How pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic principles pave the way for optimal basal insulin therapy in type 2 diabetes.

This pedagogical review illustrates the differences between pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) measures, using insulin therapy as the primary example. The main conclusion is that PD parameters are of greater clinical significance for insulin therapy than PK parameters. The glucose-clamp technique, the optimal method for determining insulin PD, is explained so that the reader can understand the important studies in the literature. Key glucose-clamp studies that compare two basal insulin analogues - insulin glargine and insulin detemir - to Neutral Protamine Hagedorn insulin and to each other are then presented. The review further explains how PD parameters have been translated into useful clinical concepts and simple titration algorithms for everyday clinical practice. Finally, the necessity of overcoming patient and/or physician barriers to insulin therapy and providing continuing education and training is emphasised.

Evidence of IgG autoantibodies against human proinsulin in patients with IDDM before insulin treatment.

IgG proinsulin autoantibodies (IgG-PAAs) have been found in a fraction of sera from patients with newly diagnosed insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (IDDM) before onset of insulin treatment. Only sera lacking insulin antibodies have been analyzed, to avoid interference. Competitive inhibition studies provide specificity for human proinsulin but not for insulin. IgG-PAAs largely cross-react with human C-peptide. Precursors of insulin thus are involved in the immune process of IDDM.

Linear loss of insulin secretory capacity during the last six months preceding IDDM. No effect of antiedematous therapy with ketotifen.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effect of an antiedematous therapy with the histamine antagonist ketotifen on beta-cell function in late prediabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: In a randomized double-blind placebo-controlled study, ketotifen was administered for 3 months to 9 islet cell antibody positive (ICA+) prediabetic patients with a first-phase insulin response (FPIR) below the 2.5th percentile to preserve residual beta-cell function. Patients were followed by intravenous glucose tolerance tests (IVGTTs) every 4-6 weeks for determination of FPIR, HbA1, ICAs, and insulin autoantibodies. In 5 patients, the immune activation state was followed by determination of serum levels of tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-alpha), beta 2-microglobulin, and C-reactive protein (CRP). RESULTS: Seven of nine patients developed diabetes within one year of follow-up. Irrespective of treatment with ketotifen, a slow and linear decline (P < 0.05) of 1 + 3-min insulin values was observed in sequential IVGTTs in those 7 patients who developed insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (IDDM) during follow-up. The 2 other patients showed wide fluctuations of the insulin response with a threefold increase of initial insulin levels. HbA1 did not correlate with FPIR. Fasting blood glucose increased significantly during the study (P < 0.05). Individual levels of serum TNF-alpha, CRP, and beta 2-microglobulin did not change during the study. CONCLUSIONS: The study could not demonstrate preservation of beta-cell function by ketotifen in the late stage before manifestation of clinical diabetes. Manifestation is preceded in the last 6 months by a steady loss of the FPIR without rapid deterioration immediately before diagnosis and without signs of increased immune activity.

Insulin autoantibodies measured by radioimmunoassay methodology are more related to insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus than those measured by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay: results of the Fourth International Workshop on the Standardization of Insulin Autoantibody Measurement.

Insulin autoantibodies (IAA) have been identified in newly diagnosed insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (IDDM) patients and in individuals at high risk of developing the disease. However, the literature is not in agreement regarding the prevalence, significance, and predictive value of IAA. Previous workshops have shown that certain sera give markedly different results depending upon assay methodology and, therefore, have suggested that these discrepancies may be due to variations in the assay methodologies used: either the fluid phase RIA or the solid phase enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Sera from controls (n = 61), newly diagnosed IDDM patients (n = 30), healthy subjects who later became diabetic (n = 8), and first degree relatives of diabetic probands (n = 22) were randomly numbered and sent without category identification to 19 RIA and 10 ELISA laboratories. Each laboratory's raw data from the control sera were used to determine the cut-off point for positive (3 SD above the mean of control sera) in the disease relevant categories. RIA and ELISA methods were comparable in obtaining a low frequency of IAA in control sera. However, the laboratories using RIA methods found a much higher percentage of sera to be IAA positive among both newly diagnosed patients and healthy individuals who later developed diabetes than laboratories using ELISA methods (P less than 0.005). In contrast, there was considerable overlap in the percentage of sera from first degree relatives found positive by both assays. These data strongly suggest that IAA measured by RIA methodology are more disease related than those measured by ELISA methods. Consequently, RIA assays or assays proven to perform as well should be used to measure IAA associated with IDDM.

Prevalence of cytoplasmatic islet cell antibodies and insulin autoantibodies is increased in subjects with genetically defined high risk for insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus.

