLUSION CRITERIA
      • TRIAL DESIGN
      • TRIAL OUTCOME MEASURES
      • CONCLUSION
      • Acknowledgments
      • Footnotes
      • REFERENCES
    • Figures & Tables
    • Info & Metrics
    • PDF

    Related Articles

    Cited By...

    More in this TOC Section

    • Regulation of Hepatic Metabolism and Cell Growth by the ATF/CREB Family of Transcription Factors
    • Modulation of Leukocytes of the Innate Arm of the Immune System as a Potential Approach to Prevent the Onset and Progression of Type 1 Diabetes
    • Emerging Role of Bone Morphogenetic Protein 4 in Metabolic Disorders
    Show more Perspectives in Diabetes

    Similar Articles

    Navigate

    • Current Issue
    • Online Ahead of Print
    • Scientific Sessions Abstracts
    • Collections
    • Archives
    • Submit
    • Subscribe
    • Email Alerts
    • RSS Feeds

    More Information

    • About the Journal
    • Instructions for Authors
    • Journal Policies
    • Reprints and Permissions
    • Advertising
    • Privacy Policy: ADA Journals
    • Copyright Notice/Public Access Policy
    • Contact Us

    Other ADA Resources

    • Diabetes Care
    • Clinical Diabetes
    • Diabetes Spectrum
    • Scientific Sessions Abstracts
    • Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes
    • BMJ Open - Diabetes Research & Care
    • Professional Books
    • Diabetes Forecast

     

    • DiabetesJournals.org
    • Diabetes Core Update
    • ADA's DiabetesPro
    • ADA Member Directory
    • Diabetes.org

    © 2021 by the American Diabetes Association. Diabetes Print ISSN: 0012-1797, Online ISSN: 1939-327X.