Safety of the use of gold nanoparticles conjugated with proinsulin peptide and administered by hollow microneedles as an immunotherapy in type 1 diabetes.

Antigen-specific immunotherapy is an immunomodulatory strategy for autoimmune diseases, such as type 1 diabetes, in which patients are treated with autoantigens to promote immune tolerance, stop autoimmune ß-cell destruction and prevent permanent dependence on exogenous insulin. In this study, human proinsulin peptide C19-A3 (known for its positive safety profile) was conjugated to ultrasmall gold nanoparticles (GNPs), an attractive drug delivery platform due to the potential anti-inflammatory properties of gold. We hypothesised that microneedle intradermal delivery of C19-A3 GNP may improve peptide pharmacokinetics and induce tolerogenic immunomodulation and proceeded to evaluate its safety and feasibility in a first-in-human trial. Allowing for the limitation of the small number of participants, intradermal administration of C19-A3 GNP appears safe and well tolerated in participants with type 1 diabetes. The associated prolonged skin retention of C19-A3 GNP after intradermal administration offers a number of possibilities to enhance its tolerogenic potential, which should be explored in future studies.

Conjugation of a peptide autoantigen to gold nanoparticles for intradermally administered antigen specific immunotherapy.

Antigen specific immunotherapy aims to tolerise patients to specific autoantigens that are responsible for the pathology of an autoimmune disease. Immune tolerance is generated in conditions where the immune response is suppressed and thus gold nanoparticles (AuNPs) are an attractive drug delivery platform due to their anti-inflammatory effects and their potential to facilitate temporal and spatial delivery of a peptide autoantigen in conjunction with pro-tolerogenic elements. In this study we have covalently attached an autoantigen, currently under clinical evaluation for the treatment of type 1 diabetes (PIC19-A3 peptide), to AuNPs to create nanoscale (<5 nm), negatively charged (-40 to -60 mV) AuNP-peptide complexes for immunotherapy. We also employ a clinically approved microneedle delivery system, MicronJet600, to facilitate minimally-invasive intradermal delivery of the nanoparticle constructs to target skin-resident antigen presenting cells, which are known to be apposite target cells for immunotherapy. The AuNP-peptide complexes remain physically stable upon extrusion through microneedles and when delivered into ex vivo human skin they are able to diffuse rapidly and widely throughout the dermis (their site of deposition) and, perhaps more surprisingly, the overlying epidermal layer. Intracellular uptake was extensive, with Langerhans cells proving to be the most efficient cells at internalising the AuNP-peptide complex (94% of the local population within the treated region of skin). In vitro studies showed that uptake of the AuNP-peptide complexes by dendritic cells reduced the capacity of these cells to activate naïve T cells. This indicator of biological functionality encourages further development of the AuNP-peptide formulation, which is now being evaluated in clinical trials.

Stimulated urine C-peptide creatinine ratio vs serum C-peptide level for monitoring of ß-cell function in the first year after diagnosis of Type 1 diabetes.

AIMS: To determine if urine C-peptide/creatinine ratio is a useful tool for monitoring ß-cell function in new-onset Type 1 diabetes. METHODS: Data were obtained from a prospective immunomodulation study in people with Type 1 diabetes ≤ 3 months from diagnosis, with a standard mixed-meal tolerance test and measurement of urine C-peptide/creatinine ratio carried out at 0, 3, 6, 9 and 12 months. The change in the insulin-dose-adjusted HbA1c level was also correlated with the change in serum/urine C-peptide level during the 12-month follow-up period. RESULTS: A significant reduction in urine C-peptide/creatinine ratio, measured after a mixed-meal, was reached at 9 months (-45.4%), whilst the reduction in stimulated serum C-peptide level reached significance after 3 months (-54.7%) in placebo-treated participants. Neither change in stimulated serum C-peptide nor change in urine C-peptide level correlated with each other, and nor did change in insulin-dose-adjusted HbA1c level in the first 6 months, but all measures correlated significantly in the second half of the 12-month follow-up period. CONCLUSION: Mixed-meal-stimulated urine C-peptide/creatinine ratio was similar to, although less sensitive than, stimulated serum C-peptide level in monitoring ß-cell function during the first year after diagnosis. Because the former is significantly less invasive, it warrants inclusion in further studies in Type 1 diabetes and may represent an attractive alternative outcome measure in cohort studies and in children.