The presence of cytoplasmatic islet cell antibodies (ICA) and IgG insulin autoantibodies (IgG-IAA) has been observed in the prediabetic state of type 1 (insulin-dependent) diabetes (IDDM). We therefore analyzed the prevalence of these markers in sera from 1117 healthy HLA-typed first-degree relatives (1 degree Rel) of IDDM patients. ICA was determined by indirect immunofluorescence on cryostat sections of human pancreas. For IgG-IAA measurement a competitive solid-phase ELISA was used. ICA were present in 3.5% of 1 degree Rel vs 0.4% of controls (P less than 0.025). The highest frequencies of ICA were found in individuals of IDDM multiplex families (7.7%) and HLA-DR1,3 (5.4%), -DR1,4 (5.8%), and -DR3,4 (6.7%) positive subjects. We therefore conclude that the prevalence of ICA is increased in 1 degree Rel with high genetic risk for diabetes. IgG-IAA occurred in 9.9% of 1 degree Rel vs 1.4% of controls (P less than 0.01). Like ICA, IgG-IAA were significantly increased in a group of subjects being positive for either HLA-DR1,3 -DR1,4, or -DR3,4 (16.5%, P less than 0.01). In multiplex families, however, prevalence of IgG-IAA was not increased. In contrast to ICA there was an additional influence of age and sex: IgG-IAA were found more often in siblings (mean age, 16.6 years; prevalence, 15.0%) than in parents (mean age, 44.1 years; prevalence, 8.3%) of IDDM patients (P less than 0.01). In brothers the prevalence of IgG-IAA is higher than in other 1 degree Rel. Only a weak association between ICA and IgG-IAA was observed in subjects (n = 810) tested for both antibodies.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Proinsulin autoantibodies: association with type I diabetes but not with islet cell antibodies, insulin autoantibodies or HLA-DR type.

Antibodies reacting with proinsulin but not with insulin determinants have been observed recently in Type I diabetes. We describe here that ELISA-determined proinsulin autoantibodies (IgG-PAA) also occur in first-degree relatives of IDDM patients (38/513, 7.4% vs 1.9% in controls, P less than 0.025). In contrast to insulin autoantibodies (IgG-IAA) and islet cell antibodies (ICA) no association with HLA type was found. Furthermore, IgG-PAA occur independently of IgG-IAA and ICA. We conclude that the humoral autoimmune response to proinsulin determinants is under separate genetic control.

Antibodies to proinsulin and insulin as predictive markers of type 1 diabetes.

The aim of the present study was to test whether proinsulin autoantibodies (IgG-PAA), insulin autoantibodies (IgG-IAA), and islet cell antibodies (ICA) may be used to identify subjects at risk for Type 1 diabetes. Pre-diabetic sera from 18 individuals who later developed diabetes were tested. Results were compared with 18 age-, sex-, and HLA-DR-matched non-diabetic control subjects from families with Type 1 diabetes. At a mean of 2.4 yr before the onset of diabetes, ICA were found in 13 patients (vs 0 control subjects, p less than 0.001), ELISA-determined IgG-IAA in 8 patients (vs 1 control subject, p less than 0.05) and ELISA-determined IgG-PAA in 4 patients (vs 2 control subjects, NS). ELISA-determined IgG-PAA do not appear to be useful predictors of the future development of Type 1 diabetes.

Proinsulin autoantibodies are more closely associated with type 1 (insulin-dependent) diabetes mellitus than insulin autoantibodies.

The disease association of autoantibodies to proinsulin and insulin was compared in patients with Type 1 (insulin-dependent) diabetes mellitus and first-degree relatives. Following the recommendation of the Fourth International Workshop on the Standardization of insulin autoantibodies, autoantibodies were determined by fluid-phase radioimmunoassay using equimolar concentrations of mono-125I-A14-insulin or -proinsulin to detect insulin or proinsulin autoantibodies, respectively. A higher prevalence of proinsulin autoantibodies vs insulin autoantibodies was found in 97 patients with Type 1 diabetes prior to insulin treatment (34.0% vs 22.7%, p less than 0.05) and in 16 islet cell antibody-positive relatives (43.8% vs 31.3%, NS). There was only one serum positive for insulin and proinsulin autoantibodies in 110 islet cell antibody-negative first degree relatives (0.9%). None of 88 normal sera contained proinsulin autoantibodies or insulin autoantibodies. There was a close correlation of proinsulin autoantibody and insulin autoantibody titres in individual sera (r = 0.95, p less than 0.01) due to crossreaction of all insulin autoantibodies with proinsulin. However, some proinsulin autoantibodies did not crossreact with insulin. Background binding in normal sera was lower for proinsulin autoantibodies. We conclude that proinsulin autoantibodies have a higher association to acute Type 1 diabetes than insulin autoantibodies.